Slashdot Mirror

Said the man, oops, the person, whose idea of "articulating" a point is to add curse-words to his/her/its/their speech.

isn't he the excuse you trot out for being allowed to say the n-word?

I don't need no negro's permission to say "negro", thank you very much. The word simply means "black" — as in "Negro Lives Matter" — and, incidentally, that's exactly, how Blacks are called in Ukrainian, Russian, and a whole host of other languages. It is perfectly neutral.

right-wingers need to keep their damn mouths shut when it comes to social justice issues

Oh, wow, maybe, you are articulate, after all! In one phrase you managed to violate all the rules:

• against labeling
• against othering
• against groupsplaining — a general term you haven't heard of yet, but should have no difficulty understanding

I'm going on a hunger strike in protest — until Slashdot editors apologize and resign for fostering an environment, which allowed you to mentally-rape me with your angry speech. Safe Zone! Safe Zone! Safe Zone!!! Please don't hate...

Some Christians certainly are evil

KAMPALA, Uganda — Last March, three American evangelical Christians, whose teachings about “curing” homosexuals have been widely discredited in the United States, arrived here in Uganda’s capital to give a series of talks.

The theme of the event, according to Stephen Langa, its Ugandan organizer, was “the gay agenda — that whole hidden and dark agenda” — and the threat homosexuals posed to Bible-based values and the traditional African family.

For three days, according to participants and audio recordings, thousands of Ugandans, including police officers, teachers and national politicians, listened raptly to the Americans, who were presented as experts on homosexuality. The visitors discussed how to make gay people straight, how gay men often sodomized teenage boys and how “the gay movement is an evil institution” whose goal is “to defeat the marriage-based society and replace it with a culture of sexual promiscuity.”

Now the three Americans are finding themselves on the defensive, saying they had no intention of helping stoke the kind of anger that could lead to what came next: a bill to impose a death sentence for homosexual behavior.

This was just business as usual, nothing new.

Uganda is set to pass new anti-gay legislation with provisions calling for the execution of gay people under some circumstances. The rumor of the death penalty clause being removed seems grossly exaggerated. Dr. Warren Throckmorton, who has followed the legislation closely, indicates that some Western media are erroneously reporting that the death penalty clause has been removed. He writes that "the bill is the same bill it has always been. It cannot be amended until the committee report is presented to the floor of the Parliament." Even with the amendment the legislation remains a gross travesty of justice.

The "intellectual" fuel for this grotesque law came from Christian fundamentalists in the United States. According to The New York Times:

Much of Africa's anti-homosexuality movement is supported by American evangelicals, the Rev. Kapya Kaoma of Zambia wrote in 2009, who are keen to export the American "culture war" to new ground. Indeed, American evangelical Christians played a role in stirring the anti-homosexual sentiment that culminated in the initial legislation in Uganda.

Of course, it's also right at home in the US as well. Earlier this yesr:

California proposal to legalize killing gays hard to stop

A California initiative proposal is testing the limits of free speech. Lawyer Matt McLaughlin wants to authorize the killing of gays and lesbians. Yet legal experts say the state’s attorney general can’t block it.

McLaughlin’s plan refers to “buggery” or “sodomy” as “a monstrous evil that Almighty God, giver of freedom and liberty, commands us to suppress on pain of our utter destruction even as he overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.” Under the proposal, “... any person who willingly touches another person of the same gender for purposes of sexual gratification (would) be put to death by bullets to the head or by any other convenient method.”

Anyone transmitting “sodomistic propaganda” to a minor would be fined $1 million per offense, and/or imprisoned up to 10 years, and/or expelled from California for up to life. It would ban lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, or those who espouse sodomistic propaganda, or who belong to any group that does, from serving in publ

Thank you for the clarification. One of the reasons that I enjoy Slashdot, as much as I do, is that I can enter the little bit that I know and someone, almost always, comes along and fills in the details for me

Same here, I learn more from the comments than the stories. /. is going downhill though.

There's some sensitive types out today and while you weren't specifically racists, you certainly insinuated (even if not intentional) some prejudicial beliefs.

No I didn't, but I wasn't very clear. With "these people" I was referring to the attackers, not any wider group.

I can say that there are people there who speak out and condemn the violence and hate it (and the behaviors that are, truly, cultural) as much as you or I.

I've studied and worked with people from the ME, even had them in the family. They were much more decent people than the 2nd, 3rd generation immigrants of ME descent here in Europe. Especially the palestinians I've met.
It's the people over there that suffer most from this type of violence. They're struggling to maintain a secular society in the face of this threat in places like Algeria and Tunisia. The events in France is a type of violence that is not uncommon in those countries.

Take for example the Algerian civil war, very brutal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

GIA's policy of extermination was not unlike what IS is doing today, they just didn't have social media back then. They tried a 9/11 type attack against France already in the 90s, but were thwarted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I've been warned about terrorists, kidnapping, and armed conflicts - I've traveled extensively in Africa and South America over the years as well as some in the Middle East.

I think the State Department is legally obliged to warn citizens, even if chances of being kidnapped are 0.1% a year.

See the violence in the "Christian" or "Voodoo" areas of East and West Africa. I'd not be surprised if they averaged out to a higher number of fatalities than the Islamic extremists have done in, say, the past quarter century.

That's possible, I don't think it's fair to compare those 2 regions though. Anyway, this type of ideology is a modern phenomenon. It started in the 20s with al-Qutb and has just slowly gained momentum. It's going into full bloom now, and things will get worse before they get better. Even if IS is defeated tomorrow, they'll melt away and pop up somewhere else. My money is on a war in the Caucasus within 2 years, there are 8-10k Chechnyans in IS and they've been threatening Putin.

