Slashdot Mirror

Although if you want a rumor that may or may not be true and also may or may not be related, Chelsea Manning has apparently attempted suicide.

Or not, the Army won't say either way.

Oh, are you kidding? Now that Snapchat can SAVE the pictures taken with your camera to your very phone... I say it increases the 20 or so billion Snapchat market cap by another 5 at least, basically adds the value of an airline like Lufthansa to the extremely important piece of Internet infrastructure that is Snapchat. I mean pfft, an airline with 268 aircraft (615 aircraft if you count all of the subsidiaries)., 220 destinations, 32.4 Billion Euro in assets, about 32 billion in revenues, 1.67 billion in operating income, 1.69 billion in net income, 5.8 billion in equity, carrying over 106 million paying passengers in 2014...

versus

Snapchat, a 25.8MB phone application, OK? Available in 20 languages! Images that can (supposedly) disappear in 10 seconds, delivering amazing 10 BILLION video views a day.

In May 2016, Snapchat raised $1.81 billion in equity offering

. Eat that, Lufthansa.

This must be a new low for /. submissions, when not even the submitter Reads The Fine Article...

The CNN article nowhere mentions airplane deaths or parachute drops of pods.

What it does mention (in so many words) is that they want to do for air passengers and freight, what Intermodal shipping containers have done for surface freight (sea, rail, trucking) - and yes, with the possibility to extend air networks to other modes of transport e.g. road or rail, like what has happened for shipping containers. Read like that, it makes a lot more sense than the wild hand-waving of the summary and the other comments. Albeit probably not enough sense to make this a reality... I for one am not so sure that passengers would allow for the same sort of dynamics that freight does, once bundled into a bulking container of whatever name.

It also differs from the Airbus design in that the pods are not inside the aircraft, but attached to the aircraft. Less duplication of structural material than the Airbus design? Probably. But perhaps not as much as contemporary aircraft though.

Surveillance systems are always abused in this way.

when it doesnt http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/3...

Trump supporters were previously Bush supporters, and Bush did the exact same damn thing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

He even refused to turn over e-mails under subpoena: "The White House stated it might have lost five million emails"

At least 5 different investigations were hampered by his private e-mail account:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

And Jeb did the same thing, too:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/je...

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/05/...

No because this is a professional team that is wearing Polo shirts with the mission patch instead of being attention seekers. They realize they represent thousands of people that dedicated a decade of their lives to make this work.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/04/...

Boring Shirts. Why are they not in suits? Polo shirts are not professional in the least. Besides, it really isn't about the shirts, its the privileged assholes in them. That photo has only one non patriarchal person in it.

The real goal is this:https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ci7V02mXIAAs3eN.jpg as the Huffpost paints the way to true diversity. Time for NASA to get with the program.

No because this is a professional team that is wearing Polo shirts with the mission patch instead of being attention seekers. They realize they represent thousands of people that dedicated a decade of their lives to make this work.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/04/...

Seattle misery: HUGE problems with traffic. New construction makes the traffic worse. Amazon and Microsoft abusing employees. Shockingly slow internet connections.

I've been in Seattle for a lil while. Traffic does suck. The roads here are very poorly planned. Some friends in the DOT contracting business have shared that the companies are milking contracts for all their worth and dumping them (hearsay) ... The internet is getting better. Centurylink adopted a debunked fibre installation in the city and had it up and running at near 1gig speeds just a few months after adoption (about 800mbits is the max I've ever seen while streaming a linux distro in a torrent app) ... It's better than getting your internet from Comcast with their obvious price-fixing and anti-competitive behaviour - there was a slashdot about this not too long ago.

Amazon: Worse than Wal-Mart: Amazon's sick brutality and secret history of ruthlessly intimidating workers (February 23, 2014)

Yet, they produce a continuous stream of what we locals call "am-holes" ... their employee-fucking is widely known yet they somehow keep attracting young talent. As the owner of a startup, I find it extremely hard to poach amazon employees. What I offer in freedom doesn't trump their offer of stability. I'm pretty sure they conscript people secretly by paying off their student loans in exchange for longish contracts with gag clauses. Just a hunch. What's really worse than their treatment of their employees is their treatment of the local ecosystems. Their disruption is so profound it turned a major borough of the city into their shitty little playground, and they're moving to other boroughs.

