Slashdot Mirror

ISIS is failing, while Trump's ties by electronic evidence to both Putin and Russian-state-sponsored groups are stacking up, all while Russian aggression is increasing, and Trump hasn't shown any evidence of a backbone that would support US interests against Russian aggression. He has even demeaned NATO, the backbone of global security and stability for nearly 70 years.

Here you go.

http://www.independent.co.uk/e... - they have of course scrubbed their original article which linked to the MET, and they independent has also scrubbed the original article. Just a FYI. Luckily there's some pdf snapshots around. You can start working backwards from that, and all you run into is scrubbed articles, stuff removed from web.archive.org and so on. Oops as they'd say.

Primary sources say otherwise; it is just an Arabic abbreviation of their name. It's not a pejorative.

There is not ratified treaty, there is nothing beyond a gentlemen's agreement that other people won't behave badly. It is not often you find agreement between such idealogically disparate organizationshttps://www.cato.org/publications/testimony/pitfalls-unilateral-negotiations-paris-climate-change-conference or https://thinkprogress.org/no-the-paris-climate-agreement-isnt-binding-here-s-why-that-doesn-t-matter-62827c72bb04 or even http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/09/01/un-paris-climate-pact-remains-non-binding-meaningless/

as for the laws of nature, suckers stop chanting and start running now. Zika forever. http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/zika-virus-travel-brazil-male-infertility-sterility-south-america-central-america-caribbean-a6834091.html

That's a new version of a "proactive recall" and "upright and ethical behavior" - when they botched the recall completely by not using the CSPC like they are supposed to, and reportedly tried to pay at least one person to stay quiet about their explodey phone, according to the New York Times.

This is, of course, after multiple convictions for bribery, tax evasion, price fixing, and collusion to the point of the CEO resigning in disgrace.

I don't know why anyone would be a "fan" of a company that has shown themselves to be a bad actor over and over again. I'd buy Sony before I buy Samsung, and I'll never own another Sony product because of their string of horseshit.

Jehovah's Witnesses have done this, as have other cults...
1 predict the end of the world...
2 screw up badly on prediction...
3 revise date of end of world...
4 GOTO 1

Replace "end of world" with "end of Arctice icecap", and you get the idea...

Sunday 21 August 2016 https://www.theguardian.com/en...
'Next year or the year after, the Arctic will be free of ice'

Saturday 4 June 2016 http://www.independent.co.uk/e...
Professor Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University predicts we could see 'an area of less than one million square kilometres for September of this year'

Monday 17 September 2012 https://www.theguardian.com/en...
One of the world's leading ice experts has predicted the final collapse of Arctic sea ice in summer months within four years.

Wednesday, 12 December 2007 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/713... Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013'

Rinse... lather... repeat.

Which polls?

Maybe you should check those stats...

http://www.independent.co.uk/l...
http://bgr.com/2016/10/03/ipho...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
http://www.digitaltrends.com/m...
http://www.express.co.uk/life-...

Just dropping three points here:

* Sea levels *are* rising, and its negatively impacting the lives of people already, today: http://www.newyorker.com/tech/...
* greenland ice is melting http://www.independent.co.uk/e...
* glaciers are melting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

All three of these things are hopefully undisputable.

Yes, science isn't sure about everything, but it is quite sure about this, sure enough that it should be trusted. And please do base your political decision on what the scientific consensus provides, everything else would be totally irresponsible.

It IS a legitimate concern for some people.
Mostly white racist... but it IS a legitimate concern for them.

Another good reason would be being stupid. Which is a FAR MORE legitimate concern for everyone.

...in 2006 by Al Gore? "...unless drastic measures to reduce greenhouse gases are taken within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return", Gore said.

...in 1999, by James Hansen, telling us that the 2000's would rival the 1930's for the highest ever... of course, then we went into a "hiatus" of global warming. Original article.