I could be wrong but I don't really think the root is the religion, region, or culture.

The culture is definitely very different, Westerners tend to underestimate that. I have some anecdotes if you're interested.

I think it all boils down to being hopeless, full of despair, having nothing to lose, and having everything to lose.

If only it were that simple. There's a lot of money and politics behind it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

"the fountainhead of Islamic extremism that promotes and legitimizes such violence lies with the fanatical "Wahhabi" strain of Islam centered in Saudi Arabia. Exact numbers are not known, but it is thought that more than $100 billion have been spent on exporting fanatical Wahhabism to various much poorer Muslim nations worldwide over the past three decades.

"Saudi Arabia has not stopped its interest in spreading extreme Wahhabism. ISIS...is a product of Saudi ideals, Saudi money and Saudi organizational support, although now they are making a pretense of being very anti-ISIS."

And then you can talk about how, instead of simply paving those areas over into glass, which we could do any time we want,

So this isn't about doing what is right or will lead to a better world, but being stronger and forcing everyone into submission? I got the bigger club: Do what I say. This isn't the best way to instill confidence that the "western way of living" is better or more moral.

we're instead going to as much trouble as possible to hit and limit damage to individual targets that match very specific criteria.

What specific criteria? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... http://www.businessinsider.com... Is there a court that can be called to question drone strikes? What happens if somebody does not adhere to these "specific criteria"? Any consequences? No? So these are just arbitrary killings.
Also the words "as much trouble as possible to hit and limit damage" strike me as caustic. A proper way would be to arrest those people and give them a proper trial. But obviously that is far to much trouble.

No, they have a huge problem with immigrants who don't want to become part of French culture, don't want to do what's necessary to thrive in that economy, and who show up expecting to be handed a nice standard of living in exchange for ... showing up.

Well you could make them feel more welcome:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhfGcXeFCtU
http://www.france24.com/en/20150120-calais-france-migrants-denounce-police-brutality-hrw
If you treat people like shit, it is fairly likely that they won't want to integrate.

Just like is happening across Europe generally, now. Europe has only itself to blame for allowing it to happen.

Blame ourselves whatfor? In my town we got a great new restaurant opened by a woman from Iraq which is great. I worked with a software developer from Afghanistan (which didn't make any difference whatsoever). The CEO of a company I worked for was from Turkey. Many of the people from the middle east are integrated into society without any problems.

It's about culture. The religion in question is the organizing system within the culture that's causing the problems. The voices of that religion are the motivating features of the culture, and the fundamental features of that religion spell out how the people who adhere to it are supposed to interact with those who aren't members.

Just take a look at history. Christianity has been used to justify the inquisition, burning witches, the crusades, wars between catholics and protestants. Only in the last 200 (?) years it has been more or less a religion of peace. Homosexuals have been a problem for the church for years, but now it's changing. Divorces are getting more and more accepted.
Since the bible hasn't changed in all those years, this somewhat indicates that religion is more a backwards reflection of society, than it is coining society.

Quit making excuses for medieval-minded theocratic thugs and their willing followers.

I don't really care all that much about those thugs. They are a lost cause. Most of the actual terrorists are already dead anyway. And I just hope the police catches whoever is behind this (organization/financing) and locks them up for good.
What I care about is that we (as the western world) do not response in a likewise medieval manner and start another pointless war or kill more civilians. I think you can see in Israel / Palistine what happens if fundamentalists on both sides work together to create a stable environment of mutual violence.
Also I care about the next generation of immigrants which has not been radicalized yet, and where we should try to help then integrat

"So are you sayiong that a Black American citizen can just show up in some all white village in rural Mississippi, and everyone will shower him or her with gifts? Invite them into their home for a nice dinner? Ignore them?"

Hate to burst your stereotypical statement, but I've seen multiple Black (& other ethnic) folks "just show up" here in MS. They didn't get showered with gifts, but were treated very politely (yep, invited to, and attend local churches)--much better than how I've seen the same color folks treated in other "more enlightened" places. Maybe you better get your news from someone w/o an ax to grind...

Oh sorry, THere is no racism in Mississippi, and everyone is a kind person, accomodating to all other races and religions. A true REniassance state of the new south, where all men and women are created equal, and all creeds colors and sexual preferences ar etreated with the utmost respoect.

whereas those northeren states blacks and other minoritiys are merely kept around so we have someone to hang when we get out th bedsheets foro our Klan meetings.

These folks at ol Miss must have been celebrating Obama's 2012 win, no doubt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Oh wait. Hey, maybe it was a 50th Anniversary celebration of their riots when theyy were very happy that the first black student, James Meredith was enrolled in Ol Miss. Hopefully they invited him to church.

A former serviceman, y'all really wanted to thank him for serving his country I guess:

http://www.history.com/this-da...

Even your Governor welcomed him with open arms by a personal escort making certain he got to class. Oh wait, your governor was blocking the doorway to not allow him in the building. I guess your Governor wanted to be certain this man who risked his life for our country, got a lot of that fine Mississippi air.

Y'all liked him so much, one of ya gave him his very own personal bullet for his very own in 1966. Damn - southerners sure do know how to treat people who are different than you/

At Brandon High School, which is apparentlly a proud school that trains young men and women to invite African-Americans to come to church, in 2012, 19 year old Deryl Dedmon got two life sentences for killing a black man by running over him with his pickup truck:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

The official story is that he and some friends were partying, when they decised they were going to go look for some black guy to harass.

You and I both know it was an accident that happened when Dedmon, was trying to invite the dead guy James Craig Anderson to come to church with him and his friends.

This year was a minor thing with another Brandon Student tweeting stupid racist comments on school time. Not a huge thing, but between us chachalacas, I don't think tshe cares for people based on their skin color.

