Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



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

Comment Re:Sexist Shite (Score 1) 126

Wow, that's a lot of words.

Could have shortened that to "I don't understand how this 'feminism' works in practice but in this scenario I literally invented, liberals and feminists are all awful, I'm always right, and I'm willing to gloss over the entire history of sexual assault, the existing power imbalance between genders and classes, and pretty much the rest of reality of being a woman in America to keep that fiction going in my head. SEE HOW RATIONAL I AM"

Comment Re:Sexist Shite (Score 2, Insightful) 126

Are the feminazis still pushing sexist nonsense like this ? After what the electorate told them at the last election ?

I think what the election told feminists was that you can be on tape as admitting to abusing women and still get voted in as president?

That fact doesn't really shut feminists up so much as prove them right.

Democrats

AAPS Doctors Run Survey On Hillary Clinton's Health (prnewswire.com) 629

schwit1 PR Newswire: Concerns about Hillary Clinton's health are "serious -- could be disqualifying for the position of President of the U.S.," say nearly 71% of 250 physicians responding to an informal internet survey by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS). About 20% said concerns were "likely overblown, but should be addressed as by full release of medical records." Only 2.7% responded that they were "just a political attack; I have confidence in the letter from her physician and see no cause for concern." While more than 81% were aware of her history of a concussion, only 59% were aware of the cerebral sinus thrombosis, and 52% of the history of deep venous thrombosis. More than 78% said the health concerns had received "not enough emphasis" in the media, and only 2.7% that there had been "too much emphasis." Nearly two-thirds said that a physician who had a concern about a candidate's fitness to serve for health reasons should "make the concerns known to the public." Only 11% said a physician should "keep silent unless he had personally examined the patient," and 10% that the candidate's health was "off limits for public discussion." A poll of 833 randomly selected registered voters by Gravis Marketing showed that nearly half (49%) were not aware of the "well documented major health issues that Hillary Clinton has." Nearly three-fourths (74%) were unaware of Bill Clinton's statement that Hillary suffered a "terrible" concussion requiring "six months of very serious work to get over." The majority (57%) thought that candidates should release their medical records.

Comment It's not about unjustly discrediting journalists. (Score 1) 724

It's about calling out scam artists like Anita Sarkeesian and her bogus kickstarter. It's about calling out scumbags like Zoe Quinn and the gaming journalists with the undisclosed conflicts of interests that reported on her games. It's about calling out those who defend those other people by ignoring facts and manufacturing controversy, trying to discredit legitimate criticism as misogyny. People just like you, Timothy. This trash piece is unsurprising, though, since Slashdot has completely sold out to the SJW lie.

I find it interesting that this said it's not about journalism, it's about Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian. Then I look up the page and there's half a dozen people saying it's about journalistic integrity and Zoe Quinn is just pretending it's about her because she's an attention whore.

It's almost like, if you have a decentralised movement with no obvious leadership, that you don't have the ability to say what your movement is (or isn't) about any more. So when people say that Intel are caving to the kind of idiot who thinks the above isn't misogyny, you can't say that's not what's happening, because you don't own the movement and you can't point to anyone who does.

Comment Re:Also interesting for what they missed out (Score 1) 68

Is it though? I'm not a lawyer, but the BBC article suggests the opposite - that because it explicitly doesn't stop you from circumventing DRM, there will be even more pressure to create DRM that prevents format shifting to protect the bottom line.

Remember this is the UK, not the US - the DMCA doesn't exist here.

Comment Re:Because it sucks when you can't compete..... (Score 1) 96

Maps was an example rather than the only definitive place that it happens. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear.

I don't have a strong opinion on SEO either way, but it's clear that companies believe it helps and are willing to invest in it, where Google doesn't need to as they control the results and the algorithm. Regardless if SEO was paid for or not, I can see why companies wouldn't consider the current situation ideal.

Comment Re:Again? (Score 3, Interesting) 96

The trouble is in this instance, is that the people who have the decision making power (you, in this instance) aren't the same as the people who are being abused (the provider of the thing you're searching for). To say that it's okay because you have the power to change what you do, doesn't change the fact that you won't change because you're not the one being screwed.

Slashdot Top Deals

Tomorrow's computers some time next month. -- DEC

Working...