...in 2006, by this group, saying, Extinction is OUR choice, unless... .... within the next 8 years we have STOPPED using fossil fuels, PLANTED millions of trees, ended logging, and PREPARED our cities and agriculture for the inevitable sea rise. OTHERWISE OUR CHILDREN MAY NOT SURVIVE!

...in 2006, by the Independent?

...in late 2006, by Mother Jones?

..in 2004, by James Hansen? Article

Or maybe just google all this from 10+ years ago, telling us we'd all be dead in 10 years. google.com

Let's stop with the hysteria and stick to facts. I'm not against cutting CO2 emissions, I am against needless panic mongering.

http://www.foxnews.com/politic...

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

Russian efforts are small potatoes compared to that.

Actually Russians have bigger dicks than Americans. https://static.independent.co....

Let's not forget that the previous administration (Bush) took us to war under false pretenses.

If you're old enough to remember that era, recall that Bush and Cheney were all over the news saying that the evidence was real, and Tony Blair even came out and confirmed the evidence of WMDs.

That's because the Bush administration treated the CIA as a lawyer instead of a scientist.

They should have been asking "tell us what you can discover about Iraq".

Instead they asked "give us the strongest case you can that shows Iraq has WMDs".

The understandably the CIA did exactly as requested, and created false evidence.

On the contrary, there's no huge political motivation to blame Russia, sure it's politically inconvenient for Trump, but lets be honest, no one is choosing who to vote for based on whether or not Russia is doing the leaking.

With this on the other hand, the publicly available evidence is pretty damning, there's no significant political pressure to skew the investigation, and most of the off-the-record stuff from analysts is more convinced than the public statements from the administration.

They could always be wrong, but I think it's really damn likely that Russia is behind the attacks.

Hmm. How is it unproven? Because you and other civilians haven't seen or read the evidence, you believe there is none? Or, it's it because certain news outlets and other propaganda deny such evidence? Anyway, I can see a clear case for avoiding any proactive action on our part but also see good cause to do so. It's a difficult decision to make that the average person can't contemplate due to our lack of insight and knowledge.

Let's not forget that the previous administration (Bush) took us to war under false pretenses.

If you're old enough to remember that era, recall that Bush and Cheney were all over the news saying that the evidence was real, and Tony Blair even came out and confirmed the evidence of WMDs.

Everyone *else* in the world, including the UN inspectors, claimed that there were none.

Does anyone remember the Iraq war? It took 9 years and cost us $2 trillion, caused half a million civilian deaths, 4500 American serviceman deaths, and several hundred American amputees.

I think it's entirely reasonable that, before we go to war with a fukkin' nuclear power, that we be shown some of the evidence first.

Do you disagree?

Of the 3 "western democracies" you mentioned. None of them have a similar election system to the U.S., and Great Britain doesn't even have primaries. And from what I can tell France doesn't either. So of your examples 2/3 don't publicly fund primary elections, because they don't even have primary elections.

Your ignorance is showing...
http://www.independent.co.uk/v...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://ecpr.eu/Events/PaperDe...
http://www.lemonde.fr/politiqu...
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ésidentielle_socialiste_de_2017

OK so now that it has been clearly established that you say things easily exposed as ignorant but are still sufficiently enamoured of your opinions to continue attempting to present them as better than the status quo, it's time to sign off. You're just a fringie attempting to warp the system too your benefit.

So you still have no answer why some meaningless locker-room boasting

So, Trump was boasting about sexually assaulting a woman but lying to make himself look better in the eyes of a grade-C soap opera actor?

OK, I accept your argument, but I'm not sure why you want to be calling Trump a liar if you want him to become president. I take him at his word. If he says he did it, then he did it. Trump deserves the benefit of the doubt about his claim of sexually assaulting women.

Anyway, we'll have more to discuss on this topic in two days, when Trump's trial in the rape of a 13 year-old girl starts.

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

I think its more than just thinner devices. Keep on adding parts and whatnot is the culprit. Apple right can do it right, but Samsung is running into problems trying to do what Apple is doing.

Oh you mean like this?