And in the spirit of being ahead of the curve, Mississippi did not outla slavery until february 7, 2013. Or maybe 1995. If you believe in States Rights, you could legally own a person in Mississippi. until 2013. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/he... See you in church.

Flammable" and "non-flammable" are HORSESHIT with backwards and incorrect derivations that have only added confusion.

Oh, bullshit. When I was a kid things were flammable, and inflammable. That's what was taught in school. Then some whiny people said in deference to other languages it was less confusing if we changed to match them. Mostly it's caused confusion since.

Backwards and incorrect derivations are the fucking mean and potatoes of English. It's all backwards and incorrect.

We discuss Flammability as a property, not inflammability. Something is said to be aflame, and not inflamed. Moe from the Simpsons made a flaming Moe, not an inflaming Moe.

(In)destructible, (in)secure, (in)visible, (in)controvetible, (in)sane, (in)correct, (in)capable. These are examples of why inflammable was a perfectly valid derivation which meant "doesn't burn", and was in fact in widespread use for a VERY long time.

Don't give me crap about wrong derivations and that this word comes from this or that and is therefore conjugated thusly

The entire rest of the grammar in English around fire, do NOT lead you to "inflammable" to mean "does burn".

Do you know why? Because English is a horribly screwed up language, full of bizarre exceptions and corner cases, piled on top of stupid rules which only mostly work, and in some cases require some really arcane knowledge about the word.

Flammable has been in use for a very long time. Inflammable for even longer, apparently.

But let's not pretend that the word hasn't seen active use in society for a LONG time. It's not a few random people who are confused, it's everybody over a certain age in an English speaking country.

You can't talk about "flammable" things and then tell me I should be saying "inflammable" means it burns; that doesn't match the rest of the English language on this.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

Headline: "Eric Holder: ..."

Basically as far as anyone need bother reading.

Something was rotten in the state of denmark.

Snowden's revelations caused a huge shakeup in the intelligence community. Such as a federal judge ruling that the NSAs blanket collection was unconstitutional. If things were right beforehand, none of this would have happened
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

Snowden had whistleblower options. Flying to China/Russia and leaking the information to a foreign governments is not blowing the whistle but espionage and treason (during war time at that).

Because they're ineffective. Ask Jeffrey Sterling, Bill Binnie, or John Kiriakou how well that works.

Leaking classified information to a journalist is not the same as someone who has the clearance to know the information, and is the designated authority to blow whistles to (congress).

then they should stop violating laws and subverting the constitution

It has not been ruled that they did. The justification that was published had to do with pen registers. Also, getting a warrant satisfies the constitution, it doesn't matter which court is used for that warrant.

stop with the secret courts

Who else would you use that can see the secret information to determine if the warrant should be given?

the universal spying

the undermining of the US high tech industry

So, stop doing the job that they are asked to do by the government? The NSA is a spying agency, sorry to burst your bubble.

and the harsh punishment of whistleblowers.

No whistleblower has ever been harmed by the NSA. Disclosing secret and top secret information to foreign governments is not whistleblowing, it is treason. Snowden chose not to blow the whistle and instead commit treason, he is being charged with the crimes he committed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

If Snowden wanted to be a whistleblower, he should have taken his concerns to congress, not foreign governments.

Lessig didn't drop out because the debate rules were "unfair". He dropped out because the DNC changed the debate rules midstream in a way that would exclude Lessig from the debates. His campaign worked hard to meet the requirement to participate in the second debate, at which point they changed the rules to exclude again.

Note that he raised more money than Webb and Chafee, who were allowed in the first debate; and if his name hadn't been excluded from polls, it's even conceivable he would have been allowed into the first debate.

HuffPo actually explains how the rules changed:
The DNC's rules for candidate participation in their debates were pretty straightforward--or so we thought. In August, before the Lessig campaign began, DNC Chair, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, announced the standards for being included in the debates. As she described the rule, a candidate had to have 1 percent in three DNC sanctioned national polls, "in the six weeks prior to the debate."
[...]
And indeed, that is precisely the rule that was applied in the first debate. As CNN specified in a late September memo, to qualify a candidate had to poll at 1 percent in the "polls released between August 1, 2015 and October 10, 2015." The first debate was October 12.
[...]
During that call, I was told that the DNC participation standard for the debates was for a candidate to be at one percent in three polls conducted, "six weeks prior to the debate"--not the clarified rule cited earlier by Wasserman-Shultz and the DNC political director that a candidate had to be at one percent in three polls conducted "in the six weeks prior to the debate."

So the DNC had said 1% in the six weeks before the debate and used that standard in the first debate, but in the second debate where Lessig qualified by that standard they switched to 6 weeks before the debate.

It seems odd even if you don't take the wording at face value and wonder about the missing upper bound in the range given by "six weeks before the debate".

I can see why the DNC doesn't want a candidate who is there almost explicitly as a one issue protest candidate but that's a fairly dirty way to go about it.

If that is your opinion about 'government' and hence 'society', why don't you emmigrate to true third world country, like Somalia, Sudan or Nigeria?

Weren't you among those, "threatening" to emigrate to Canada, when Bush got elected? Or was it North Korea — the platonic ideal of government "taking care" of the citizenry's every need? WTF are you still doing here?

The 'governments' there certainly don't feed the poor, house the homeless and treat the sick.

Nice of you to have included Somalia — this whole meme about how Libertarians are supposed to move there is as stupid as it is infamous — the country's current troubles are due to its previous government being Socialist. Venezuela is unravelling into the same direction in front of our eyes — just ask Bernie Sanders, when you next meet him, what he would differently from Hugo Chavez...

Oh, but what about Sudan? Well, they have an ambitious social protection program called the Social Initiative Program. Nigeria does too. Time to update your talking-points card.