Microsoft: Microsoft Is Filled With Abusive Managers And Overworked Employees, Says Tell-All Book (May 23, 2012)

Not to mention one of the biggest DRM manufacturers west of the Atlantic. I loved Doctorow's lecture to MS about it (http://www.craphound.com/msftdrm.txt)

Traffic: Seattle one of the worst U.S. cities for traffic congestion, tied with NYC (March 31, 2015) Quote: "An additional 23 minutes a day spent in traffic may not sound like much, but when it adds up over a year it becomes 89 hours." (Whoever wrote that must be accustomed to Seattle misery. An additional 23 minutes a day spent in traffic sounds HORRIBLE.)

There are ways around the traffic. And it's not waze. You really just have to take specific roundabout routes with less/little traffic and you get there quicker. The main roads are for suburbanites too fucking lazy to take the beautiful trains which head in from pretty much every direction, with huge park & ride lots for commuters. I personally believe the traffic problem is a problem with the personalities of the body politick. They are quite anti-social, fear human contact (in my observation), and take every precaution to not talk to strangers. It's really odd. We 'transplants' call it the "seattle-freeze" - which is something I warn anyone moving to the area about.

Slow internet: Many areas of Seattle have poor internet connections. See the article, These places have the slowest Internet in the country. (June 25, 2015) Quote: "... Seattle ... CenturyLink (CTL) customers trying to access particular sites from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. will have unbearably slow speeds."

Seattle misery: HUGE problems with traffic. New construction makes the traffic worse. Amazon and Microsoft abusing employees. Shockingly slow internet connections.

Amazon: Worse than Wal-Mart: Amazon's sick brutality and secret history of ruthlessly intimidating workers (February 23, 2014)

Microsoft: Microsoft Is Filled With Abusive Managers And Overworked Employees, Says Tell-All Book (May 23, 2012)

Traffic: Seattle one of the worst U.S. cities for traffic congestion, tied with NYC (March 31, 2015) Quote: "An additional 23 minutes a day spent in traffic may not sound like much, but when it adds up over a year it becomes 89 hours." (Whoever wrote that must be accustomed to Seattle misery. An additional 23 minutes a day spent in traffic sounds HORRIBLE.)

Slow internet: Many areas of Seattle have poor internet connections. See the article, These places have the slowest Internet in the country. (June 25, 2015) Quote: "... Seattle ... CenturyLink (CTL) customers trying to access particular sites from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. will have unbearably slow speeds."

The Hubble Space Telescope has captured images of glowing auroras over Jupiter just days before NASA's new Juno spaceship arrives to orbit the gas giant. "These auroras are very dramatic and among the most active I have ever seen," said Jonathan Nichols from the University of Leicester, UK, and principal investigator of the study.

"It almost seems as if Jupiter is throwing a fireworks party for the imminent arrival of Juno,..

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/01/...

Seattle misery: HUGE problems with traffic. New construction makes the traffic worse. Amazon and Microsoft abusing employees. Shockingly slow internet connections.

Amazon: Worse than Wal-Mart: Amazon's sick brutality and secret history of ruthlessly intimidating workers (February 23, 2014)

Microsoft: Microsoft Is Filled With Abusive Managers And Overworked Employees, Says Tell-All Book (May 23, 2012)

Traffic: Seattle one of the worst U.S. cities for traffic congestion, tied with NYC (March 31, 2015) Quote: "An additional 23 minutes a day spent in traffic may not sound like much, but when it adds up over a year it becomes 89 hours." (Whoever wrote that must be accustomed to Seattle misery. An additional 23 minutes a day spent in traffic sounds HORRIBLE.)

Slow internet: Many areas of Seattle have poor internet connections. See the article, These places have the slowest Internet in the country. (June 25, 2015) Quote: "... Seattle ... CenturyLink (CTL) customers trying to access particular sites from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. will have unbearably slow speeds."

