Slashdot Mirror

"After reading this I'm not going to even entertain the thought of working there."

A few links to stories that say that's a good decision:

Dear Amazon interns, some advice from an old man who has been at Amazon way too long. Quote: "Amazon's work-life balance is awful."

Inside Amazon's Kafkaesque performance-improvement plan

Inside Amazon's Bizarre Corporate Culture

Glassdoor Reviews of Amazon

Amazon Is a Time Thief, by an Amazon Employee.

Working for Amazon Sounds Utterly Soul Crushing.

Life in an Amazon Warehouse: Fear and Efficiency at 35 Orders Per Second

I think you're confused.

People who are on our side, whatever side that may be, never rape. If they're charged with rapes, it's due to lying sluts making fake charges due to political motives.
People who are against us however are never faced with false rape accusations. They're rapists, plain and simple. Even if they haven't been charged with rape.

Please keep these matters straight.

Also: It's easy to forget, but remember: rapists look like creepy guys who would jump out of the bushes with a knife. They never look like upstanding members of their community, and they never do things in their professional life that one can admire. Their whole life is dedicated to the pursuit of Rape and General Evil. We've all seen movies and TV shows, right? That's how rapists are in the real world too, because Hollywood is famous for accurate presentations.

Lastly: It's unfair to mention anything about Assange's past, so no mentioning his I am a god to women comments, his womens' brains can't do math comments, the accusations from whistleblowers working with him of misogyny and aggressive sexual behavior, accusations of cyberstalking a teenager before he got famous, his stopping an interview to oggle some pre-teens, or about 50 other things. Let's stick to the issues at hand: What a great hero he is! So kudos to him for his brave evasion of evil injustice!

There doesn't seem to be any gap in employment with this candidate, however. You seem to be applying age and gender stereotypes that don't actually apply here. In this case, the candidate has as many years of continuous experience than the age at which googlers are considered "greyglers" http://gawker.com/5568975/at-g... So it matters what other women do with their childbearing years how?

It's almost like free speech is more of a social justice value than a meathead one.

*snort*

http://thoughtcatalog.com/andr... :

God help us if we have to rely on conservatives to defend free speech.

A list of such censorship is basically endless, so I will have to suffice with a not-so-brief list of some of the more egregious examples:

• A student at Purdue was found guilty of "racial harassment" for reading a book called Notre Dame Vs the Klan. (The Klan is the bad guy in the book.)
• A candidate in the European elections was arrested in Britain for quoting a passage from Winston Churchill about Islam.
• Gert Wilders, a politician in the Netherlands, was tried on five counts including "criminally insulting Muslims because of their religion."
• Both Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant were dragged in front of the Canadian Human Rights Commission for being Islamophobic.
• Conservative radio host Michael Savage was banned in Britain.
• The group Women, Action and Media convinced Twitter to allow them help report and censor harassment and hate speech. Twitter subsequently suspended the accounts of the anti-feminist Youtubers Thunderfoot and Mykeru (they were later reinstated). Both of them are liberals, by the way.
• Adam Weinstein at Gawker wants to "Arrest Climate-Change Deniers."
• Brendan Eich was forced to resign as CEO of Mozilla for opposing gay marriage. Another guy was fired because someone eaves dropped on his joke about dongles.
• A group called Color of Change was able to get Patrick Buchanan fired from MSNBC for expressing his incorrect opinions (that have been pretty consistent for the last 50 years) in his book Suicide of a Superpower.
• Allegedly, a man was banned from an Oregon college campus for "resembling a rapist."
• The "Pickup Artist" Julien Blanc was barred from entering the UK for making sexist comments.
• The mayor of Massachusetts banned the word "illegal" when referring to, umm, immigrants who came into the United States without going through the proper, legal channels. The Associated Press did

Some other great reading:

"We're a free speech site with very few exceptions (mostly personal info) and having to stomach occasional troll reddit like picsofdeadkids or morally quesitonable reddits like jailbait are part of the price of free speech on a site like this."

-/u/Hueypriest Comment

"We stand for free speech. This means we are not going to ban distasteful subreddits. We will not ban legal content even if we find it odious or if we personally condemn it. Not because that's the law in the United States – because as many people have pointed out, privately-owned forums are under no obligation to uphold it – but because we believe in that ideal independently, and that's what we want to promote on our platform. We are clarifying that now because in the past it wasn't clear, and (to be honest) in the past we were not completely independent and there were other pressures acting on reddit. Now it's just reddit, and we serve the community, we serve the ideals of free speech, and we hope to ultimately be a universal platform for human discourse (cat pictures are a form of discourse)."

-/u/yishan Gawker article + interview

And how do his summaries keep getting through?

This is the second incomprehensible summary accepted from this user this week about Microsoft and Code.org. The first was "Well-Played: Microsoft Parlayed NSF Video 'Remake' into National CS K-12 Crisis" ( http://developers.slashdot.org... ) and now this.

Apparently he's been at this for a while, too. Here's a Gawker article about the mystery of TheoDP from 2006: http://gawker.com/178280/the-m...

Does he have dirt on the Slashdot editors?