And you likely proclaim yourself a Christian even...

Tell me, where in the Christian (or Jewish) dogma is there anything about it being the government's (Cæsar's) responsibility to help the "less fortunate"? It is not — good people are supposed to do it themselves, government spending tax-monies on it is not benevolence.

maybe move inland and hope for good TV coverage of the drowning masses at the beach.

Al Gore, of all people, undercut this particular aspect of his own scare-mongering, when he bought an ocean-front villa for himself. A real nice one too, I hear...

But then, the "recovering politician" was never much about practicing, what he preaches.

At the same time, the corrupt, conflict-of-interest-filled prisons-for-profit system needs to be dismantled. The government should pay the prison owners a fair value, and then seize the prisons for state ownership.

With both of these actions, you'll see incarcerations drop and many of these prisons can be closed or reused for other purposes, like maybe jailing some bankers and politicians!

You seem to be under some illusions about the working conditions of University professors. Most of your professors are adjuncts, working part time for less than minimum wage.

You're upset because your professor didn't contact you way before the first class to tell you what the expectations were? Guess what? The University probably hadn't even gotten around to hiring her yet. And even if they had, they reserved the right to say "just kidding" and cancel it at the last minute.

You want someone to blame for the poor quality of your education? It's not your professors. It's the "dooshbags" they are working for.

I am sorry to hear that you are out an extra $50 for the cost of a new textbook. Your professor, who makes about $20,000 a year by working at three different schools with no benefits, no job security and no support from their employer, knows what that feels like.

That is simply not true, we do pollute more, that is because we have more people and are much more effective at getting resources.

But killing is just wrong while we do kill people, we probably live in the most peaceful time in human existence.

Here are murder rates:
http://marginalrevolution.com/...

if you want a citation from wars:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

also think about deaths from illness,

Also in the past remember slavery was acceptable,

I am as pessimistic as the next person but don't blind yourself with false assumptions.

One would think that trying to organize a "discussion panel" would imply they are interested in a conversation.

You'd think that, wouldn't you? But you'd be wrong.

As usual, the concept of moderation goes *woosh* over people's heads as they furiously go about constructing their strawmen.

Except these stories never seem to focus on moderation. They focus on "cutting". You can't cut everything, you will starve. However, it seems our society has rejected moderation as something viable.

My personal opinion is, eating will kill you. Not eating will kill you faster. We're all going to die at some point. Eat just enough of whatever you want so you don't starve. Don't eat more than that.

The needs of teachers are that they remain employed with the highest salary and best benefits they can get.

Yeah those evil profiteering teachers. Everywhere I go I see teachers in ferraris, research scientists drinking champaign!

In the real world not everyone is motivated by greed and capitalism:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

If teachers wanted higher salaries over all else, then why would they buy school supplies out of pocket? Many teachers, a large fraction I think actually want to teach, and teach well. That way like so many humans they can get real satisfaction out of a job well done.

Really, Walmart is 100x bigger than Amazon and actually has large scale reach (not distance).

Why all the Amazon articles of this week (hiring 100K temps, stock price, walmart comparsions, etc...)?

Likely because they always need a gimmick to stir up attention in gearing up for the holiday season. 2012-Kindle Fire/phone & cyber Monday, 2013-drones. 2014-floor bots, black Friday and echo (which really got steam in the last quarter). A company like Walmart doesn't need to (they will get shoppers for the holiday season).

And every year Wall St reports missed earnings/loss and business news ALWAYS talks about Amazon vs Walmart.... every year.

We get it. And Amazon will continue to stay in the red.

Actually walmart's safety standards are a notch above the typical health food store in that they won't carry organic alfalfa sprouts due to the high incidence of e.coli contamination. Meanwhile places like whole foods carry them anyways; in fact whole foods prominently offers a full page of suggestions on what to make with them.

And indeed, it is walmart who is correct here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

And at the same time, whole foods maintains a "ban list" of ingredients not allowed to be sold in their stores, only these ingredients are not proven to be harmful. For example, they ban glutamates. The reason for that is because some people claim to be allergic to them, but no allergy claim has ever been empirically proven. However whole foods happily carries foods that are known to be such strong allergens that even a trace amount can outright kill some people; specifically, peanuts.

Why? Because whole foods is snake oil, just like their homeopathic medicine aisle.

That said, I don't get why there's all of this love for a company that actively rips you off (whole foods) and all kinds of animosity towards one that is only guilty of making things too affordable for the poor (walmart.)

Much of the current population stems from the Reagen / CIA produced crack cocaine epidemic in the 80's. The Feds basically created their own monster. And, here's a source!, there are many more out there. "Freeway: Crack in the System" is on netflix even.

Taco Bell uses Silicon Dioxide as an anti clumping agent in their meat, so it is possible I suppose that a volcano would want some as that is simply sand.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

Yes, because you already made up your mind that the deciding factor here is "skin color" rather than the fact that the kid was carrying something that (rightfuly or not) was seen as/deemed threatening, or the fact that US schools have stupid "zero tolerance" shit rules (to protect little precious snowflakes like yourself).

It's not like any white kids have suffered anything similar ever, or anything like that.

But, yeah... I guess that doesn't count, because that kid is white so, therefore, a racist (meaning... he probably had it coming anyway, right?).

lol, go back to tumblr

When Assange surrenders to the UK authorities & then does his prison time for jumping bail & is then extradited to Sweden as anyone else would be, THEN it will be about the Swedish rape charges.