A recent slashdot reply caught my eye, because it succinctly sums up the situation in the UK.

In her department, which requires high-end medically-skilled professionals, her boss posted after Brexit. The basic gist was "Don't worry, everyone, your cancer diagnosis will still be safe in the hands of our department consisting almost entirely of Spanish, Italian, German, French, Polish, Greek, ...... personnel for the time being".

The important part of this post is that the jobs in this lab are denied to UK citizens due to globalism.

Of course, proponents of globalism will tell us that the UK citizens can easily move to Greece and get an equivalent job.

It could happen - right?

Globalism was sold to us as a way to increase our standard of living. It was well known that salaries would stagnate, but (we were told) the lower prices on imported goods would more than make up for the difference.

In hindsight, we see that salaries did stagnate, and also unemployment went up while per-capita gdp about doubled.

Globalism is good for a handful few people, while it has driven half the workforce to the brink of poverty.

The economic rationale says that the economy is doing great (which it is, actually) and ignores the dissatisfaction of millions of citizens as valueless.

Why should *any* country sacrifice the welfare of its citizens for the benefit of people in other countries?

If want to argue globalism, please include the analysis that indicates why having 75 million households on the brink of poverty and 10% unemployment is a good thing.

It's the difference between a rationalization and actual evidence.

I know that as does probably just about everyone on /. but do you remember how much of a deal the news media made about the terrorists using encrypt during their coverage of the attacks. It now looks like since the initial frenzy is over with that and people have it in their mind that it was because of encryption officials were unable to stop the attacks the media come out stating that they used unencrypted communication but that gets a lot less if any air play or only a brief mention in a small article buried on the inside.

It's almost as if they were all getting their stories from the same source... ;)

Protectionism doesn't work. The world is competing now, and running away to avoid that just makes you into East Germany, and the Berlin wall is falling.

Protectionism doesn't work because of rationalization.

Globalism doesn't work because of evidence.

But I'll give you a chance to explain. What changes should we make to prevent the American people from being driven into poverty?

I believe that the food itself is probably OK for human consumption although GMO food (especially tomatoes) does seem to have much less and/or odd flavour. I think the biggest risk about GMO food is oddly overlooked, and that is that it will lead to a varietal monoculture controlled by a single company (Monsanto). Do you really want a single corporate with their thumb on all corn production for example? Do you really want to loose your choices of different varieties of things?
Also look at what happens when a disease hits a monoculture, It already happened to bananas in 1965, and even todays bananas still seriously risk going extinct. http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/22/...

I know that as does probably just about everyone on /. but do you remember how much of a deal the news media made about the terrorists using encrypt during their coverage of the attacks. It now looks like since the initial frenzy is over with that and people have it in their mind that it was because of encryption officials were unable to stop the attacks the media come out stating that they used unencrypted communication but that gets a lot less if any air play or only a brief mention in a small article buried on the inside.

What it'll do is roughly equivalent to a car alarm, or a deadbolt lock on the front door of your house:

I'm pretty sure that incidents of theft from cars and houses have reduced since car alarms and deadbolts started being fitted as standard respectively. So your point is...?

Sure, you aren't going to solve the problem completely, but at least you can eliminate a few unneccesary deaths that happen purely because guns are so uncontrolled and casually lying around available for children to play with, accidents or grabbing in a rage.

What it'll do is roughly equivalent to a car alarm, or a deadbolt lock on the front door of your house:

I'm pretty sure that incidents of theft from cars and houses have reduced since car alarms and deadbolts started being fitted as standard respectively. So your point is...?

Sure, you aren't going to solve the problem completely, but at least you can eliminate a few unneccesary deaths that happen purely because guns are so uncontrolled and casually lying around available for children to play with, accidents or grabbing in a rage.

So a few weeks ago we hear stories all over ./ about Hillary (you shouldn't be able to buy a gun if you're being investigated by the FBI but running for the most powerful position on the planet is fine) getting really friendly with the big tech companies, in fact, if you look at who runs these companies and where they donate to you find they're already in bed with each other. http://www.businessinsider.com... Now rides in the Native American (very white) knight to the rescue blasting the unfair competition, which can of course only by fixed with more government interference and of course control (because it's working so well with our health care system). So should we expect Warren (who by the way made her millions throwing poor people out of their homes) to rail against the huge Wall Street banks next? I mean how many millions did Clinton receive from them? http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/... Can we expect Warren to rail against Clinton? Nope, not at all, because that doesn't provide the means to consolidate more power under her control.