I do find it really, really strange that the SJW side is backing Pao here when the employee she fired is also a woman.

citation needed on this one. where is the SJW side that is backing Pao? unless SJW stands for Strawman Justice Warrior.

Misogynist Tantrum Officially Drives Ellen Pao from Reddit

Assange was publicly exposed as a jerk long ago. These aren't even the really choice stories.

WikiLeaks rival plans Monday launch after internal split, founders say

Another former WikiLeaks staffer said he had brought up his discontent with Assange, but that the WikiLeaks founder had not wanted to listen.

"Eventually this ended with me arguing with Julian about basically his dictatorial behavior, which ended in Julian saying to me that if I had a problem with him I could just 'piss off,' I quote," Herbert Snorreson said.

Lifting the Lid on WikiLeaks: An Inside Look at Difficult Negotiations with Julian Assange

For some time now, Julian Assange has been sparring with New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller. ...

Keller describes the stormy relationship with WikiLeaks founder Assange, comparing the Australian to a character straight out of a Stieg Larsson thriller, "a man who could figure either as a hero or villain." Keller claims that the journalists who worked with Assange saw him as a "source," a man who "clearly had his own agenda," and was not a "partner or collaborator."

Keller goes on to describe Assange as being "elusive, manipulative and volatile." He also writes that Assange's relationship with the New York Times became "openly hostile," and, in the end, the Australian wanted to exclude the newspaper from publishing any further WikiLeaks documents in the future.

The treachery of Julian Assange
Are Wikileaks Activists Finally Realizing Their Founder Is a Megalomaniac?
The Sexual Demigod: Wikileaks Founder Worshipped By Christian Women

Assange was publicly exposed as a jerk long ago. These aren't even the really choice stories.

WikiLeaks rival plans Monday launch after internal split, founders say

Another former WikiLeaks staffer said he had brought up his discontent with Assange, but that the WikiLeaks founder had not wanted to listen.

"Eventually this ended with me arguing with Julian about basically his dictatorial behavior, which ended in Julian saying to me that if I had a problem with him I could just 'piss off,' I quote," Herbert Snorreson said.

Lifting the Lid on WikiLeaks: An Inside Look at Difficult Negotiations with Julian Assange

For some time now, Julian Assange has been sparring with New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller. ...

Keller describes the stormy relationship with WikiLeaks founder Assange, comparing the Australian to a character straight out of a Stieg Larsson thriller, "a man who could figure either as a hero or villain." Keller claims that the journalists who worked with Assange saw him as a "source," a man who "clearly had his own agenda," and was not a "partner or collaborator."

Keller goes on to describe Assange as being "elusive, manipulative and volatile." He also writes that Assange's relationship with the New York Times became "openly hostile," and, in the end, the Australian wanted to exclude the newspaper from publishing any further WikiLeaks documents in the future.

The treachery of Julian Assange
Are Wikileaks Activists Finally Realizing Their Founder Is a Megalomaniac?
The Sexual Demigod: Wikileaks Founder Worshipped By Christian Women

a drudge report myth

Weak troll. And citation needed.

How about this link, which is at the end of the article that is here on slashdot? It plainly states

the top link on the Drudge Report led to a YouTube video in which an Ohio woman said she's going to vote for President Obama because he gave her a phone.

...

If you're upset that Obama is giving "freeloaders" gratis cell phones paid for with your tax money, don't be. Firstly, Obama had nothing to do with the Lifeline program: the "Obama phone" narrative is a myth that both liberals and conservatives have fallen for since 2009. Secondly, Lifeline isn't paid for with tax revenues. Rather, Lifeline is funded with a pool of money, called the Universal Service Fund, which is paid for with revenue donations from telecommunications providers. Some of those providersâ"like Verizon, for instanceâ"pass off that cost to their customers with a Universal Service fee, but the government doesn't mandate that the money come from citizens, meaning it's technically not a tax.

...

It is sort of sad that the woman in Drudge's "Obama phone" video has no idea that her free cell phone has nothing to do with Obama. But conservatives who would try and hold her up as an example of a liberal president gone wild with handouts are just as sad and ignorant, and more cruel by a large margin.

It would appear the weak troll is you, who couldn't bother to follow the link that slashdot provided. The surprise here though is that slashdot is actually countering - rather than propagating - something from drudge report. The latter is far more the standard m.o. around here, especially when samzenpus is involved.

http://gawker.com/ is pretty similar.

Did I miss a memo? Moscow is in Europe now? I'd better run and tell Putin as he seems to be wanting to start a war with Europe - how he'll laugh when he finds out his mistake!

Here's some stats for the UK https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/298435/Police_use_of_firearms_Commons.pdf/ and here's a German report http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/polizei-schoss-2011-seltener-im-dienst-a-832037.html/ although you'll need to translate it (or read a summary http://gawker.com/5909283/german-police-really-dont-like-shooting-at-people-used-only-85-bullets-last-year/ ).

Honestly, here in the UK, police violence tends to get newspaper headlines as there's been history of institutional racism in a lot of police forces. It's not something that typically get brushed under the carpet, but instead is used more as a political bargaining chip.

what if a software bot could buy drugs AND a passport?

