Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:For them theoretically hacking a private org? (Score 1, Insightful) 352

Even if they are proven..... really shitty behavior, some of it even criminal, was exposed that we as voters certainly have a right to know about. How dare they expose deep-rooted corruption! As far as I'm concerned, I'd stop short of thanking the Russians.

As far as Russia influencing the election.... exactly how many governments have we toppled and how many sovereign nations are there where we have tried to directly influence their local politics? This is pure hypocrisy. Personally, I say let's get the war over with. I'm tired of living under the bomb, just drop the fucking things.

Comment LOL Hysterical.... (Score 1) 287

They've dumped more money and evidence into shifting attention to the Russians over this than the crimes and deceit unearthed by the hacks. And there's still no definitive proof the hack was state-sponsored. In the end they are just butt-hurt and want to distract you from the real problem.

While I'm not comfortable with them hacking US organizations, I'm not comfortable with the fact we've been hacking Russian systems for ages and influencing politics in their puppet states either. In the end, I'm more inclined to thank the Russians and spend all the money and effort to remove Clinton than to engage in butt-hurt sabre rattling over this.

If there weren't disgusting things committed in the first place, there would be nothing for them to attempt to influence an election with. I'm far more concerned about Clinton's BS than the fact the Russians exposed it.

Comment I have a couple..... (Score 1) 410

"Were you born with such a smug punchable face or did you pay good money for it being the spoiled worthless poser rich boy that you are?"

"Is your douchebaggery the result of a dismissive neglectful father and lack of attention or did you just grow into it without outside influence?"

"Have you ever had a clinical diagnosis for Antisocial Personality Disorder (sociopathy) or any other interesting cluster B personality disorders?"

"Do you want to buy 4chan because you enjoy the lack of empathy displayed by the user base? Would you hate to lose one of the only communities you can identify with?"

All in all, I hope someone buys 4chan. I find it entertaining from time to time. I'd hate to see it go to this fuckstick though as he'd just drive the trolls toward less insane communities throughout the net when he decides he wants it to actually make money.

Comment Re:Sometimes being first isn't the best plan. (Score 1) 254

There were several attempts at x86 GUI's in the 80's and 90's, but most failed and lost money.

Certainly not because they sucked. Early GEM versions were far better than early versions of Winblows. And GEM saw some modest success on the Atari ST before Tramiel got complacent and let the platform stagnate. Had Kildall not been screwed from all directions it would be a pretty different landscape out there.

Comment Re:And yet... (Score 1) 500

I would say non-zero but very remote. There's still no reason to exclude them from the debates. If anything, Johnson in the last debate would have made for a meaningful discussion instead of the shitshow that was advertised like a wrestling match.

The Republican Party is clearly dying. Johnson himself is not really what I'd call a hardcore Libertarian. He's more like a Republican without the Christian Nationalist ideology, warmongering, disdain for minority groups and immigrants, authoritarianism and drug war baggage. He's basically what a modern Republican should be.

While I like the true Libertarian ideals, I can accept that many find such a world scary and I'll happily take a Republican without the aspects that make most Republicans assholes. If the slight watering down of Libertarian ideals causes the party to gain more acceptance and eventually replace the Republicans, it would benefit us all.

Comment Re:And yet... (Score 4, Interesting) 500

Internalize theoretical qualification scenario, deflect on manufactured attack, ad hominem without making a point to just disagree with vitrol. Classic troll.

Of course it was.

In reality, no-one is truly qualified or "experienced" enough to be president. Once you are, your term limit is up and everyone thinks your an asshole unless you get assassinated and/or successfully get a moon shot funded. Johnson/Weld are the ticket with actual experience governing and running a state. Both were re-elected and both were able to gain cooperation on both sides of the isle in a non-partisan manner. IMHO, that makes them far more qualified to be promoted to the national stage than the other leading morons famous for "pivoting" and/or deflecting blame when the shit hits the fan and things don't work out.

It's not like these guys are dumbasses straight out of college, we are talking about experienced multi-term politicians here with a good track record. I can forgive the fact he probably got a C in world geography and had one bong hit too many that morning in high school. At least he doesn't have a huge track record of negative foreign policy failures like Clinton. Or zero governing experience and lots of daddy's money.

Comment Re:And yet... (Score 1) 500

Either way, actual progress for a third party and elevating their status can be nothing but a good thing. We have to start somewhere. We'll continue to get increasingly polarizing "scary" douche and turd sandwich candidates from the current mainstream parties whether it's now, 4 years from now, 8 years from now or 20 years from now.

If anything, even if he loses, Johnson has achieved more than just about any recent 3rd party candidate in history. You are screwed no matter who gets elected. Voting with the herd is a wasted vote. Voting against the other tyrant is not how it's supposed to work here. You're supposed to vote FOR a candidate.

Comment Re:And yet... (Score 2) 500

Sadly Johnson is a dufus and can't even name one living president he likes. And earlier he didn't even know what Aleppo was.

Had he been asked which US president he admired, you probably would have gotten a decent response. As far as Aleppo, honest screw-up, I can point to much worse from both elected presidents and candidates both now and years ago. He certainly knew who Assad was though. I could care less if he got a C in geography.

I'll take a likeable dufus with integrity who fosters non-partisan cooperation and strives to do the right thing over a tyrant any day. To consider Trump a serious candidate and discount a well-liked multiterm politician with actual experience is pretty silly.

Comment Re:And yet... (Score 1) 500

As for comparing him to George Bush, that's such a low bar that it says nothing about his intelligence.

And yet several people you know not only got Dubya elected.... but RE-elected. I don't think Trump could name a single foreign leader he hasn't been prepped for by his team and/or shared coke and prostitutes with yet he isn't held to near as high a standard as Johnson supposedly needs to be. Trump's rants were downright incomprehensible and RETARDED during the debate and it hasn't hurt him any.

I seriously doubt Johnson is genuinely incapable of naming a few foreign leaders. Respectable right-leaning ones in this day and age are a pretty short list and often aren't very noteworthy as they don't make the news very often. He also needed to be careful of naming one someone might think offensive and use against him. That can actually be a pretty loaded question. For example, I respect Gorbachev but to do so on live TV would get me branded as a commie pinko even though Gorbachev tried his best to reform the USSR into something resembling a more open system even if Glasnost/perestroika backfired. If he said the wrong name, it could have backfired and he'd get no chance for rebuttal or explanation. Basically passing on that question was a VERY smart thing to do.

That's also a question I've rarely heard asked to someone running for president.

Comment Re:And yet... (Score 1) 500

(which developers do you admire, er uh...). He's unqualified, it's ok, lots of people are. Some of them are running for president anyway.

That's a trick question, the correct answer is myself because everyone else's code is shit. I'm unqualified but that's ok, lots of people are. Most of them get development jobs anyway.

Comment Re:And yet... (Score 3) 500

The guy who couldn't name one that HE ADMIRED. Yeah, him. And tell me you've never had a brainfart during an interview. He recovered quickly from that in spite of the guy turning around and being a complete douche to him as soon as the phrase came out of his mouth.

There's many instances of both Clintons, Trump, GW Bush screwing up just as badly on live TV or just spitting out incomprehensible bullshit that "sounded smart" to dodge the question.

He's already apologized for not being as talented a bullshitter on the spot as other candidates..... time to move on.

Slashdot Top Deals

There are two kinds of egotists: 1) Those who admit it 2) The rest of us