She apparently wants to go back to being a professor though: http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/30/...

Without knowing which things you would like to highlight I might assume you may mean this article:
Why Congress Cut The CDC’s Gun Research Budget
or did you mean something like this: What happened to the CDC's courage on guns?

Those were chosen because they are the top 2 items that showed up in my google search on that phrase (no quotes) and they appear to be at odds with one another. I also doubt many people would know off hand who the Nazi propaganda minster was so that reference indicating how you wanted to issue to be viewed would be lost.

The link supporting the assertion that terrorists behind the Paris and San Bernardino attacks "used encrypted communications to evade detection." is not supported by the linked article. In the first place, the article is only about San Bernardino, not Paris. Second, it only says that authorities were trying to get access to encrypted data. In the San Bernardino case, there was encrypted data because the iPhone encrypts by default but there was no evidence released that the encrypted data contained anything relevant to the case. No article is linked about Paris. My understanding there was that French officials basically said that the terrorists must have encrypted there communication because they didn't detect anything. They offered no proof that encryption had been used. The assertion was like the one in San Bernardino - the suspects had used some encryption in the course of their regular use of technology, as most people do, but there was no definite statement that the encrypted communication had actually been used to plot attacks. Ars Technica reports no evidence of encryption being used.

I feel like every few years the "scientific community" comes to a consensus on a new dino apocalypse theory. I am, so sick of unlearning all the shit that I learned in high school only to have to relearn it again.

For example, dinosaurs were on their way out before the meteor hit.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/19/...

So was the asteroid really that bad? Honestly, I just don't care anymore. What I do care about is the pseudoscience passed off as facts as if the scientific community is doing more than trying to tell a consistent story based on a minuscule amount of evidence. The sad thing is scientists can't agree on theories when there is a preponderance of evidence. What hope do we have of knowing something that happened to living things millions of years ago. Quit sensationalizing this stuff.

Perhaps. You made me think of Randall Leece Deal, an actor in Deliverance who GWB pardoned for moonshining.

Bush pardons moonshining 'Deliverance' actor

"I was just helping some friends back then," he said. "It was really just more like a game than anything, to be honest with you. It wasn't a big business deal, fiddling with moonshine. At least to me it wasn't."

I'm sure being in a very well known movie didn't hurt. The article doesn't explain Bush's reasoning in pardoning him, but my take on it when it happened was the crime, while illegal wasn't that big of a deal and he had lived several decades since then as a reasonably good law-abiding citizen. If he had been convicted of other crimes since then I'm guessing he wouldn't have gotten the pardon. I'm just speculating of course.

You and the moron with the mod-point should actually take some time to read up on it. The 'rounded-corners' bit was part of a long list of cosmetic, as opposed to utilitarian, details that Samsung copied very closely.

"Copied very closely"? LOL!

People have been rounding off corners for thousands of years. If you think that Samsung had to sit down and carefully study Apples ingenious new design for corners then you're one of the smallest thinkers on the planet.

Yes. Copied very closely indeed!

So, look at those two pictures and tell me seriously that the only thing similar between the first gen. iPhone and that Samsung POS is Rounded Corners. I dare you.

Apple busted samsung for making something that bore some similarity to their phone. If you cant see the irony in them getting sued by this whackado then you're the moe-ron.

Samsung's phone was a direct-as-possible copy of the iPhone, and there are internal Samsung memos to prove it.

Anyone participating in the "Serves Apple Right" or "Rounded Corners FTW"-type memes are either Shills, or complete and total idiots (or both).

Which are you?

But radical Muslims blowing up other Muslims? Not a peep.

Drudge Report was all over the Istanbul bombing almost as soon as it happened. CNN reported too. As did Fox News...

Today — the next day — New York Times had their article. And Washington Post.

