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

 



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

Comment Re:already exceeding expectations (Score 1) 1460

You're right that fact alone does not make him illegitimate.
That fact combined with massive voter disenfranchisement, gerrymandering and a million other dirty republican tricks however, does make him illegitimate. There has never been a more fraudulent election in the USA than this one.

Now all that cheating didn't work by itself. He sure had help from the Democrats running a hugely unpopular candidate. The two of them were both the most unpopular candidates in US history, and her campaign approach had a number of serious errors.
I have no doubt she was the lesser of the two evils - what with being sane and all that. She was provably the more honest of the two candidates (damn Trump managed to be most dishonest candidate in history - which is quite an achievement for "not a politician" and seriously how do you get away with taking four different contradictory positions on every policy question - sometimes in the same day ?!?!?!). But frankly she was the only politician he could win against - and it was an extremely narrow victory. Even in the states which made the difference he won by hairline margins.

Ultimately - I came out of this election with the solid realization that the biggest mistake the democratic party ever made was thinking you could send yet another fuck-you to the liberals and go run some center-right neo-liberal candidate when the voters had wanted a democratic socialist. Bernie would have wiped the fucking floor with Trump. Not least is the evidence that a helluva lot of Trump voters were Bernie supporters early on.

Now personally, I think anybody who went from Bernie to Trump is seriously deranged because his proposals are the exact opposite of Bernie's on everything that mattered (the only overlap was on opposing bad trade deals but their ideas on what should exist instead have NOTHING in common) - but had he been an option, those people would not have voted for Trump.
If your issue is with bad trade deals and the economic worries of middle America and two politicians are talking about that - you vote for the classy one, not the pussygrabber.

Comment Re:already exceeding expectations (Score 1) 1460

> the exact problem the electoral college was created to prevent.
Not it's not ! READ what the founding fathers gave as their reason for it. The EC was created to override the vote of the people in the event the people elected an unfit demagogue to the presidency.

The E.C. has in fact spectacularly failed at what it was created to prevent. What it was created to prevent was Donald J. Trump!

Comment Re:Encouraging corporate arrogance. (Score 1) 74

>See, they've legalized this whole get-out-of-jail-free system called bankruptcy...

Yeah... until ordinary people started using it, now there's a huge push (10 bucks says you can instantly guess which party's politicians are driving it) to make it much harder for individuals to go bankrupt - all filled with little exceptions so big corporations can still do it easily.

You know, because paying your future earnings for the rest of your life on a fraudulent debt you can never pay off and basically being forced into indentured servitude stopped being considered a violation of the constitution when FDR died.

Comment Re:Encouraging corporate arrogance. (Score 1) 74

So THESE people who DID read something before they signed it, do not get to demand the government give them restitution when the other party flat out failed to live up to their responsibilities as per what was written ?

Fraud is not a crime the government is SUPPOSED to punish ?

Damn you free market fundamentalists are such fucking idiots.

No. The problem here is not the "nanny state" - if anthing it's the government not doing their job well enough. It's the fact that the punishment for fraud is usually smaller than the profits you can make from it.
When EVERY fraudster gets to neighbours with Bernie Madoff this shit will end. Your plan would make it worse, because it doesn't matter what the contract says if the other party will not face any negative consequences for flat-out ignoring it.

Comment Re:1500 years ago, to be precise (Score 1) 74

You're rather misrepresenting history - seeing as corporations weren't invented yet when Justinian was alive, in fact they were only invented about a thousand years later. The Dutch East India Corporation was the first such entity to exist. It had a private army and navy - both among the largest in the world at the time. It came to own about 25% of the land-surface of the earth. People in those places were not "citizens", you know having rights and such, they were divided between "slaves" and "employees".
The next two corporations were the British East India Corporation - a direct clone of it's Dutch forebear, though it was more successful and ended up owning well over a third of the world's land surface. The other was the French American Colonial Corporation - which billed itself as a replica of the Dutch forebear, but was nothing but a massive Ponzi scheme from day one. It was founded by a Murderer who had fled Scottland to avoid his execution. It paid old investors purely from money earned from new investors (since it's Louisianna colony never made any money), and when it ran out of those the chairman got himself appointed head of the French central bank and simply printed money to pay investors - rapidly devaluing the currency, destroying the French economy, impoverishing the nation and becoming the single most important cause of the subsequent French revolution.

So right from the start, corporations have been insidious human rights abusers and large-scale committers of fraud. There has yet to be one that isn't all of the above.

Comment Re: Treason ain't what it used to be (Score 1) 794

>It's documented that they were in fact carrying weapons. Furthermore, Assange himself even admitted to editing the video in order to manipulate the public:

Oh right... so the right to bear arms only applies to Americans ? Oh sorry, i forgot, WHITE Americans. Anybody else has a gun - their fair game to kill.

>There are armed men in the group

Yes, they are called bodyguards. The mere presence of a weapon does not make somebody an enemy combatant. The Geneva convention is supposed to mean you ONLY shoot at other soldiers.

