What part of "pointless and closed" are you unable to understand?
What part of "pointless and closed" are you unable to understand?
What part of "pointless and closed" were you unable to understand?
Do I need to be more explicit about why I believe you are not worth more of my time? The truth would require rudeness, and I'm not even campaigning to be president.
The people that did it.
Certainly, but they had help. Not surprised at this point, but somehow still disappointed to find no mention of "Microsoft", "liability", or even "blame" (beyond the titular question).
If there were liability for the customers' harm, then the makers would design and implement hardware and software with more concern about security and abuse. Not saying Microsoft invented the idea of avoiding responsibility (and actually unable to think of anything that Microsoft actually did invent), but they perfected it. Thereby Microsoft became rich and successful and the model for other companies. Latest reports are pointing the fingers at Chinese manufacturers, but they just sold what the customers wanted, secure in the legal protection of "You can't sue us no matter how much harm our devices cause."
Oh well. Pointless to spend more thought or time on Slashdot these days, especially in speculating on possible improvements. This article will disappear in a few hours, but maybe I missed something "funny"... Okay, found the only post with a funny mod, and it wasn't. Not surprised.
Yes, you have convinced me you are fanatical and willing to repeat yourself. I could extend my responses, but there was no evidence of anything recognizable as sincerity or curiosity, so you have also convinced me that would be a waste of time and keystrokes. Or perhaps I should apologize for writing at a level that is too difficult for you?
I regard this discussion as pointless and closed. Feel free to repeat yourself some more.
Gawdamn the backspace bug on Slashdot! Just lost a carefully prepared reply that had taken several minutes (and quite a bit of energy) to write. *sigh*
Anyway, I'll reduce it to "Why does anyone hate Hillary?"
Your sig looks familiar, so maybe you can just remind me of an earlier reply, but I still don't get it.
My first degree included sociology and I studied quite a bit about polling. I even followed up with math before switching to computer science for my second degree. So I'm telling you [tbannist] to stop projecting your ignorance or bias.
Short summary: It is quite easy to deliver any poll results you are being paid for. LOTS of ways to rig the results, but the more "scientific" pollsters play games with framing and even priming in contrast to the older and cruder techniques of manipulating the questions and possible answers.
It is even easier to produce a poll that produces garbage. For example, serious polling has to involve pre-polling to test the questions.
The hardest thing is to produce an honest poll that gives you meaningful insight into any deep issue. REALLY hard to keep the pollsters' mindsets and prejudices out of the results before you try to figure out what the results really mean.
I think the money went to his head a long while ago and it became a boring business. I think he lost his sense of humor, too, but he's getting ideas from around the Web and he has hired a couple of editors to pick the ones he illustrates for his strip. Nothing that feels like his originality there.
As regards Trump, I think it was a head fake. If Trump wins, he gets to say "I told you so" and if Trump loses he'll claim credit and say "If I hadn't scared, you then Trump could have won."
I still can't understand the rabid hatred of Hillary (except for the misogynists), though their viciousness has finally got me to like her a little bit in spite of the lawyer thing. I started neutral towards Trump, but now I think he's a pathological liar and I definitely hate liars. Probably a sociopath, too, but there are plenty of them running apparently successful businesses.
Interesting post, and if I ever saw a mod point, I might give it to you, even though you only posed the questions.
Anyway, it's obvious that technology is influencing elections in many ways, but mostly for the worse. Just picking a few examples off the top of my head:
(1) Scientific polling that makes voting feel meaningless
(2) Precise gerrymandering that distorts the House of so-called Representatives
(3) Trump's self-immolation via Twitter
Still no funny comments and the ones modded insightful weren't, and the discussion is almost expired...
Of course the amazing thing is that Trump probably thinks the tweeting is helping his campaign. He doesn't even want to stop, though Hillary would be helping him greatly if this gimmick discouraged him from tweeting. Like Sun Tzu says, you shouldn't interfere when your enemy is punching himself in the face. (Actually, I'm still entertaining the hypothesis that Twitter actually brainwashed Trump with Alt-Right links.)
I still think it's kind of unfair for Hillary to exploit his weaknesses, but then again, I think Trump is asking for it. Near as I can tell, no one forced him into this ritual humiliation. Kind of a shame he didn't have any good friends who could persuade him not to, and if he thought Bill Clinton was being a good friend when he encouraged him to run against Bill's very own wife... Well, there goes any claim to high intelligence, as if the Donald's campaign hadn't been proof enough.