Are you taking your talking points from these dimwits, perhaps?

The Chinese own about 7% of America's debt, with the majority being held by American citizens or American organizations.

* More muslims commit terrorist attacks than non-muslims

If you're talking about the US, this statistic is simply incorrect. There's some differing definitions, but something like 6% of all terrorist attacks and 35% of deadly terrorist attack are committed by Muslims. The remainder, which is obviously the majority, aren't.

So you're suggesting we exclude the people average gun owners have chosen to support

No, I'm saying that a public referendum has never on gun control has never been put to the American citizens. The only ones who have gotten to vote on the issue are people who get paid directly by the NRA.

And I don't think you want it put to a referendum, because the NRA (and its members) will lose:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/20/...

"American Exceptionalism" doesn't mean what you seem to think it does. It's not "American Betterism". Look it up some time if you're interested in knowing what the words you use mean.

In brief summary, it's the idea that the US has a special responsibility to act in accordance with the principles of freedom and democracy because it was founded not as an ethnic group, but based on those principles.

You mean the principles of selling billions in weapons to Saudi Arabia - the beheading capital of the world, executing people for sorcery - or allowing child rape on military bases? The principles of supporting coups of democracies - most recently Honduras and Ukraine?

Look it up some time if you're interested in knowing what the words you use mean.

If you're interested in not being a complete shit-for-brains, ray, you might want to do something about your willful ignorance before you prattle on about what others should know. Has Russia spent the last 30 years expanding the Warsaw Pact to Mexico, Canada and surrounding islands after promising not to? Is Russia murdering people with robot planes on the other side of the planet from them?

Has Russia run a worldwide kidnapping and torture program, that was so brutal it even shocked Bush? Is Russia trying to spy on the electronic communications of every person on the planet, the way the NSA has? Nope, nope and nope.

The EU allows for free movement between countries,

Which is also a requirement for joining the European free trade union.

and is also forcing countries to take in some of these migrants.

Oh really? Read and weep. It has nothing to do with the EU. UK would still take refugees after leaving EU.

It was a US senator. There have been a number of other news worthy fuck ups as well with that list too. Now add in that most of the people who would be impacted by this list are nobodies that would never make the news and it becomes clear that this is a pretty shitty list.

Using the no-fly list to keep bad guys from guns is a terrible idea, here is why:

• 1. The government can place anyone on the no-fly list for any reason at any time. They could easily just place everyone on the no-fly list banning everyone from buying/owning guns. Only the bad guys will have guns.
• 2. You say that won't happen? Innocent people are placed on that list all the time, and you cannot be removed:
  1. Woman on no-fly list.
  2. 8 year old American on no-fly list.
  3. 6 year old Canadian on no-fly list.
  4. Others including Cat Stevens and Senator Kennedy.
• 3. I could be placed on the no-fly list for writting this, chilling free speech. You could be placed on it for having read it. Don't believe me?
  1. Reporter writing a story about Homeland Security has home raided by the Coast Guard, seizing guns and her research/work at 4:30AM in body armor, weapons drawn.
  2. CIA uses 3 degrees of separation when spying on terror suspects.
• 4. What exactly is the no-fly list for? To keep foreign bad guys out of the country, or to keep bad guys from blowing up planes? What does either of those things have anything to do with gun control? It is already against the law for non-resident aliens to possess firearms and ammunition. What does blowing up a plane have anything to do with guns? So the only reason to use the no-fly list as a means for gun control would be to keep American citizens from possessing.

  None of the shooters in any of the mass shootings were on the no-fly list.

It's just a bad idea that can and will be abused to keep law abiding citizens from possessing guns, which the federal government has no legal power to do.

If you actually want to solve the mass shooting problem, and not just use fear to remove freedoms from individuals with thunderous applause, this is what I propose:

Let guns be in schools. As part of P.E. or even on its own, students will be in a firearm safety course. They will be target practicing. They will be tearing their guns down. They will be cleaning their firearms. They will be using hand guns, and rifles, and shotguns, etc. They will be taught that they are tools just like the circular saw or the welder in shop class, or knives and scissors in art class and home economics. They will take this class every year they are old enough to hold a weapon safely.

