Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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

Comment Re: Bad Headline (Score 1) 585

I found you an example, one on which he even doubled down later.

If you refuse to understand the plain meaning of the words uttered in that example, I'm afraid I cannot help you. You will just keep saying "that's not what he meant" or "that shouldn't be taken serious" or "he said something else later" regardless of any actual quote, so why bother? We've seen how it works multiple times during the election.

And if that is the case, any conversation with you is fundamentally meaningless for any purpose other than gathering data on how to thwart you and your ilk as much as possible. I'm certainly not going to convince you of anything.

Comment Re: Bad Headline (Score 1) 585

The question doesn't ask about a specific Trump plan - that would be impossible, because Trump contradicts himself all the time. They ask about a specific plan of a "national Muslim registry", which was talked about by Trump during the election. The lack of details is deliberate - it shouldn't really matter what such a plan entails, exactly, the only sensible answer for anything with such a name is "no".

Comment Re: Those who something, something (Score 1) 585

No, there isn't one. But this statement doesn't establish a clear separation of church and state. The way it has been historically interpreted by pretty much every Christian society, is that there should be a distinct secular leaders (and hierarchy under them) and religious leaders (and hierarchy under them), but they are not separate. The secular leaders have a duty to promote and spread religion, and protect it from attacks (including ideological attacks - punishing heresies etc). And the religious leaders preach that it's a religious duty to obey the [righteous] secular leaders, and bless their policies. This has been the case since Constantine, and the Greek even concocted a term for this arrangement - "symphonia of powers".

In practice, you still get a theocracy.

Comment Re: Bad Headline (Score 1) 585

Which part of the question is loaded?

It's very blunt and straightforward: if the Trump administration follows up on any of his campaign promises wrt Muslim registry, will you assist? Yes/no?

And it's not even out of the blue. It's not like it is a deliberately concocted hypothetical scenario. It is something that Trump himself has talked about, repeatedly. It's not at all unreasonable to ask companies whether they would be involved.

Comment Re: Crybabies (Score 1) 524

What I meant is that the driver license itself does not show whether you're a citizen or not. At least it certainly doesn't in my state.

With respect to proving residency, yes, I know that you don't actually need a deed (I had to prove residency as a non-citizen several times, albeit for other reasons). But you need an utility bill, bank statement etc in your name. It's pretty hard to get such a thing for a hotel room. I guess it might be possible to fool a bank like that, but I doubt it'd last long.

Comment Re: Crybabies (Score 1) 524

It's worth noting that getting a driver license does not require one to be a citizen - indeed, you can get one on pretty much any valid visa, including students or workers. So far as I know, most states don't put citizenship info on the license.

Now, doing this on vacation would be tricky, because you'd need to prove contiguous residence in the state, usually for at least 30 days. This generally requires a lease, not something like a hotel; and getting that on a tourist visa would be tricky.

Comment Re:Tech won't fix society (Score 1) 270

It all has value, absolutely! The problem is presenting it as "solution to fake news". This is setting the expectations way too high, and is an impossible bar to reach through that approach.

With respect to media environment being technological - it's true, but cultural effects still dominate. If Facebook, for example, added some kind of "fake news" indicator on stories, would it help? Probably not - people who read and reshare them will just ignore it, and would describe it as some kind of nefarious attempt by "Silicon Valley liberals" to push their world view on them. Eventually, someone would make browser extensions that would disable it completely, and people would install that.

Suppose FB just starts censoring such stories outright? Then they'd simply be shared somewhere else, on a (possibly new) social network created to cater to this freshly alienated by huge market. I would imagine that the guys running Breitbart would just love to give it a go.

Obviously, there are certain social effects - networking etc - that make existing platforms entrenched, and provide barriers to entry for new competitors. But the barriers are not insurmountable, and said social effects can be negated by sufficient amount of inconvenience caused by staying. I assert that any technical solution that is strong enough to actually solve this problem would constitute such sufficient amount of inconvenience.

Comment Re:Tech won't fix society (Score 1) 270

HOW IRONIC that you've proposed a technical solution for a social problem.

No, I didn't. The solution that I proposed is to the problem of determining fake news from real news - that is a technical problem. The social problem is different - how to make people believe and/or care that fake news are fake.

Comment Re:Tech won't fix society (Score 1) 270

The problem are all instances that people believe in.

And vast majority of them are only slightly more plausible than "aliens are controlling your minds". It's stuff like "Obama is secretly a Muslim who's plotting to have US occupied by UN". And I personally know some people who genuinely believe this, and will happily reshare any news from e.g. InfoWars that will support and reinforce that belief.

Slashdot Top Deals

"If the code and the comments disagree, then both are probably wrong." -- Norm Schryer