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


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

Comment Re:Onwards to victory. (Score 1) 168

I went to the supermarket today. According to the National Enquirer, Hillary Clinton has already been indicted for a whole bunch of illegal things she did. It was on the front page.

I'm still a little leery of jumping on the "OMG FAKE NEWS!!" bandwagon given there seems to be absolutely nothing new about the phenomenon. I'm inclined to blame a combination of an awful Democratic candidate (well, she was. And no, I don't think Bernie would have won either. Democrats had a dreadful choice at the primaries this year) and the seductive nature of Fascism, which has proven itself over and over again to be a message people respond to as long as they don't recognize it for what it is.

The supermarket tabloids have been peddling this crap for decades. TV news, especially local news, also has its own version of "reality", frequently mixing syndicated spots of dubious accuracy with genuine news. (And this is ignoring justified, if over stated, criticism of mainstream serious print media, which is a different category of misleading content.)

Comment Re:Hi , this is some random website called (Score 1) 473

The Intercept is a legitimate site co-founded by Glenn Greenwald. It has essentially the same reputation as Greenwald, it's truthful and focuses on certain issues to the point of obsession, but for fairly good reasons.

As far as not answering the question, the correct response to "Will you ever sell your services to make a registry for Muslims?" is the same one as "Would you build baby mulching machines in Toddler sizes?" or even just "If Trump asked you to make your workers wear militaristic uniforms with jackboots, would you do that?" - the answer is always going to be "Fuck no", not "At this time we'd prefer not to answer" or no answer at all. That's regardless of whether the questioner is from the New York Times or Breitbart.

Comment Re:DUH! (Score 1) 65

It's actually an article of faith among some here that having your content available to download for free doesn't in any way affect your sales negatively, an argument frequently used as a justification for mass copyright infringement.

The presumption people who make the argument usually have is that people download what they want to test it, and then buy the stuff they think is good. I'm not convinced, but there you have it.

Comment Re:"a European cloud provider" (Score 1) 97

VPS providers usually have reasonable reasons to customize the distros they run somewhat to fit within the framework they're using to virtualize each server - which are vary rarely simple "VMWare on a Xeon" type environments due to cost/scalability issues.

My guess is that certain providers are crappier than others.

Comment Re:But will it run (Score 1) 127

Nokia had a range of operating systems that were, in every sense, fully functional computer operating systems, but were far more efficient. I'm not sure the choice between No Linux and Linux is what you claim.

At this point the market has decided everyone wants devices that, if you're lucky, might be able to last a day and a half on a single battery life (and that require battery technologies that have proven to be somewhat unstable to provide that amount of life.) So I'm not sure how much the "efficient operating system" thing counts right now, but I wish it did.

Comment Some examples of smeared time (Score 5, Funny) 178

At 4.37 it'll report that 4.38 molests goats. 4.38 will retaliate by claiming 4.37 killed a man and lied about it. 4.39 will accuse 4.38 of secretly having two wives who know nothing about one another. 4.40 will claim 4.38 and 4.37 are having a secret affair and are making up allegations about one another to hide the fact. 4.41 will claim 4.40 is a multiple felon. 4.42 will accuse 4.41 of cheating on his taxes...

Comment A symbolic gesture (Score 1) 226

Reddit has one of the most open membership processes there is, with no email address or similar required. Throwaway accounts are extremely common. The posting history of an account doesn't reflect the visibility of its comments - while there's "karma", it doesn't work the same way as with Slashdot where postings from high karma users are given more visibility.

So banning users, however toxic, is going to be relatively pointless. At best, it means someone can't prove they're the same person as, say, the originator of a thread. But in all reality, if all you're known for is shitposting, will anyone want to?

Comment Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts (Score 1) 549


Make it politically possible for others to resist.

Make it politically impossible for him to win again.

You know, Republicans managed to completely neuter the relatively harmless Obama within two years of his election, simply by putting up every roadblock they could. I think blocking the political agenda of someone running as a Fascist is considerably more worthy.

Comment Re:Yes? So? (Score 1) 549

It might actually help in the long run. I mean, if he spends all his time sending stupid attacks on Brazillian supermodels at 3am using the National Emergency Alert System, rather than, say, playing with the Nuclear football, or dreaming up ways to deport suspected sympathizers of flag burners, we might be a little safer.

Come to think of it, all those rumors about Twitter banning him? Maybe, for the safety of our nation, we need to let him continue with the distraction.

Comment Re:Doubleplusgood! (Score 1) 394

He started his campaign by demonizing and scapegoating immigrants. He continued by demonizing members of a minority religion and proposed policies actively harmful to them. He actively encouraged, promising to pay the legal fees for, supporters to attack protestors, who were at the time standing silently holding banners criticizing Trump's previous comments. He has continued along these lines, and before the election itself even started making threats to prosecute his political opponent over charges long since investigated and dismissed by not only law enforcement, but by hostile congressional committees. He even - for reasons that remain peculiar - managed to insert barely concealed anti-Semitic language in his last round of election ads.

What about him makes you say he's the "closest thing to a moderate"? Because I'm not seeing it. He's the closest thing to Mussolini we've seen win the Presidency (or even get close to winning the Presidency.) Is he as bad as Mussolini? Mussolini started in a country that had descended into lawless anarchy, and could get away with a lot more than Trump can. So it's hard to really make a direct comparison, but we know what drives both.

I appreciate many don't like Clinton. I don't either. Depending on how many conspiracy theories you believe about her, she's either an honest, female, version of Richard Nixon, or, well, just as bad as Richard Nixon. But even Nixon vs Mussolini is no contest.

What's frightening is that while all of this was acknowledged before the election, now he's one many seem to feel the need to fall in line and pretend it's not happening. Oh no, it must instead be the media's fault, the "lying press"... now where have I heard that phrase before?

Slashdot Top Deals

1: No code table for op: ++post