To those that joke about this, imagine you have a bot car that hits someone? or is programmed to cause harm? a robotic car can drive to canada and back, who is responsible for contents?

In a school system whose policies literally cannot differentiate between an actual loaded and cocked gun and a half-eaten pop-tart, do we really expect these people to be smart enough to tell when a BLASTER is fake? I mean, ASIDE from the fact that ALL blasters are fake? Come ON, really!

http://gawker.com/5988299/scho...

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

To even BEGIN doing this we would first have to teach the "authorities" the difference between "fact" and "fiction" which we already KNOW is beyond their poor mental capabilities!

You really want Zuckerberg to be providing internet on top of the spring loaded trap called Facebook?

Facebook’s plan to find its next billion users: convince them the internet and Facebook are the same

http://qz.com/5180/facebooks-p...

"They trust me — dumb fucks,"
-Zuckerberg
http://gawker.com/5636765/face...

Zuckerberg is at the heart of driving these H1-B's too, so if you're using Facebook you gave him the power to fuck you over.
"They trust me — dumb fucks,"
-Zuckerberg

http://gawker.com/5636765/face...

Just for the record, the "Obamaphone" program has a name. It's called the "Lifeline Assistance Program" and was started in the 1980s by...Ronald Reagan. It has nothing to do with Obama.

https://www.fcc.gov/guides/lif...

http://www.snopes.com/politics...

http://gawker.com/5947133/the-...

If you don't learn from your history? Then you sir are a dumbass, because datamining is what Google does and if its one thing they love its gathering more and more intel on you.

I mean have you really already forgotten the stink over google trying to ram G+ and real names down on YouTube? From Google Drive to even spying on kids emails the simple fact is Google is all about connecting the dots, its what they do, where their income is coming from, and the more they can gather on you the more money it can make from its REAL customers, the advertisers.

One of the Gawker sites interviewed this guy a few weeks ago. I went into it ready to criticize, but now I wish more people like him were in charge of the armed forces.

http://phasezero.gawker.com/an...

Widespread corruption led to many records of Shor's actions being "lost" or outright deleted.

As we all know, not a smidgen of corruption was involved in the disappearance of certain e-mails at the IRS recently. And the only emails deleted by the former Secretary of State from the private server she illegally used were those about yoga routines and the like.

So, if America's public figures can lose important records without being corrupt, why are we automatically making such accusations against the little Moldova?

"We need to find a way quash free speech on our network while maintaining the illusion to our users that we are not quashing free speech."

Just like 'old Zuck said, most of their users are dumb fucks, too.

Because when the police jam cellular, they don't jam FM. http://gawker.com/5830458/san-...

I have long stated that Affirmative Action is broken. I applaud its desire to fix a real problem, but the net effect is reverse discrimination. Best qualified is best qualified whether male, female, black, blue, brown, yellow, white, or orange.

There is no such thing as "reverse racism":

The term reverse racism may not be in common usage, but it does exist. In this case, in order to undo racism from 50+ years ago against Blacks, Affirmative Action institutionalizes racism against Whites. It does not abolish racism, just changes which race is discriminated against.

I guess "best qualified" is why Whites dominate in the CEO suite: http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/diversity_among_ceos.html

Correlation does not equal causation. More men are CEOs because more men have more time in the workforce and generally have higher education. Women traditionally take time off from their studies and careers to help raise the kids. My own mother earned her Associate's when she was 40, after raising seven kids.

It also must be the reason that the US Congress does not look like the US racially: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/05/the-new-congress-is-80-percent-white-80-percent-male-and-92-percent-christian/

You must run before you can get elected. The student body at my university was also overwhelmingly male (though extremely racially diverse). After studying the situation, it was determined that a female who was running was three times as likely to get elected as a male also in the running. Alas, the general population votes, so there is not single thing that everyone agrees on for what is "best qualified". I was called a sexist for not supporting Hillary Clinton and a racist for not supporting Barak Obama. When I vote, I vote for who's best (IMO) for the country, and not out of fear being called a bigot. I voted for a Black female for a different position, but it's because I agreed with her message. It was only years after the election that I learned of her religious background.

It also must be why there has not been a noticeable rise in minorities in the Forbes 400 Richest Americans list: http://gawker.com/5645917/the-forbes-400-a-demographic-breakdown

This is more about economic classes than races. Most lower and middle class individuals are not in a financial position to take the kind of gambles which can pay out the biggest dividends. It takes a million dollars to start a business. Those of us in the middle and lower classes look like too big a risk for banks to lend that money. Also note that 31% of those 400 come from old money.

I have long stated that Affirmative Action is broken. I applaud its desire to fix a real problem, but the net effect is reverse discrimination. Best qualified is best qualified whether male, female, black, blue, brown, yellow, white, or orange.

There is no such thing as "reverse racism":

http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/10/history-of-black-white-relations/

I guess "best qualified" is why Whites dominate in the CEO suite:

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/diversity_among_ceos.html

It also must be the reason that the US Congress does not look like the US racially:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/05/the-new-congress-is-80-percent-white-80-percent-male-and-92-percent-christian/

It also must be why there has not been a noticeable rise in minorities in the Forbes 400 Richest Americans list:

http://gawker.com/5645917/the-forbes-400-a-demographic-breakdown

All I can say is I really want to get some of whatever you are smoking!