Despite the a/c's crude phrasing, we should be careful about introducing large amounts of anything new into the environment. I was just reading about "Project Plowshare", an idea in the '60s to use nuclear bombs to remodel the earth for engineering projects. Does anyone still think that's a good idea (not you Donald)?

Britain's rivers and lakes polluted by microplastics in paint used for road markings

I'm pretty sure this blue glowing paint is not powered by nuclear bombs - it would be somewhat brighter if that were the case, and would have a noticeable affect on maintenance costs.

Despite the a/c's crude phrasing, we should be careful about introducing large amounts of anything new into the environment. I was just reading about "Project Plowshare", an idea in the '60s to use nuclear bombs to remodel the earth for engineering projects. Does anyone still think that's a good idea (not you Donald)?

Britain's rivers and lakes polluted by microplastics in paint used for road markings

What about the Indonesian man who's 145 years old?

Not confirmed I presume. Guinness world record is still held by 122 year old woman. Also one would expect some outliers.

What about the Indonesian man who's 145 years old?

All that plastic rubbish is not collected into a huge floating island, nor does it look at all impressive on photos (which is why there are none in the articles). It isn't clumped together - it's more like flecks of plastic floating in a soup.

That does not lessen the problem. There's still a vast amount of debris out there, just spread out a lot, over multiple areas. And any plastics that do break down form "microplastics" that have now found their way into more than a quarter of fish sold in Indonesia and China.

> In truth, anyone who has enough money and/or power gets to circumvent the law easier than poor people or average Joes.

True. Tony Blair, Jack Straw and George W aren't up on war crimes for what they did in Iraq for the same reason Jack Straw gave Augusto Pincochet a get out of jail free card. Powerful do whatever the fuck they want. Little people go before the firing squad.
 
  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36738086 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/11/tony-blair-prosecution-war-crimes-hague-geneva-pillage-economy-iraq-chilcot http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/02/outrage-as-war-crimes-prosecutors-say-tony-blair-will-not-be-inv/ http://www.globalresearch.ca/iraq-why-no-chilcot-report-in-the-us-tony-blair-is-guilty-of-war-crimes-what-about-george-w-bush/5537806 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/06/iraq-war-inquiry-chilcot-tony-blair-prosecute http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/07/left-should-stop-calling-tony-blair-war-criminal-and-move

Believe it or not, in the last few days...

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

Yes, even the tides.

He is assailed by rumours that he is an alcoholic. So he gives a lunchtime interview to an journalist. During the lunch he eats a salad, and drinks 4 glasses of champagne. Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

Not someone whose opinion is worth anything.

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

And SHUT UP about Jewish treatment of Arabs until you've cleaned up your own abattoir.

Note the response: 'I'm sure there's more to this story...' will not be consistent with your critiques of Israel.

They've since reinstated the photo.

Meanwhile, isn't Finland actually just mailing everyone a check for X? Or am I confusing that with some different Scandi plan?

You are quite the idiot, aren't you:

The income would be unconditional and would not involve being means-tested for benefits. It would replace part of Finland's social security net. ....But those in the project who do earn a wage would pay the money back through increased income tax.

Do you see that? "It would replace part of Finland's social security net."

What you are confusing is your own imagination for facts. Perhaps you should stop treating Fox news as an authoritative source?

Some officials in the European Union (EU) want the United Kingdom (UK) to invoke article 50 of the Lisbon treaty before beginning any negotiations. The Lisbon treaty amended the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The TEU and TFEU form the constitutional basis of the EU. The UK agreed to the Lisbon treaty when their house of commons debated and passed it on Jan. 21st, 2008.

Invoking article 50 of the Lisbon treaty simply means that the UK would be officially notifying the EU of their intention to leave the EU. The UK and EU would then have up to 2 years to negotiate the UK leaving the EU. The EU council could extend this 2 year deadline if an extension was agreed to by the UK. Once invoked they would be automatically not in the EU, which just means not subject to the TEU and TFEU treaties, after 2 years if no agreement could be met. If the UK changed their mind and wanted to cancel the leaving process then they would have to invoke article 49 during that 2 year period.