You mean when Sweden makes it clear it's about fucking rape, and nothing but the rape, you 50 pounds-of-dumbfuck-in-a-five-pound-sack idiot. Every time you open your mouth, you add another 10 pounds to the sack. Since the previous 18 demonstrations of what a goosestepping fool you are have gone over your head, lets go for 19:

Like the boy who cried wolf, you lose the right to be butthurt when anyone questions your honesty and motives, after you've proven your motives and honesty should be questioned.

Sweden has turned people over to the CIA to be tortured, and the only person who has been sent to prison for the CIA's torture program is the man who revealed its existence. So not only is Assange's demand that he not be handed over to the CIA not unreasonable, he'd have to have a whole in his head not to demand such a condition.

This really isn't hard to understand, even for a goosestepping fool such as yourself. If the cops want to question you for alleged drug possession, it would seem crazy to insist that they don't sexually assault you with multiple colonoscopies, over the better part of the day, just to show that you aren't actually hiding drugs up your ass. Unless the warrant is from Hidalgo County, where the cops have been known to do just that.

Those cops have completely lost the right to act indignant and butthurt over being asked for such a guarantee, since they've done exactly what the suspect is accusing them of doing. And it would be the easiest thing in the world for an honest DA to say "fine, we wont shove a probe up your ass time and time again". But we aren't dealing with honest prosecutors.

As Assange has already raped in all probability two women I can see why pedophilia is a likely next step for him, one you seem eager to emulate given your fixations and how you worship him.

Then. They. Would. Make. It. About. Rape. If. It. Was. About. Rape. But thanks for making it clear you don't actually give a shit about rape, by not giving a shit about rape far worse, and far more widespread than anything Assange is accused of doing. You Nazi shit-for-brains pecker head, you.

How'd this get modded "Informative"? I guess the Clintons are Republican now? http://www.ijreview.com/2014/0... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

I'm not going to convince you but for most people it's plain as day that he uses the language of hate and fear to gain popularity.

It's "obvious" to you because this is what the media focuses on and interprets for you, and you have been propagandized with it.

I'm actually not influenced by the media much. I don't have cable, don't listen to the radio, don't troll blogs/news sites, etc. I think for myself and go back to the original transcripts when I do decide to take interest in a subject (as I did with all three of those quotes).

"Laziness is a trait in the blacks. ... Black guys counting my money! I hate it" - Trump

This one kind of surprised me - I hadn't heard it repeated before, so I went to check the context. I found where it came from on a HuffPo article from 2011, which says he didn't directly deny it, but the veracity is very questionable. In any case, the article points out Trump's public support of civil rights, donations to civil rights groups, etc., although it paints an unflattering picture of Trump generally. Regardless, there is nothing racist about his campaign, it has nothing to do with his positions or his views on these issues, which seem reasonable.

It was a direct quote from his twitter account. The tweet has long since been deleted but it was captured and reported on extensively.

"China is killing us. They’ve taken so much of our wealth. They’ve taken our jobs. They’ve taken our business, they’ve taken our manufacturing, [audience member screams out “our land”] Our land? The way they’re going they’ll have that pretty soon.Think about it, we have rebuilt China — somebody said to me “that’s a harsh statement” — it’s the greatest theft in the history of the United States." - Trump

So you're in favor of moving more manufacturing jobs to China? Driven by more dirty coal power plants? This is about US competition with China - all countries compete for better trade position, and China is producing all the cheap crap that Walmart sells millions of dollars worth of every day. THIS is one of the threats we should be focused on. Afghanistan and Syria are not going to attack us any time soon, but we are pouring billions into military operations there, while China has all the jobs. Not sure what this has to do with Hitler. Trump isn't advocating invading China or anything like that. He's pointing out that our politicians and multinational corporations have sent all of our manufacturing there, and we can't compete with them. He's right.

I assume you're a TPP supporter? Because that's going to close down more jobs in the US, send more manufacturing to Asia, and allow global multinational corporations to have more power than ever.

If his comments were strictly about the loss of manufacturing, I would agree with you. Unfortunately he couldn't keep his racism in check and called them thieves stealing from Americans, which is exactly what the Nazis did with the Jews - they painted them as thieves/rats/etc stealing from Germans. Also, TPP is the worst agreement since NAFTA - I hope it dies.

When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." - Trump

Okay, this was about illegal immigrants. And, yes, they are causing problems for the US. This, again, is about the US competing with other countries, primaril

I'm not going to convince you but for most people it's plain as day that he uses the language of hate and fear to gain popularity.

It's "obvious" to you because this is what the media focuses on and interprets for you, and you have been propagandized with it. Not because he actually does that. His campaign has nothing to do with hate or fear. Look at Sander's campaign to see someone running on hate. Check out Cruz or Lindsey Graham's campaigns for something based on fear. These are just out-of-context quotes used to excoriate Trump.

Since you don't seem to understand how this works, let me explain it to you. The media covers politics the way the DC political consultants tell them to. That's because media companies get a LOT of money from those consultants. Any candidate that does NOT hire these consultants for their campaign is at a significant disadvantage because of the influence these consultants have in the coverage.

"Laziness is a trait in the blacks. ... Black guys counting my money! I hate it" - Trump

This one kind of surprised me - I hadn't heard it repeated before, so I went to check the context. I found where it came from on a HuffPo article from 2011, which says he didn't directly deny it, but the veracity is very questionable. In any case, the article points out Trump's public support of civil rights, donations to civil rights groups, etc., although it paints an unflattering picture of Trump generally. Regardless, there is nothing racist about his campaign, it has nothing to do with his positions or his views on these issues, which seem reasonable.