The subpoena doesn't cover personal emails, and her team already made and kept copies of the work-related emails for the investigation.

Leaving aside the question of why you think Team Clinton's sanitizing of the e-mails is trustworthy, we already know they're lying. Top Hillary aides Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin used secret ClintonEmail addresses rather than their State Department ones, which means any e-mails to Clinton's Chief of Staff or Deputy Chief of Staff weren't turned over. And Sidney Blumenthal (not a government employee, by the way) was sending secret intelligence information about the Benghazi attack to her ClintonEmail address. Also work related, and also not turned over.

The subpoena doesn't cover personal emails, and her team already made and kept copies of the work-related emails for the investigation.

Leaving aside the question of why you think Team Clinton's sanitizing of the e-mails is trustworthy, we already know they're lying. Top Hillary aides Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin used secret ClintonEmail addresses rather than their State Department ones, which means any e-mails to Clinton's Chief of Staff or Deputy Chief of Staff weren't turned over. And Sidney Blumenthal (not a government employee, by the way) was sending secret intelligence information about the Benghazi attack to her ClintonEmail address. Also work related, and also not turned over.

Seven Year Old San Francisco Girl Struck and Killed By Uber Driver; Uber Denies Responsibility http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/...

Boston Uber Driver Charged with indecent Assault and Battery http://www.bostonglobe.com/met...

Off-Duty LA Uber Driver Accused of Sexual Assault http://www.bizjournals.com/los...

Chicago Uber Driver With Felony Conviction Charged With Battery For Allegedly Hitting Passenger http://www.forbes.com/sites/el...

Writer and Activist Reports Being Choked in DC; Uber Denies The Event and Responsibility http://valleywag.gawker.com/ub...

DC Uber Driver Allegedly Assaults Customer for Burping http://www.washingtoncitypaper...

San Francisco Uber Customer Claims Abuse and Assault by Uber Driver (Pando) http://pando.com/2013/11/25/ub...

Passenger Struck In Head With Hammer by UberX Driver http://www.forbes.com/sites/el...

Uber Driver Pulls Gun on Valet in Atlanta http://pando.com/2014/09/08/at...

Uber Driver Punches Passenger in Oklahoma http://newsok.com/oklahoma-cit...

Lyft Driver Attacks Pedestrian in San Francisco http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news...

Lyft Driver Brandishes Knife in Los Angeles http://www.laweekly.com/2013-0...

Uber Customer Sues for $2M over Alleged Driver Stabbing in DC http://dcinno.streetwise.co/20...

DC Uber Driver Allegedly Rapes Customer http://betabeat.com/2013/03/ub...

Uber Driver Charged with Fondling Passenger in Chicago http://valleywag.gawker.com/ub...

DC Uber Driver Arrested for Alleged Rape But Not Charged Despite Strong Evidence http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Another DC Uber Driver Accused of Molesting Uber Rider http://valleywag.gawker.com/an...

Passenger Struck In Head With Hammer by UberX Driver http://www.forbes.com/sites/el...

Uber Driver in India Accused of Rape http://www.bbc.c

Seven Year Old San Francisco Girl Struck and Killed By Uber Driver; Uber Denies Responsibility http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/...

Boston Uber Driver Charged with indecent Assault and Battery http://www.bostonglobe.com/met...

Off-Duty LA Uber Driver Accused of Sexual Assault http://www.bizjournals.com/los...

Chicago Uber Driver With Felony Conviction Charged With Battery For Allegedly Hitting Passenger http://www.forbes.com/sites/el...

Writer and Activist Reports Being Choked in DC; Uber Denies The Event and Responsibility http://valleywag.gawker.com/ub...

DC Uber Driver Allegedly Assaults Customer for Burping http://www.washingtoncitypaper...

San Francisco Uber Customer Claims Abuse and Assault by Uber Driver (Pando) http://pando.com/2013/11/25/ub...

Passenger Struck In Head With Hammer by UberX Driver http://www.forbes.com/sites/el...

Uber Driver Pulls Gun on Valet in Atlanta http://pando.com/2014/09/08/at...

Uber Driver Punches Passenger in Oklahoma http://newsok.com/oklahoma-cit...

Lyft Driver Attacks Pedestrian in San Francisco http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news...

Lyft Driver Brandishes Knife in Los Angeles http://www.laweekly.com/2013-0...

Uber Customer Sues for $2M over Alleged Driver Stabbing in DC http://dcinno.streetwise.co/20...

DC Uber Driver Allegedly Rapes Customer http://betabeat.com/2013/03/ub...

Uber Driver Charged with Fondling Passenger in Chicago http://valleywag.gawker.com/ub...

DC Uber Driver Arrested for Alleged Rape But Not Charged Despite Strong Evidence http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Another DC Uber Driver Accused of Molesting Uber Rider http://valleywag.gawker.com/an...

Passenger Struck In Head With Hammer by UberX Driver http://www.forbes.com/sites/el...

Uber Driver in India Accused of Rape http://www.bbc.c

Seven Year Old San Francisco Girl Struck and Killed By Uber Driver; Uber Denies Responsibility http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/...