References:
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/w...
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal... (consolidated copy of TEU and TFEU which includes the Article 50 mentioned above)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

[citation needed]

Are you fucking kidding me? Try reading an actual news source.

Try here, for instance:

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

You know, for example.

And what you want is that only those with the "correct" opinions are allowed to speak at all. That includes critics of certain religions, certain political viewpoints or just anyone who has wrongthink.This is the sort of thing I'm talking about.

The British government disagrees with you:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-1...

So do others:
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

Anywhere, where's the fucking justice in the US court and prison system these days?

Gee, it's almost like women just aren't interested in the tech fields and there just aren't qualified female applicants out there.

But that can't be true, because that would be admitting that there are innate differences between the sexes and that's just not PC to talk about.

There's enough evidence that there are innate differences between the sexes. Some of it is from socialization, some of it is genetic, some of it is epigenetic. We can only affect the first of those three factors.

I don't see them calling for an end to economic discrimination against left-handed people, even though it's easy to see ho's left-handed.

In this paper, I argue that the phenomenon of handedness can provide insight into some of the issues surrounding economists’ recent exploration of early biological and environmental influences on people’s long-run outcomes. I review prior research showing that left- and right-handed individuals have different brain structures, particularly with regard to language processing. Using fivedatasets from the United States and the United Kingdom, I show that, consistent with prior research, both maternal left-handedness and poor infant health increase the likelihood of a child being left-handed. Thus, handedness can be used to explore the long-run effects of differential brain structure generated in part by genetics and in part by poor infant health.

Lefties exhibit economically and statistically significant human capital deficits relative to righties, even conditional on infant health and family background. Compared to righties, lefties score a tenth of a standard deviation lower on measures of cognitive skill and, contrary to popular wisdom, are not overrepresented at the high end of the distribution. Lefties have more emotional and behavioral problems, have more learning disabilities such as dyslexia, complete less schooling, and work in occupations requiring less cognitive skill. Differences between left- and right-handed siblings, which offer a way of controlling for qualities of family upbringing, are similar in magnitude. Interestingly, lefties with left-handed mothers show no cognitive deficits relative to righties. Some of these facts have been documented previously, though not across the range of datasets used here.

Lefties also have 10–12percent lower annual earnings than righties, roughly equivalent to the return to a year of schooling in these samples. A large fraction of this gap can be explained by observed differences in cognitive skills and emotional or behavioral problems. Lefties work in more manually intensive occupations than do righties, further suggesting that their primary labor market disadvantage is cognitive rather than physical. This paper is the first to document these patterns

The FBI busted Russian sleeper agents using the WiFi across the food-court trick.

As such, I don't think the WiFi across the food-court would help the DNC.

See the story. There are many articles on the cell. Only a few mention the WiFi link. Quite a few debate whether the agents were actually sleeper agents.

I'm not saying conservatives are Nazis, just that National Socialism is an extreme form of many of the policies British conservatives support. May's immigration policy is a good example, and she demonstrated more than once she was willing to lie to demonize them and get her way ("catgate", for example). More generally, the Tory party's policy on immigration is "foreigners are the problem", as opposed to say Germany where they simply get on with dealing with it.

Again, speaking quite generally the conservative movement tends to be quite authoritarian in the UK. Strongly supporting the rule and application of law, and empowering the police and security services. Again, see May and her Snooper's Charter. Of course authoritarianism isn't unique to conservatism, I'm merely making the observation.

Here's that link for you: http://indy100.independent.co....

I think he was genuinely unaware of the source of the quote. Must have been a bit of shock.

1. So many people are over weight these days. Fat is unattractive therefore fat people will not have a lot of sex.

The attractiveness or not of fat has varied so much that it's pretty much certainly a cultural thing. And some people right in this culture find fat attractive. Just google "BBW" for some education (NSFW).