Just like at 16, when they are given a license to operate a tool that "kills" on average 3,287 people per day, at 18 they will take a test and if passed they will get a concealed carry license issued by their state of residence. The CCL will be valid in every state and territory of this nation. All of our children will be taught to not fear guns, and if they so chose they will be armed. That way the next time someone decides to bring a semi auto rifle to a night club to kill innocent people, that person would potentially be staring down a hundred barrels of trained good guys.

There will be no fear for the government to use to tighten gun control. People will not fear guns and will know how to use them. There will not be a gun control problem. Who knows, if everyone is armed, perhaps people may be more respectful to each other.

The Firefox making Yahoo the default search is a Firefox thing, not a linux thing at all: http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/2...

So then were in the constitution does it state that the federal government can regulate which mode of transportation Also you don't know you are on their stupid list until you are turned away at the airport so at that point they really are preventing you from traveling. I can use?

As far as the list goes there have been some big fuck-ups so my faith in it being correct is about zero as the vast majority of people on it are not terrorists. I say that because if even a sizeable amount of the people on the list were terrorists the US would look a lot more like Fallujah.

Oh, and didn't the FBI investigate the Orlando shooter TWICE, and found nothing to justify further interest? So, how would passing this amendment have prevented Orlando?

No the regulations were so severe in investigating people of interest that they were effectively dissuaded from further investigating even though the shooter was on the terrorist watchlist. And the FBI had a very strong suspicion that he was a ticking bomb So when you read between the lines you basically see that they discovered he was a protected class aka muslim and either looked the other way or were persuaded to look the other way because the optics wouldn't be good.. On top of that his wife is now being investigated as a link to this.

OK. There's something wrong when the FBI can't investigate someone Muslim, who wants to buy bulk ammo and body armor, is acting all squirrely, and has domestic violence issues. I'm all for political correctness, but this seems to be taking things a bit too far the wrong way. Someone in FBI management needs to step back and man up a bit.

ESPECIALLY...when (old white guy) I have to take my belt and shoes off every time I fly.

Oh, and didn't the FBI investigate the Orlando shooter TWICE, and found nothing to justify further interest? So, how would passing this amendment have prevented Orlando?

No the regulations were so severe in investigating people of interest that they were effectively dissuaded from further investigating even though the shooter was on the terrorist watchlist. And the FBI had a very strong suspicion that he was a ticking bomb So when you read between the lines you basically see that they discovered he was a protected class aka muslim and either looked the other way or were persuaded to look the other way because the optics wouldn't be good.. On top of that his wife is now being investigated as a link to this.

OK. There's something wrong when the FBI can't investigate someone Muslim, who wants to buy bulk ammo and body armor, is acting all squirrely, and has domestic violence issues. I'm all for political correctness, but this seems to be taking things a bit too far the wrong way. Someone in FBI management needs to step back and man up a bit.

ESPECIALLY...when (old white guy) I have to take my belt and shoes off every time I fly.

Oh, and didn't the FBI investigate the Orlando shooter TWICE, and found nothing to justify further interest? So, how would passing this amendment have prevented Orlando?

No the regulations were so severe in investigating people of interest that they were effectively dissuaded from further investigating even though the shooter was on the terrorist watchlist. And the FBI had a very strong suspicion that he was a ticking bomb So when you read between the lines you basically see that they discovered he was a protected class aka muslim and either looked the other way or were persuaded to look the other way because the optics wouldn't be good.. On top of that his wife is now being investigated as a link to this.

Oh, and didn't the FBI investigate the Orlando shooter TWICE, and found nothing to justify further interest? So, how would passing this amendment have prevented Orlando?

No the regulations were so severe in investigating people of interest that they were effectively dissuaded from further investigating even though the shooter was on the terrorist watchlist. And the FBI had a very strong suspicion that he was a ticking bomb So when you read between the lines you basically see that they discovered he was a protected class aka muslim and either looked the other way or were persuaded to look the other way because the optics wouldn't be good.. On top of that his wife is now being investigated as a link to this.