Boston Uber Driver Charged with indecent Assault and Battery http://www.bostonglobe.com/met...

Off-Duty LA Uber Driver Accused of Sexual Assault http://www.bizjournals.com/los...

Chicago Uber Driver With Felony Conviction Charged With Battery For Allegedly Hitting Passenger http://www.forbes.com/sites/el...

Writer and Activist Reports Being Choked in DC; Uber Denies The Event and Responsibility http://valleywag.gawker.com/ub...

DC Uber Driver Allegedly Assaults Customer for Burping http://www.washingtoncitypaper...

San Francisco Uber Customer Claims Abuse and Assault by Uber Driver (Pando) http://pando.com/2013/11/25/ub...

Passenger Struck In Head With Hammer by UberX Driver http://www.forbes.com/sites/el...

Uber Driver Pulls Gun on Valet in Atlanta http://pando.com/2014/09/08/at...

Uber Driver Punches Passenger in Oklahoma http://newsok.com/oklahoma-cit...

Lyft Driver Attacks Pedestrian in San Francisco http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news...

Lyft Driver Brandishes Knife in Los Angeles http://www.laweekly.com/2013-0...

Uber Customer Sues for $2M over Alleged Driver Stabbing in DC http://dcinno.streetwise.co/20...

DC Uber Driver Allegedly Rapes Customer http://betabeat.com/2013/03/ub...

Uber Driver Charged with Fondling Passenger in Chicago http://valleywag.gawker.com/ub...

DC Uber Driver Arrested for Alleged Rape But Not Charged Despite Strong Evidence http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Another DC Uber Driver Accused of Molesting Uber Rider http://valleywag.gawker.com/an...

Passenger Struck In Head With Hammer by UberX Driver http://www.forbes.com/sites/el...

Uber Driver in India Accused of Rape http://www.bbc.c

The fact that it's not exactly in the format you want or dumbed down enough for you to understand is not my problem.

It is your problem — you answered my challenge (for the second time in a month) and failed.

The links are in 30 different references at the bottom that the paper cites with enough information for you to look them up.

If it were this easy, you would've done it yourself long ago instead of extending this silly thread well beyond the point, where your inability to meet my challenge became painfully obvious.

you refuse to meet me half way and address what the paper says

I don't want to argue with somebody else's words — history of this very thread shows, how easy it is for you to throw other people statements under the proverbial bus:

• "Maslowski's colleagues didn't agree with him", you said,
• "Al Gore is an asshole" (dave420 implied — without any objections from you),
• "Viner was talking to a popular publication, rather than a peer-reviewed magazine" (as if it makes any difference)

— whatever. Like I said already, I don't want to think through an argument only to find myself attacking something you consider inconsequential...

When you asked for an example, I gave you some — summarizing both the failed predictions and their disproofs in my own words instead of simply referring you to other people's articles (of which there are plenty). Because to do otherwise — as seems your wont — is to appeal to authority.

You knew, what the "format" needs to be from the beginning. That you could not meet it is not my fault — it is your failure. Or, more likely, it is the failure of this belief, which you continue to call "science".

You're arguing like a lawyer, not a scientist.

I'm not a scientist — nor do I need to be in order to be convinced (rather than compelled ) to do something about "the dangers of humanity's contribution to global warming". I am just a somewhat educated man, who knows of humanity's long history of fads and beliefs, and is aware of some of the scientific and philosophical mechanisms invented to help prevent our falling into the same holes and stepping on the same rakes again...

Well this is the issue isn't it... how do you know if the person was guilty or not? the 4% you cite are the ones who actually got justice after serving long prison terms... it doesn't count the people still in prison but innocent, nor the ones executed.

If they were trialed and convicted, made it through the appeals process, DNA evidence, and witnesses and so on and still on death row, I'm satisfied enough in their guilt. But we are not talking about people still in prison, just people on death row. There is a very high standard for being sentenced to death and an elaborate appeals process that takes a very liberal approach.

f you kill someone then you deserve to get the death penalty right? well if the state (you, me, and everyone who does nothing to change the death penalty law thereby accepting them) executes an innocent man, that's murder and you deserve the death penalty.

Nope. It would be whomever lied in court to convict the prisoner. We do not just flip a coin and say you need to die. Some people might like that but it just does not happen unless the cops kill someone (there have been more unarmed people killed by cops since 1999 than claimed innocent people executed).

Even at 4% it's certain we are executing innocent men... and we're all to blame.. why do we get to murder and not pay the price we demand of those we put to death?

Like I said, it would be whomever lied in court. If they are convicted and no one lied, it would be accidental just like you crashing your car after sliding on ice and killing someone. But those instances are rare, the bar for a capitol punishment case is high and the death sentence would most likely be withheld without someone lieing or manufacturing evidence.

especially because it costs less to house a man till he dies (and this allows the opportunity to eventually free him if innocent)!!!!!

Actually, if you are not on death row, you are less likely to be set free because less resources are devoted to appeals and process for prisoners not on death row. If you are on death row, one of the reasons it costs so much more is because they do so much more to ensure you are not the innocent person you claim to be. Regular prisoners do not get this extra attention.

