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


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:In the bunker (Score 2) 276

Well.. While we are making stupid claims... How about Obama's trips to the Med, where he and his wife took separate aircraft and a boat load of friends? And what makes you think protecting the president in FL is all that much more expensive than having him at the White House? It's not like they don't have SS staff in both places at this point...

You silly person. Think about what you just said. "what makes you think protecting the president in FL is all that much more expensive than having him at the White House?" and then you finish with, "It's not like they don't have SS staff in both places at this point.".

If they have SS service staff in both places (and of course, Trump Tower plus the homes of Uday, Qusay and Ivanka), then that's where the extra expense comes in. I'll bet if you sit down and really give it a lot of serious thought, you'll come up with how this "multiplication" thing works.

Comment Re:WTF (Score 1) 244

It only applies to countries that are part of Trump's Muslim ban.

The Trump travel ban affects six countries (at least the new, improved one does) and the new restriction on electronic devices affects eight countries.

I'm not sure which countries make up the additional two.

Comment Re:Comey? (Score 4, Interesting) 516

Maybe it's because they WEREN'T "investigating Trump" at the time, and still aren't.

According to the FBI director, there is an investigation into whether "associates of Mr. Trump were in contact with Russian officials, and whether they colluded with them."

Now, you may say this is not "investigating Trump", but in government corruption investigations, the FBI always works their way from "associates" inward to the main guy. These are not people that anyone would trust not to "flip" on the boss if they're facing jail time.

The noose is tightening. You can tell from the panicked tweets.

Comment Re:This just in (Score 3, Interesting) 226

You have a funny definition of freedom if it means support and praise of people who back things like elimination of civil liberties, strict control of speech, elimination of equality, and convergence towards dictatorship.

You have a funny definition of freedom yourself if you think that it means developing and collecting techniques to use your personal electronics as spies for the government. Whatever Assange's relation to the Kremlin may be: on this specific issue they are fighting for your and my freedom with much more impact than any soldier ever had in the past 70 years.

Assange [...] doesn't believe in freedom, he believes in absolute rule by only those who he personally agrees with [...]

According to a 2011 interview with Forbes, Assange is some sort of libertarian. Now I tend more to what is called socialist in the US, and believe little in trickle-down economy and market shenanigans, but you are describing a fascist, which Assange has never given any reason to believe he is. On the other hand, the people who "believe in absolute rule" are also those who collect and use the hacking tricks used by the CIA. So what kind of fascist would ever disarm the brown shirts?

Comment Re: Next! (Score 1) 155

Maybe because such a law was recently implemented in Europe

OK, but laws like the Republicans are proposing, criminalizing protest have been passed in places like Egypt, Russia, Turkey, etc. There are people doing jail time for protesting in those places.

Let's not bullshit. We both know the reason the usual suspects are expressing their Sunday night outrage (or Monday morning, for those being outraged from Macedonia and points East) over a law regarding inaccurate statements.

Comment Re: Next! (Score 1) 155

That article is just more of what your first post's article had in it. And neither one is very meaningful until the laws are actually made.

Ah, good. Now we're getting to it. Read the summary for the article we're talking about. It's also just a "proposed" law, but it apparently has caused much consternation among the commenters.

Don't you think we should also hold our fire on this new bill until the "law is actually made"?

Or are you suggesting that when a Democratic state legislator proposes a bill it should be held to a different standard than when Republican legislators do it?

I am currently in a state (Texas) where state legislators are famous for proposing bills that are so stupid it would make your head spin. Their laws are overturned by the US Supreme Court as unconstitutional more often than just about any other state in the union.

Comment Re: Next! (Score 3, Interesting) 155

I should be aloud to move and hit you in order to save my own life/property.

The 18 state legislatures pushing these bills are less concerned about your car being blocked than people showing up demanding answers.

All of the bills would allow states to sue protesters for the cost of policing. Do you believe we should be able to sue gun manufacturers for the cost of policing, too?

Both speech and gun ownership are supposedly constitutional rights.

Slashdot Top Deals

You are always doing something marginal when the boss drops by your desk.