CNN article: http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/1...

For what it's worth, this has been down-played in media (haven't seen it blasting twitter and stuff much)

So basically NONE OF THE PROPOSALS would have prevented him from getting a gun.

As a voter, I'm sick of intelligent and informed voters being sidelined by media and legal cowboy politicians.

He was denied a sale at a gun shop who also reported him to the FBI as they had a really bad feeling about the guy, they felt really uncomfortable with some of the questions he was asking and his general behavior. It wasn't the first time he had been report either but look what good that ended up doing.

CNN article: http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/1...

For what it's worth, this has been down-played in media (haven't seen it blasting twitter and stuff much)

So basically NONE OF THE PROPOSALS would have prevented him from getting a gun.

As a voter, I'm sick of intelligent and informed voters being sidelined by media and legal cowboy politicians.

Donald Trump "was assigned to Gryffindor for his boldness -- but only with a 48 percent certainty.

At least Watson was more certain than the percentage of republicans that voted for him to be their nominee.

I'm thinking we vote for Trump to go the Gryffindor, Hillary ot go to jail and "None of the Above" for president. How much worse could Richard Pryor do than the choices we're going to have this fall anyhow.

What's sad is the fans have passion and tell better stories and understand the source material better that the studio's hired hacks. Look what a farce the rebooted Star Trek has become. Every reboot really.

Funny story: Once a puritan attorney-general decided to shut down the porno movie industry by prosecuting the actresses for prostitution and financers as pimps. He took a test case to court, but the judiciary bukakked all over his face with a finding that made clear the porno movie industry was legal.

It would be funny if Paramount tried to fuck this fan over in court and ended up legitimizing fan films.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... http://www.slate.com/articles/... https://www.hg.org/article.asp... http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/08...

Good luck.

As much as I would like to see people like him sent off to federal PMITA prison it isn't going to happen. These guys are part of the protected class and they really need to screw over congress. Even spying and hacking into the Senate Intelligence Committee servers didn't' get them into trouble, so I doubt anything will ever come of this. I just wonder what they have on the congress critters.

And in which country would that be legal? I mean not being allowed to resell something you got via a discount?

Any country with strong contract law. See, for example, the Skiplagged lawsuit.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/2...

It is $4 from an actual assembly plant that ran in the US for a little while.

I get to choose between a Crazy Bastard and a Crooked Bitch.

I'm pretty sure that "Crazy Crooked Bastard" applies in this case:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/3...

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06...

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballo...

"Crooked Crazy Bastard" is also appropriate. I'm not sure why you'd think this indicates someone who would shake up the corrupt system.

http://img2.timeinc.net/people...

There's a really obvious reason why Trump is so popular.

A lot of people are facing complete ruin and are scared, holding their breath hoping that something will change.

Trump is the candidate for "change", and Clinton is the candidate for "stay the course".

I'm not a Clinton supporter, but I don't think that statement about Hillary is particularly controversial even among her supporters. She's definitely a political insider, is funded by moneyed interests, and her website has a list of issues that give a sense of "direction" without promising anything concrete. Typical of politicians for the last 50 years - nothing bad or unusual about that.

Trump has a list of 7 things that he will change, with a concrete list of changes for each. All of his proposed changes are aimed at making peoples' lives better.

People who are secure in their position, who have a job and don't see themselves being laid off or expect to find a new job quickly if they are laid off, should vote for Hillary. There are a lot of these people in the country, and "stay the course" is the least risky choice for them to make.

People who are unemployed, struggling, or in fear of losing their situation should vote for Trump, because he's proposing to make changes.

As the theory goes, when you're doing well you should minimise risk - don't do anything that could change your situation. When you're doing poorly, you can tolerate more risk in the hopes that it might help.

So it really all boils down to the proportion of people in the country who are at-risk and scared, versus the proportion who think the current situation is "pretty good".

We're presented with a never-ending stream of depressing news about this here on Slashdot, and you really can't trust the MSM any more, so it's easy to believe that majority of the country might be shivering in fear hoping for something to change, but that might not be an accurate view.

"Change" or "stay the course"? The voters will probably decide this November.