Even some arguably intelligent people get it backwards...

http://gawker.com/5851835/stev...

she was promoted pretty high in the food chain at Google

She was dating Larry Page. http://gawker.com/214051/utter... http://www.businessinsider.com...

She is very ambitious, thus she constantly self-promotes herself. Claiming to work 130 hours a week is part of this self-promotion.

Yes because obviously there's no self-promotion in fucking the CEO..

she was promoted pretty high in the food chain at Google

She was dating Larry Page.
http://gawker.com/214051/utter...
http://www.businessinsider.com...

She is very ambitious, thus she constantly self-promotes herself.
Claiming to work 130 hours a week is part of this self-promotion.

I was referring to Wayne LaPierre's statement.

http://www.npr.org/2012/12/21/...

WAYNE LAPIERRE: The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun.

This has been rebutted by people who know far more about guns than I do:

http://gawker.com/its-really-h...
It's Really Hard to Be a Good Guy With a Gun
Adam Weinstein
6/10/14 4:20pm

Fine. I leave it to you, the hypervigilant. Even though the statistics show mass shootings are on the rise, and not one has been stopped by armed good guys—armed civilian good guys. In fact, they've been shot more often than they've shot the baddies. Which is natural, since assault weapons are on the rise, and it's hard to conceal a weapon that can outshoot someone with a Bushmaster. I leave it to you, because I still puzzle in my mind over all the tactical difficulties posed by someone in civilian clothes carrying a gun during a shooting. (How do you telegraph your goodness to the cops and bystanders?)

One of the things LaPierre blamed for the killings was the absence of "an active, national database of the mentally ill." Since he didn't take questions at his press conference, nobody was able to ask him who would decide who goes into the database, how they would decide, and whether they would then prevent people in the database from buying guns.

One thing I do know about is the medical evidence.

In fact, psychiatrists (the people who decide who is mentally ill) say that such laws would be useless. There was a debate about that in the Annals of Internal Medicine between a gun-owning doctor and a doctor who wanted to stop people with mental disease from buying guns. The gun-restricting doctor admitted he was wrong. Only a tiny minority of people with mental illness are a danger to anyone else. About 30% of the population over 65 has clinical depression. Does LaPierre want to take the guns away from 30% of the population over 65?

In fact, the NRA has lobbied for laws that let people who were prevented from possessing guns, because they were convicted of violent crimes, appeal and have those convictions set aside again in a rubber-stamp procedure, so they could buy guns again. And several of those people have committed murders as a result. So LaPierre wants to give guns back to murderers to let them murder again.

Unfortunately, as a story in Nature said last year, there is no good evidence on gun violence one way or the other. That's because the NRA lobbied congress to stop the Centers for Disease Control from doing gun-related research. That was in response to a study that found that people who bought guns were more likely to use them to commit suicide than to defend themselves. That study would be impossible today, because of the network of NRA-supported laws that prevent researchers from even getting information about guns.

But in the absence of hard data, most doctors and scientists say that the cause of this level of gun violence is the widespread ownership of guns, and that if there were fewer guns in circulation, there would be fewer gun-related homicides and suicides. They also say it's politically impossible to do anything significant about it in the U.S. for the foreseeable future. So our NRA-protected gun access makes it impossible to stop terrorist attacks in malls. Anyone with basic gun skills can get a quick-firing gun and kill 20 people in a crowd before even a more-skilled gun owner can stop him. And if a group of terrorists plan a coordinated attack, they could kill hundreds. If a concealed-gun owner jumps into the fray, on the average he seems to do more harm than good.

The purpose of all these regulations Uber and Lyft have been running into isn't safety or liability or anything like that

No, not anything like that.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2014/06/03/uber-driver-with-felony-conviction-charged-with-battery-for-allegedly-hitting-passenger/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-12-09/uber-driver-charged-in-san-francisco-girl-s-death-in-crosswalk.html
http://valleywag.gawker.com/uber-driver-charged-for-bashing-a-passenger-in-the-head-1639711808

Its all a conspiracy by "the man" to keep everyone "inside the box". Not like anyone's been hurt or killed, no nothing like that.

You know who has trouble with "bad cops?" The people who don't respect authority in the first place. The people who have done things that harm others and the society at large. My daughter will never be in a confrontation with the authorities - never become a Michael Brown - because she has been raised to understand the need for the police and for keeping the peace (as much as I can teach her).

Your daughter will be in confrontation with authorities if, say, her house gets SWATed on a false charge (because an unreliable informant pointed at it), or simply because they got the wrong address or the wrong door. She won't get a chance to say "yes sir, please and thank you", because she won't be asked - the first thing she'll know is when her door is blown off the hinges with a shotgun and a flashbang comes in. Maybe it lands into her baby's crib, too. Maybe she gets a limb or two broken when they put her face down into the floow. Best case, they will only shoot the dogs and mess up the room with the entrance before they figure out something's wrong and leave (with no apologies and no compensation for damages).

Or perhaps she'll be driving around with a couple thousand dollars in cash, that she won in a lottery, and gets stopped by cops because they'll claim she's speeding (but really because she's cute). And when they see the money they will claim that such a large amount in cash is suspicious, and arrest it as proceeds from drug sales, because they get to pocket a good part of it for their PD (i.e. to buy more toys like MRAPs and .50 BMG sniper rifles for themselves).