Using pornography terms as a gauge of male interest is a pretty weak metric of male sexual interests. A quick glance at this chart suggests that BBW doesn't even break the top 10. (hint it's teen, milf, and lesbian. Not a fatty in sight) http://indy100.independent.co....

2. Rape hysteria and the associated laws act as a disincentive.

What rape hysteria? Rape culture is where a rapist like Brock Turner gets a scant 6 months because the the judge says a prison sentence might have a bad impact on him.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=false+rape+news also see UVA's false rape article from the lovely Rolling Stone. In case that isn't enough for you, here's the FBI's own statistics saying rape has been in decline http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cj...

3. Men are being taught to be wimps, single mothers can't teach men how to be desirable.

I reject your ideas of what I should be.

Good for you, but it doesn't make them any less true.

7. The globalist propaganda says global warming and overpopulation is rampant, discouraging people from having children.

Yeah people never just screw for the hell of it. Only for kids. True story.

Do you have a point you're trying to make? You might be better able to formulate an argument with one ;)

8. Slutty women and their STD's, pregnancy scares and personal drama make a man think twice about chasing tail.

Wait slutty women (read: women actually happy to have sex) is a reason less sex is happening? WTF? More likely a lot of guys like you being a raging asshole to anyone who'll have sex with you is a reason you're not getting any.

See false rape hysteria above. Secondly, not all men are players nor do they want to be involved with easy access women. I find it hilarious you presume I want access to easy women (already married).

The bottom line? Dating is a buyer's market and the buyers are women. /em.

Not really, no. There's quite a bit of social pressure against it, but a lot of guys want to settle down and have kids. And of course women who want to sleep around (which is what people like you want) then get insulted and called sluts... by people like you. So that's a disincentive if ever there was one.

Your entire premise here doesn't make any sense. What do slutty women, settling down, and ad hominem have anything to do with men improving themselves to attract another partner?

TL;DR serviscope_minor's reply, "Wah! Someone said something that goes contrary to what I learned in my liberal arts classes!

So the best way to fix a broken EU is to leave it and still be beholden to its laws and regulations? Hurrrrrrrrrrr

Well hello there Mr Strawman. Perhaps you would be better off discussing your ideas with Mr Juncker?

"I assume everyone who disagrees with me is a racist. This makes it much easier for me to assume a moral high ground and dismiss their opinions and experiences out of hand without engaging." -everyone who voted to stay

I can see why you people do this. It's very easy and conveinient!

Oh go for crowd pleasing upvote clicking, social justice easymode retort shy of any actual facts. Sir, take your '"you people" and feck off!

Any campaign run on Xenophobia, fear of immigrants and refugees is racist and since the vote the country as enjoyed a huge surge of racially motivated incidents, as if this vote has given license to be a dick.
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
https://www.theguardian.com/co...
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix...
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.u...

Many law enforcement leaders are acting as if no crimes can be solved unless all cell phones are made more vulnerable.

What a great idea.... weaken everyone for a few rare cases.

It seems to me that encryption is increasingly being used as a smokescreen for law enforcement incompetence. There are reports that one of the killers of the French priest earlier this week was not only on a watch list but was actually wearing an electronic ankle tag.

That is eerily like the murder of British soldier Lee Rigby in London in 2013. The official government report into the killing found that:

"...the two killers had been investigated seven times by different agencies and that MI5 cancelled surveillance of one of the murderers, Michael Adebolajo, just a month before the attack."

Perhaps if the law enforcement agencies focused on making better use of the information they already have, rather than trying to erode everyone's privacy, they might be more successful.

No, it is not insane at all. In fact, it is most logical, and it worked. As long as we keep it up, Russia will never be a real threat. That is something I'm sure the Europeans can appreciate. Whether they do or not, is another story.

The UK's new Prime Minister will protect us!

Which is why here in the UK I'm allowed to draw two figures engaged in sexual intercourse, yet if I add a speech bubble to one saying "hi, I'm 8 years old" then I am now guilty of child pornography. Reference.