If there were some similar comments already, I would have appended mine. Nothing showed up yet, and the participation in Slashdot these days is so low that I'm not expecting much before the article dies. The moderation is not helping (as usual), but I have a new question about some discouraging "award" I recently received. Couldn't find out anything about it, so I guess I should care even less, eh?
Recommend everyone who thinks this is a good idea should read Cyber War . In short summary, America probably has good offensive capabilities, but pretty much NO defenses and HIGH vulnerability. The Chinese are actually best positioned to fight and win any cyber war, and I wouldn't even be surprised if they are framing the Russians right now...
However, my main disappointment just now is with the state of Slashdot. No prior mention of "defense"? Where has all the insight gone?
When you use a generic word as a proper noun, you're already in trouble with the branding. (Not as bad as the mutating acronym problem, however, as when GOP becomes Grab Our Pussies.)
Personal story time: I bought a Galaxy smartphone because I thought it was an international company. Therefore I thought I would be able to get English manuals. WRONG. The localized model is DIFFERENT and I couldn't even figure out which Galaxy model it was based on. It is also stuffed full of OS-level uninstallable software. Again, not English.
Yeah, it's mostly my own fault because I'm still insufficiently proficient in the local language, even though I've been studying it for decades. *sigh* However, that doesn't make me feel better about my dashed hopes.
Oh yeah. I should mention that I asked Samsung for help. No capish.
Good hardware, but I had already ruled out buying another even before they started catching fire.
(I could have raced for first post, but I still don't understand what that was about.)
I suppose you're right. I keep thinking Trump might have a shred of decency somewhere in there.
Regarding your ad hominem attacks on Bill Clinton, you yourself said he isn't the candidate. At the time, I was interested in the evidence, but most of the attacks seemed highly partisan and questionable, and they retain that appearance to this day. Ditto the extensions to Hillary. A few blowjobs don't bother me as long as it didn't interfere with his job performance. Impeachment? Didn't fly.
As regards Hillary herself, I don't like the nepotistic aspects, but the primary thing I dislike about her is the lawyer thing. I think she is mostly campaigning on President Obama's legacy, but she would be a terrible politician if she didn't reference Bill's successes, too. Oh wait, she might be a terrible politician, but I actually count that in her favor. Also don't like reports of her excessive ambition, but goes with the campaign and also helps explain why she decided to stick with Bill. (I wouldn't be surprised if she and Trump had similar attitudes towards the sanctity of marriage, but a divorced woman would have little chance of any sort in American politics.)
I think Bernie Sanders might have been a better candidate, but opinion polls are no proof and in many ways he would have been a juicy target, too. I actually regard it as unfortunate that the Democratic Party has been over-focused on Obama and Hillary for some years, which has contributed to the non-emergence of other prominent candidates. I suspect that Bill was interfering behind the scenes, too. (Maybe he's just too smart to use email for such things?)
Don't feel sanctimonious about Trump. Just considering the demographics. One of his largest voting blocs is poorly educated men, but about half of them are married to smarter women who have plenty of time to twist their husbands away from voting for Trump.
There must be an army of sock puppets giving "insightful" mod points to AC garbage that should be invisible to me.
Insight would be to note that Putin is taking advantage of the current electoral dysfunction of the USA to perpetrate large-scale war crimes in Syria. There was a time when politics stopped at the water's edge, but not now and Putin knows it.
In the debate itself insight would have been to note that Iran's increased power in the region is primarily due to Dubya's insane war against Iraq. Most of the current proxy wars are desperate attempts to contain Iran. The punchline is that they're still being funding with American money, added on top of the financial losses in Iraq itself. Maybe Afghanistan costs should be counted, too, but at least Bin Ladin was there at one time, so it's much harder to figure out who's to blame for that mess...
My own theory about posts like this is that the Russian hackers have taken over some dormant Slashdot accounts with low user numbers and have some of their best BS artists working them.
No equivalency between Hillary and Trump. She is not a witch, but she might burn you.
Certainly understand why you are too much of a coward to put your name on that piece.
What I can't understand is why it is visible. Did several pieces waste mod points on it, or do you own a herd of sock puppets with mod points?
There are two kinds of egotists: 1) Those who admit it 2) The rest of us