If she is black, it might get even more interesting. For example, during a routine traffic stop (for which she needn't do anything wrong, they might just be randomly pulling people over) an officer will ask her for ID, and she'll reach for her pocket because that's where the wallet is... and get shot point blank because the officer thought she's reaching for the gun. Because that's what he thinks of first when he sees a black person reach for their waist.

Or maybe she'll get arrested on an outright false charge just because she happens to come across a cop who "just hates niggers, that is all".

FYI, all of the above is not a figment of my imagination. It's all real stories that happened right here in USA with different people. The chances of something like that affecting your daughter are still orders of magnitude higher than the chances of being killed by a terrorist. So rather promoting more surveillance state, you might want to talk to your representative in Congress about police militarization first.

No police power has been more abused over the years than property seizure.

Here are some people that might disagree:

http://gawker.com/unarmed-peop...

Ted Cruz is also BFFs with Peter Thiel, who is a major investor is SpaceX. Remember it's the conservative republicans that are pushing for manned space exploration, like Newt Gingrich's plans for Mars. Personally I find manned exploration stupid and wasteful compared to drones and earth science, but what do I know.

http://valleywag.gawker.com/re...

http://gawker.com/5034178/pete...

Ted Cruz is also BFFs with Peter Thiel, who is a major investor is SpaceX. Remember it's the conservative republicans that are pushing for manned space exploration, like Newt Gingrich's plans for Mars. Personally I find manned exploration stupid and wasteful compared to drones and earth science, but what do I know.

http://valleywag.gawker.com/re...

http://gawker.com/5034178/pete...

The NRA has a problem with those kooks in Texas.

These kooks even try to intimidate people who may disagree with them.

And their premise that it is safe is wrong.

And as someone who goes to the shooting range(s) once in a while, I can tell that most of those folks seem to think that they are living an action movie. Aside from the few hunters and target/skeet shooters (me), the rest of them think the "bad guys" are just itching to break into their home, rape their women, take their big screen TVs and their Arnold, Steven Segal, Chuck Norris DVD collections. Those are the guys with the military styled guns on the range - with their fetish for .223 and .40. They are the ones who talk about "stopping power" and "penetration" and other ballistic shit.

We normal guys try to stay away from them and cringed when we see those redneck morons in Texas acting like jackasses.

Google is a thing, btw.

http://gawker.com/a-lot-of-sma... This article aggregates a lot of what I'm talking about.

The fact remains that regardless of their will, NK doesn't have the physical or technological means by which to hack sony and offload hundreds of TB of stolen data...

Given Kim's alleged approach to celebrity controversy, they would probably be well advised not to...

I don't see any full PowerPoint at Gawker, it's a small number of selected slides from some document.

Plus it's all marketing and distribution plans from the past, for movies released in 2012 and whatnot. Can't argue that's a trade secret because those actions have since been carried out in full view of the public.

http://gawker.com/sonys-embarrassing-powerpoints-are-even-worst-than-thei-1666403941

Here is my problem: Google has a long history of cooperating with NSA.

Don't believe me? Fine: read these links instead... Yahoo News article about cooperation between Google and NSA, Guardian article, Tom's Guide article.

Even if Google does not/did not/will not cooperate with NSA, Eric Schmidt himself has been cooperating with the US Government, which cast serious doubts about his desire to protect the private information of Google clients.

Again, don't believe me? Fine, read this instead: Julian Assange on Eric Schmidt. Or (even better) this transcript.

Even if Eric Schmidt does not cooperate with the US Government, he has said himself, repeatedly, that privacy is dead and that it's something for hackers.

Don't believe me? Fine, read this instead: EFF article, Gawker article.

In other words, a company that cooperated with the NSA, led by a man who does not care about your privacy (but cares very much about his) is telling you that there is nothing to see here, sure we are protecting your privacy, please buy our products, we are safe and professionals and there is nothing to be afraid of.

Seriously? How come this gasbag is a freaking CEO, paid millions of dollars a year?

http://valleywag.gawker.com/an...

There have been allegations of sexual assault and kidnapping, both of which aren't particularly good news. Uber's early responses were poor (e.g. not doing anything), but the most recent sexual assault has resulted in a suspended driver.

I agree that taxi lobbying has been disturbingly effective over time, resulting in diminished service quality, high prices, and licensing conditions that favor taxi dispatch companies rather than taxi drivers. These artificially restricted markets have effectively created environments ripe for disruptive alternatives.

That said, what Uber is doing with Uber X is typically illegal. For instance, in California, vehicles transporting fewer than 15 passengers one-way on a hire basis are required to file for a TCP P permit. The filing fee is $1000, and renewal is $100 every three years. Additional liability insurance (typically for $750k for Uber-type vehicles) is also required, as is controlled substance testing (drug, alcohol).

So when you got in Uber Black cars back in the early days (when that was the only type of Uber), you hopped into the vehicle of a state-licensed driver with an investment in the profession. These days, when you hop into an Uber X, it's a less consistent experience. Sometimes it's a lost out-of-towner. Sometimes there are groceries in the trunk (not a joke). Sometimes the drivers are dangerously sleepy/incompetent/distracted.