Comment Re: I honestly wonder... (Score 1) 157

For a start - a simple gene test would show her child had only her DNA, and the child would invariably be female. But seeing as it also has not been observed in any other mammal, and there is strong biomolecular reasons to believe it cannot happen in mammals - it would be an extraordinary find, and would raise well deserved scepticism if claimed. If somebody claimed it and agreed to a DNA test though - then it would be confirmed.

Comment Re: Pardon Manning and Snowden (Score 1) 382

>Stats say that a huge majority of the population falls within the normal for all measured traits (not 'some', not 'a few', but 'all'). It's not statistically possible to have a trait with a normal distribution that exempts some other trait with a normal distribution. Look it up snowflake.

It doesn't HAVE to be. There are just too many possible traits and too much variation in the population for anybody to be in the normal range on all of them. Statistically about one hundred billion humans have ever lived, you may find one if you had a sample size of one hundred trillion.
Seriously - you're talking everything from height to average heartbeats per minute through number of children and length of hair. Nobody is in the "normal" range on everything - and if ever such a person was born they'd commit suicide at age 10 when they realise they are the most boring person to ever walk the earth (which, ironically, would put them outside the normal "lifespan" measure).

If you actually think it's possible for a human to be born who isn't actually way outside the normal on at least one trait - then you need to study the right science, it's not statistics - it's genetics that determine that. Every reproduction contains random errors, a mixture of two sets of data in a semi-randomized way - and influences from environment on top. Just on genetics we can guarantee it, and when you throw social and environmental influences on top - it boggles the mind that you can imagine this is even possible.

Consider all the ways genes in the human genome can be combined into a viable person. There trillions - that means the odds of anybody having YOUR specific DNA is trillions to one. The silly conclusion is that it's impossible for you to exist. The sane conclusion is that it's impossible for anybody exactly like you to exist. DNA doesn't care if it's in the normal range or not, in fact - there are genetic factors that actively DISCOURAGES this in certain situations. HSP90 for example is a protein that folds other proteins into the right shape, it's VERY good at it - even ensuring the right shape if the DNA contains errors. But it has another job - when there are climate changes HSP90 is used as part of the processes cells use to adjust to the new climate. But while redirected to that task- it can't fold proteins, so other - proteins take over, which lack it's error-correction.
Think about what that means - it means climate changes actively ENCOURAGE mutations which could have lain dormant for millions of years to suddenly appear as actual people. The condition most likely to require adaptation - causes the body to stop suppressing it and encourages mutation.

I think there has never BEEN a more extraordinary claim than the idea that any person, let alone MOST people, fit the normal range on all traits. It's like insisting you can jump into orbit.

Comment Re:I did (Score 2) 310

Because every other country has active measures in society to combat that pressure from companies. And in the others they are at least partially successful. Not entirely - much of Europe is having the exact same problem as Japan though at an earlier stage and not as severe yet. That's one reason it's ridiculous of Europe not to welcome the refugees with open arms - they desperately need an influx of able-bodied young people to keep their economies working.
The US is earlier on the same road, mostly thanks to the immigrants Trump wants to kick out - without them, the US would be a lot further along. Already the US is worried that they can't sustain social security when people are living longer and there isn't a fast enough inflow of young people to fund it.

Japan is the furthest along that road, and thus gets to serve as the great big warning sign of where that road leads, but you're an idiot if you think those other places aren't on the exact same road and measurably moving forward on it. They are moving slower because of policies designed to combat this corporate pressure. Those policies, however, are being steadily eroded - which will accelerate the trip.

They need to be significantly strengthened if you want to change course. That means things like paid family leave, maternity leave with job protection, paternity leave with job protection, good (and affordable) childcare options - so that people don't have to choose between life and work.
A healthy society needs people who work to live. When everybody lives to work - that society is doomed.

Comment Re: Pardon Manning and Snowden (Score 1) 382

What makes you think "there is no normal" applied to just one trait ? The whole point is that it applies to your full humanity. Nobody is within the "normal" range on EVERY trait. We're ALL outside it on SOME trait.

So that means- nobody is actually normal. You can be normal X, but you can't be normal. To be normal you have to be the average on ALL MEASUREABLE TRAITS.

And no human being has ever been that.

Comment Re: Zuckerberg (Score 2) 283

Thats not an unusual. People who die without wills in a few generations can leave land as a lot of tiny patches divided among descendents with no real idea which patch belongs to who.
My great-grandfather owned a farm near Thabazimbi but none of his kids lived there and over generations the divides got tinier and tinier. A few years ago I was contacted by the government who wanted to add the farm to a nature reserve, asking my consent to give up title to my tiny share. I gave it, all the relatives I know did too. The land is now part of a nature park.

Slashdot Top Deals

"I got everybody to pay up front...then I blew up their planet." "Now why didn't I think of that?" -- Post Bros. Comics

Working...