"China is killing us. They’ve taken so much of our wealth. They’ve taken our jobs. They’ve taken our business, they’ve taken our manufacturing, [audience member screams out “our land”] Our land? The way they’re going they’ll have that pretty soon.Think about it, we have rebuilt China — somebody said to me “that’s a harsh statement” — it’s the greatest theft in the history of the United States." - Trump

So you're in favor of moving more manufacturing jobs to China? Driven by more dirty coal power plants? This is about US competition with China - all countries compete for better trade position, and China is producing all the cheap crap that Walmart sells millions of dollars worth of every day. THIS is one of the threats we should be focused on. Afghanistan and Syria are not going to attack us any time soon, but we are pouring billions into military operations there, while China has all the jobs. Not sure what this has to do with Hitler. Trump isn't advocating invading China or anything like that. He's pointing out that our politicians and multinational corporations have sent all of our manufacturing there, and we can't compete with them. He's right.

I assume you're a TPP supporter? Because that's going to close down more jobs in the US, send more manufacturing to Asia, and allow global multinational corporations to have more power than ever.

When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." - Trump

Okay, this was about illegal immigrants. And, yes, they are causing problems for the US. This, again, is about the US competing with other countries, primarily. What you left out was the intro to this quote:

When do we beat Mexico at the border? They're laughing at us, at our stupidity. And now they are beating us economically. They are not our

"He also said that climate models were a joke, and are getting worse and are deviating more and more from what is actually happening. But he is only one of the worlds most distinguished physicists. I trust Al Gore more. His carbon trading system will save the planet!" ref

"More Than 400 U.S. Cities May Be 'Past The Point Of No Return' With Sea Level Threats: But there are still cities that could be saved by reducing carbon emissions..

The step that you and many others who share a similar opinion miss is that in general, the police don't waste their time pulling someone over without some form of probable cause.

I guess that's why we have so many non-violating stop and search court cases?

For drunk driving accusations, this falls into one of two dominant scenarios: 1) it's about 3AM and all the bars closed down for the morning; 2) the driver was driving recklessly. Even if it is 3AM, if you do not show any signs of impairment when the officer comes to talk to you, they probably won't waste their time with a field sobriety test.

Note that at 3am, hopped up cops are more than happy to pull over anyone, for any reason. They are bored, and arresting anyone, even under false pretenses, means they get to do something other than just being bored.

they've either gotten stuck with a cop who's had a bad day and will look for any slight excuse to fine or arrest someone

Yep, and that means arresting you whether you're guilty or not, just because you were out, oh, and they have an "unofficial" quota to meet.

How is it a non-sequitur?

It's facile. If people are free to criticize Sam Harris's avocation of torture and racist profiling,, whyyyyyyyy isn't Harris free to criticize Islam? There is no line connecting the dots between A and B.

He's free to criticize Islam, the question is whether his criticism of Islam is just, useful, and accurate.

Ie its not, nor should be illegal, but it's unethical. As for women lying about their age I'd say that's also unethical.

So, academic suspension for coeds wearing makeup? Civil fines for women in their 30's who use college graduation pictures on dating sites? The point I'm getting at here is the selective outrage at misrepresentations while dating.

Again I never suggested penalties of any kind.

You're also conflating deception with marketing, there's certainly some overlap but there are significant differences.

How is it a non-sequitur?

It's facile. If people are free to criticize Sam Harris's avocation of torture and racist profiling,, whyyyyyyyy isn't Harris free to criticize Islam? There is no line connecting the dots between A and B.

Ie its not, nor should be illegal, but it's unethical. As for women lying about their age I'd say that's also unethical.

So, academic suspension for coeds wearing makeup? Civil fines for women in their 30's who use college graduation pictures on dating sites? The point I'm getting at here is the selective outrage at misrepresentations while dating.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-j-doherty-phd/divorce-and-vasectomy-reg_1_b_779650.html

"Creative output"? No change whatsoever.

Well that doesn't reflect my experience at all, but we're comparing what people find interesting so it becomes a battle of the anecdotes. In terms of fantasy, paranormal, or science fiction I feel I've far more and better options than twenty or even ten years ago.

Indie authors and musicians are not "sharply on the rise".

A swing and a miss. I believe the author of "The Martian" was an indie. Self publishing is taking off in a big way - but don't take my word for it, google it yourself.

And to think that stronger and longer IP protections is the reason behind the rise of indie artists is just dumb.

Not just small independent artists but large corporations also, stronger protections make creative work more valuable (this can't be disputed) and encourage higher quality. I mean who wants to put in a lot of time and effort if some nimrod is just going to filch it. However they apply to ALL creative work, not just whatever is put forth by Sony.

The people who say "stronger and longer IP protections is good for creativity" are almost universally people who have never done anything creative.

Funny, I was just thinking that people who say "stronger and longer IP protections strangle creativity" are almost universally people who not only have never done anything creative but who probably freeload off the people who do the creative work.

What you're increasingly desperately trying to do is frame this in terms of cigar-smoking capitalist Snidely Whiplashes lording it over poor toiling peasants who don't own the means of production, except they actually do. Welcome to the 21st century, marxism is worse than useless here.

Obviously this doesn't mean I support the entire treaty, at least until I see it.

https://freedomhouse.org/repor...

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

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

etc.

You said "the middle class is shrinking", which is not supported by the facts.

Your references support the fact that there are a small number of rich people in the US getting richer is true.

However you will also find that CBO numbers show income for the middle quintile rising from $61,200 in 1979 to $76,600 in 2010 (in 2010 dollars).

"Since 2000, the middle class has been shrinking for a decidedly more alarming reason: Incomes have fallen."
http://www.nytimes.com/interac...

"The study found that the percentage of middle class households (as defined above) has shrunk in all 50 states since 2000."
http://uk.businessinsider.com/...

"Median household income fell for the fifth straight year in 2012, the Census Bureau reported on Tuesday, to $51,017. That was the lowest annual income, adjusted for inflation, since 1995."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

The whole point of buying these overpriced products is that they're supposed to "Just work." They just don't live up to the promise, anymore. Apple is looking more like Microsoft each day.