More reading. And here.

The companies in question have all failed to pay their taxes according to EU standards. EU won't allow American multinationals to operate tax free. Sorry, there are no free rides.

Charming.

Always know I am doing something right when it gets ACs all worked up.

BTW Merkel's popularity is on the upswing again, your welcome.

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

You'll find out in the press. That's what the press is there for. And the more transparent a project is, the easier it is to find out whether it does something else than it claims it does. TOR, being a true open source project, is a very transparent project.

The problems with encryption standards recently show that the fact that something is completely open in it's resulting code doesn't mean it's transparent about how it got there. People with good will are needed. When it comes to the media, you need to understand that they are under the control of coroprate psychopaths who are trying to destroy the peaceful post-war settlement worldwide. Do not expect them to help.

When Farage himself spoke about the money to be saved by leaving the EU, he gave a 34 million a day figure, which is 238m a week, 32% less than what Vote Leave claimed.

Actually that is still a lie. To get to it you have to count UK's contribution before the "special" rebate and before any subsidies and other money the EU pays TO the UK. In balance (of course before all intangible or not easily calculated benefits that the UK gets from the extra market access) the UK pays the EU 90M/week.

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

You posted the exact same link I did, and it supports my position not yours. Nowhere in the 59 second video does Farage say "its not 350 million, in fact its MORE". He says 34m a day, 10b a year.

Is it too much to ask that a post about fact checking get its facts right?

The "350m to the NHS" billboards were created by the Vote Leave campaign.

Nigel Farage was not part of that organization, he joined the separate Leave.EU organization.

When Farage himself spoke about the money to be saved by leaving the EU, he gave a 34 million a day figure, which is 238m a week, 32% less than what Vote Leave claimed.

In the video, Farage also says the money saved should be spent on both schools and hospitals, as opposed to all of it going to the NHS.

Blaming Farage for lying for things said by Vote Leave is like blaming Bernie Sanders for things Hillary Clinton said. They are roughly on the same side, but they are not the same people, and do not support the exact same policies.

There's no faux fairness here, I'm not trying to be fair, I am openly against the UK leaving the EU, because it appears to me that leaving has no merits whatsoever. I would like to hear any you can think of.

You know that it's always easier to maintain the status quo, and after all the controversy and hand-wringing since the referendum, you know a second one would favor remaining.

True. The mistake has been realized, a taste of the consequences has been had, and the UK's public would like to undo this mistake. You'd prefer to bind them to it against their will, I presume.

And if you're really a patriotic Brit, have a little faith in your fellow Brits

I am not, and those Brits just demonstrated horrendous decision-making skills, so my faith in them is low right now.

For the good of Europe, Britain needs to return to a position of leadership and strength, and for that it needs real sovereignty.

Ah so this is the imperialist nostalgia I've heard so much about, first time I've seen it myself. Britain was only ever a superpower thanks to colonialism. Unless you think you can give that a second try, you'll have to accept that Britain is a relatively small country with no notable abundance of natural resources and as such it will never be a superpower comparable to the US, China, Russia, or arguably the EU you just left.

I've asked this to other Leave supporters: is there something special about the EU's trade and travel agreements that causes them to strip the UK of its sovereignty, and if not, will the UK have to sever all others as well? Will you have to refrain from forming any new ones?

And for the good of its own citizens, it needs to control its borders and immigration--or would you have more foreign Muslims running sex slave enclaves where even your own police will not venture

Still trying to make Cameron choke on his porridge?

or more cleaver-wielding maniacs chopping up people in the streets and boasting red-handed to the cameras?

Murderous madmen who chop people up in the streets and boast to the cameras come in all flavors, the last one I can think of killed Jo Cox and was 100% homegrown. And now your new leaders are struggling to find a way to have their cake and eat it too - regardless of whether the UK is in the EU or not, putting any immigration restrictions in place has roughly the same effect on trade with the EU.