Oddly, one impact I've noticed in Uber X cities is that the Uber Black drivers have toned down the limo aspect. Most Uber Black drivers that I encounter don't wear suits, supply water or mints, help with bags, or make an effort to stop accurately. The overwhelming majority of drivers that I talk with have dropped non-uber commitments (e.g. airport runs for known contacts), so it's probably just part of the evolution of the service.

Back on point, the "entitled Valley logic" point is, at the very least, founded in the evidence of a company knowingly profiting from poor enforcement of local/regional laws and deferral of responsibility to "private contractors" (stretching the envelope of the IRS definition of a contractor).

Code first and ask lawyers later (or never) is more the hallmark of San Francisco than the Valley/South-bay, but it feels like a fair point. I'm a fan of Uber, but I can take a reasoned view of the organization and its actions.

Employees say Sony must take responsibility for formulaic, mundane movies; some eye Adam Sandler

Better summary: I found a method called "hasHeartbleedVulnerability()," a library called "Stericson.RootTools" whose code appears to look for a rootkit compromising the system, and a shitload of permissions for things that the app doesn't need but would reveal much about me. Here's the link to the real article: http://www.gironsec.com/blog/2014/11/what-the-hell-uber-uncool-bro/

One could throw in that senior VP Emil Michael (yes, that one) also advises the Defense Department and that Robert Gates, former Secretary of Defense, is now working at Uber's military branch, but the fact that Uber is so close to the USG might not be relevant to you.

Why thank you, Amazing Kreskin, for your profound legal insights.

After reviewing the evidence, of the three investigating officers, two (Wassgren and Gehlin) wanted him investigated for what would eventually be five charges (2x rape, 1x unlawful sexual coersion, 2x molestation), and one (Krans) wanted him for four (1x, 1x, 2x). The first prosecutor (Finne) first wanted him investigated for five (1x, 1x, 2x), then reduced it to what would become three (0x, 1x, 2x). An appeal from one of the victims was reviewed and found with merit (not unusual in Sweden, there's a strong victims' rights process), and a new prosecutor (Ny) was brought in, and the investigation resumed for all five (2x, 1x, 2x). A judge charged / anklagad him on all five counts (2x, 1x, 2x). Assange appeled the warrant and the Svea Court of Appeals held a full court hearing, with a jury, a review of all the evidence, and testimony from Assange's lawyers; they upheld four (1x,1x, 2x). He appealed to the Swedish Supreme court; they refused his appeal. The British lower court heard Assange's appeal (arguing malicious prosecution, flaws in the Swedish process, and an invalid EAW). The British lower court ruled against him on all counts. The case was heard by the British high court, which also ruled against him on all counts. And again, the British Supreme Court heard the case, and ruled against him on all counts.

But no no, who needs a pesky legal system when we have Amazing Kreskin here to tell us about how it's all a setup! Screw those lying b****s, right?

Heck, Assange's attorneys have all but admitted that he did it. Check out Emmerson's court statements, where he bloody admits that Assange started F*ing SW unprotected while she was asleep. Let it not be forgotten that the courts have SW's SMS records from that night where she's bitterly complaining about about how Assange keeps trying t F* her unprotected despite her telling him again and again and how annoyed she's getting about that), testimony from a friend and a family member she chatted with right before the event while she was out buying breakfast, and on and on, making it pretty unambiguous that she'd been refusing unprotected sex - something that neither Assange nor his attorneys have contested. Emmerson tries to argue that consent is implied because she didn't immediately push Assange out when she woke up to him F*ing her. But that's of course a nonsense legal claim. One, you can't get "retroactive consent", it has to be present from the beginning. Two, F*ing a sleeping person is explicitly illegal in both Swedish and British law; the fact that it was done in a manner she had been explicitly refusing is merely listed as an aggravating factor. Three, the reason she'd been refusing unprotected sex was paranoia about STDs, and it was already too late, she'd have to go to the hospital either way (just ignoring the "shock" aspect, which I can tell you is *very* real; it was already too late. As her ex boyfriend of 2 1/2 years testified, she was so paranoid about unprotected sex that she not once allowed it in their entire relationship, and *still* made him get an STD test.

His freaking *defense* attorneys are admitting that he did it, so why should anyone be surprised that court after court keeps condemning him? And it's not like this is anything new for Assange. He had allegations of stalking against a 17-year-old before he got famous. Even whistleblowers he's worked with for Wikileaks have accused him of sexual aggression. This is a guy who wrote on his own blog about how womens' brains can't do math and how he's a god to women, and how his ghostwriter who spent months with him documented (with recorded transcripts) an unending litany of creepy sexual behavior,

Uber stands guilty of being clueless about political correctness. Digging dirt about the private lives of entrepreneurs is called whistleblowing, and will probably earn a biopic made about about your life. Dishing on union satraps or Luddites is "harassment" and therefore evil.

How quickly we forget that Sarah Lacy was herself caught in evil doings just a couple of years ago:
http://valleywag.gawker.com/ar...