You mean they're supposed to be flawless, because Apple, because reasons. Five people out of five million purchases report a problem with an Apple product, and Tim Cook better be calling Kerry Washington because they've got a scaaandal on their hands.

Think that's hyperbole? At the height of Bendghazi, Apple had reports from a total of 6 users on their iPhone screens bending. Whereas the Samsung Galaxy cracked, rather than bended, at the same pressure but there was no whining at Samsung.

Then, of course, there's don't hold it wrong.

It's also possible to read the ingredients list and make your decision that way. You don't have to do it every time, just identify the brands that say things like "no added sugar"...

Actually NO -- that no longer works. Companies who try to sell you "healthy" foods want to lie to you.

There are all sorts of things that are basically pure sugar that many companies are trying to add into products with "no added sugar."

One of my favorite examples is Chobani's "natural" greek yogurt, with "no added sugar," but which contains large amounts of "evaporated cane juice" (which is... well, a very slightly different processing method to make SUGAR). There have been class action lawsuits over this, but judges have thrown them out.

I mean, it's "juice," so "evaporated cane juice" must be good for you, right? Also on the list of fun ways for companies to say "sugar" in another way on "natural, no sugar added" foods -- "brown rice syrup" or "honey" or "agave nectar." Wow, it's made with "brown rice" -- must be good for me! "Nectar" -- wow, that's like a good fruit juice, no?

No matter that these things are basically 97%+ sugar and the only reason they are added to anything is as a substitute for sugar so that businesses can claim "no sugar added" on their labels and sound "healthier."

Just to be clear -- most flavors of Chobani yogurt contains more sugar per ounce than Coca Cola. That's what a "no sugar added" label gets you these days.

"Former Cisco CEO John Chambers says the US is the only major country without a proper digital agenda "

That's simply plain wrong.
The USA has a well defined digital agenda it goes by, whatever the collateral problems this generates.
And this agenda is contained in a simple sentence :
"We Try To Collect Everything And Hang On To It Forever"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

More foolishness... Let's try reality, not idle speculation, for a change.

Keep in mind that Houston, TX is the most diverse city in the nation!!!

The problem isn't racial, it's cultural all that it entails in raising children to reach their maximum potential. Now you can argue that certain groups of poor and underclass people are generationally stuck in a vicious circle, sure. But, it's not like certain people far abstracted from the individual are going "hmm gee, that person is black, and that person is hispanic...denied!!!" No, it doesn't work that way. It's all metric driven; and if the children of these two groups don't meet the qualifications in terms of grades and score count, what else do you think is going to happen?

link text

See e.g. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... and http://www.zdnet.com/article/y...

People are (at last) getting tired of facebook. That means: less growth, a user-base that isn't rejuvenating at the same rate as it could, and the spectre of *gasp* declining numbers of acebook users.

Bad news for a company that just supplies a fashionable fad (as opposed to something that people actually need) and which derives revenues from advertising and resale of its users'(private) information for marketing purposes don't you think?

So it's time for a little executive involvement in keeping those warm bods signing up.

"We're getting a smaller slice of the cake? Well then .. let's make the cake bigger!"

Aha! We need more Internet users!

Cue Zuckerberg's public appeal to the UN: "more Internet users please, it's practically a Human Right!"

Besides, it's the easiest way to get more Facebook users and it doesn't cost Facebook a dime (it's supposed to be tax money that pays for increased Internet access you see).

Seen this way it's the most natural thing for mr. Zuckerberg to do. And food, shelter and healthcare? Meh. He's not active in those markets, is he?

As you might expect, Raytheon spends heavily on political contributions and lobbying.

This is why we must elect a young, smart, well-educated politician with multi-cultural background and compelling life-story to Presidency. Someone, who knows, how to use a computer himself. Who is not beholden to KKKorporate interests. Someone loved and respected overseas. Someone, who cares... Someone, who thrills men and whom women can imagine finding in their showers and be excited, rather than frightened. Someone, who is serious about ending Washington's culture of corruption !

Yes we can!

Sigh...you DO understand that the word fallacy does NOT always come with the word "logical" connected, yes? Loaded words are a form of POLITICAL fallacy as they are used by politicians to sway the populace. Same as you don't say "integration is bad" you use "forced busing", you don't say "we are against blacks" you say "welfare queens". It gives you the same effect thanks to the public "filling in the blanks" but gives the one using them a CYA.

And excuse me for not being willing to coddle the spoiled as fuck population, I suppose you want "trigger warnings" and all that bullshit? I call it as I see it and if you are an idiot? Well sorry but unless English is not your native tongue I really shouldn't have to write for fucking third graders or keep a pile of LOLCats so that the clueless masses can understand basic sentences, especially when I use something so fucking obvious like "see how that works" that Ray Charles would have caught it.

How about everybody stop smoking the blunts before posting, yes?

"The PC has stopped being the primary computing device of most people meaning that if they don't make it big on the mobile front they'll be irrelevant in the long run."

Agreed. But I think Microsoft will not "make it big" with mobile software.

Products that face low sales because of abuse and foolishness:

Windows: If you have Windows 7, why get a new version? At some point the version you have is enough. Apparently there aren't any new features in Windows 10 that are attractive to customers. Apparently the new features in Windows 10 are all anti-customer.

Google is becoming more and more abusive: F.T.C. Is Said to Investigate Claims That Google Used Android to Promote Its Products.

Apple iPhones: What will the future iPhone 7 have that the iPhone 6 doesn't have? Digital Turnip Twaddling? At some point people will stop rushing to buy new iPhones.

Apple watches? Now that Steve Jobs is dead, Apple no longer releases easy-to-use products. Apple now does the Microsoft thing and releases buggy products that it slowly fixes. Articles:

Verdict: "... there's a learning curve you have to overcome..."

Seven problems facing the Apple Watch

Apple Watch: Issues We Know Of And Possible Fixes.

Opinion: One month later, fixing 15 early Apple Watch problems seems straightforward

These 8 problems with the Apple Watch are 'infuriating'

9 of the biggest complaints about the Apple Watch so far

8 Infuriating Problems With The Apple Watch

please point out for me when this Pope has ever been misogynist

Well, he's anti-woman-priest, and anyone who's anti-abortion-rights (you can be anti-abortion if you like, so long as you're not trying to set laws over it) or anti-contraception is anti-woman.

homophobic

discussion of subject, puffpo but eh

or condoned the sex abuse?

The church is still relocating molesters, and the church still hasn't released its list of known molesters. The church is still actively interfering with investigations and refusing to give information. He runs the church. If he can't fix it, then he should admit that he doesn't run the church. He should be joining the public in demanding the release of those records. Since he is doing none of those things, he is complicit in the ongoing international child-rape ring known as the Catholic church.

Actually, I misspoke. It's not all child rape. That's just what tends to get people on board, so I emphasize it.

Twitter has done it again!

"Turing Will Roll Back Massive Drug Price Hike After Backlash"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

Wow that was quick!

Plain out-and-out racism and denying this kid his civil rights.

You have specific evidence that he was singled out because of his race? Or is that your own bias showing?

If so, why then so much less outrage & support for the kid who pointed a chicken finger at another student, or the pop-tart gun kid, or the kid who wrote a story about shooting a dinosaur? I don't think any of them got invited to the White House.

Well, chicken finger kid got a suspension and sent home for the day. Pop-tart kid got a suspension. Only the Dinosaur Hunter (who interesting, is also the only other teenager on this list) got arrested. And Dinosaur Hunter (in theory) actually *did* talk about guns in school.

So for why, I'd give a couple reasons:

Clock Kid didn't even *do* the thing he's accused of. Which moves us up a rung from "massive over-reaction" to "teachers and cops are just making shit up".

There's some escalating reaction from the community as things just get dumber. Dinosaur Hunter's article even references PopTart. So, every time we hear about this sort of stupidity, you get just a bit *more* angry - which we should, because it gets harder to write it off as "oh, just an isolated incident / overzealous teacher".

To be a bit cynical and flippant for a moment, Dinosaur Guy was doing a creative writing exercise, and no-body cares about liberal arts in America. Meanwhile, Clock Kid may be a case of chasing away a potential STEM graduate (you know, future of the nation, shortage in the country, etc etc).

Also, he's getting a lot of attention from geeks who are watching this and thanking our lucky stars that we didn't grow up in this period. Half the stuff the teachers had us do in school in the 90s would get us arrested these days, I'd think.

For something to be discriminatory it has to disadvantage someone. That's why gender segregated bathrooms are not discriminatory - everyone is served equally and the segregation exists for an easily justifiable reason.

Privileging girls by keeping boys out of some of the comp-sci camps discriminates against boys the same way keeping girls out discriminates against girls.

Anyway, feminists have problems here too. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
You don't see men imploring the state to micromanage women in the bathroom.

So in your example it would only be sexist to exclude boys if there was not already a class for boys. In this case boys have privilege - they are the majority in the class, they don't face gender based discrimination from their classmates. They might have other problems, but the point is that they effectively already have a "boy's only" CS class.

There is no class for boys.Only classes open to the general public, and now, these special girls-only clubs. They're not allowed a defined space. If you stand for equal opportunity, then you focus on ensuring both boys and girls are not shut out of the same opportunity based on their sex. No favoritism for either. At that point, if 15 boys sign up but only 3 girls do, there is really no fault to be had. It's individuals making choices for themselves. If boys don't sign up for something because 'girls are icky' what do we tell them? Right, girls should be taught the same lesson about treating boys that way. As a side note, it's normal, healthy behavior for boys to identify with boys and girls to identify with girls. Demonizing this too much leads to neurotic behavior later.

Can't win, can we? If it's extra money on top it's discriminatory because money should go into a pool for everyone. If it's the same money being divided up differently to facilitate the education of a subgroup, that's also discrimination.

Yes it is. That's why affirmative action is most overt example of systemic discrimination in play today. In publicly funded programs, there's a fixed amount allocated for the purpose. If any of that money is set aside for a specific sex, it reduces opportunity for the other. This includes diversion for the purpose of pressuring equal outcome (50/50 enrollment) because it starves the more numerous group from needed funds/slots, thus denying some percentage the opportunity. In private spaces, those who choose to sign up and can pay, go, and it would only be sexual discrimination if the operators forbade someone entry because of sex. Obviously, relevant discriminators should always apply. Equal opportunity does not, nor should, guarantee equal outcomes calculated from irrelevant attributes like sex.

Correct. However, as I already pointed out, boys have a safe space. It's the class where there was only one girl and some unknown number of boys.

..and as I pointed out, no they don't.

That doesn't work for adults, let alone children.

Sure it works. You just expect perfect compliance from people's behavior and thoughts, and you want jackboots to stomp people flat for any variation from the doctrine's marching orders. That unreasonable thinking is why heavily socialist societies end up as hellholes of some sort. Equal opportunity is not equal outcome because everyone is an individual with a unique mix of imperatives, temperaments, strengths and weaknesses. The problem is that you want us believing sex has no bearing on this. You are wrong. Sex cuts right down to the DNA, making for substantial difference in physiological and psychological makeup between them. Expecting equal sexual outcome everywhere is crazy.