Slashdot Mirror

Obligatory Lenny reference:
http://www.independent.co.uk/l...

We should really be using machine learning to create the ultimate anti telemarketeer chatbot. On the other hand, if there is one set of interactions that would drive AI to want to destroy humanity, it is this one.

... you see under my dash isn't really the maintenance port. The real one was unscrewed and stuffed up into the wiring harness. The one you are plugging your laptop into is a modified USB killer.

I've heard something similar proposed several times, for example Airbus Patent Shows Modular, Removable Aircraft Cabins, and the same issues are discussed every time.

The primary driving factor in the design of passenger aircraft in recent decades has been getting the cost per passenger down, so a solution against which can be said "the whole obsolete airport and airline infrastructure must be rebuilt" has pretty much zero chance of happening, since that would be somewhat expensive.

As far as the safety aspect, the idea of having a detachable passenger compartment that can separately parachute-land in the event of a disaster is also not new, and the obvious issues mentioned in that article seem to apply here also. Big increase in cost to achieve a questionable and at best marginal overall safety improvement in what is already the safest for of transport is just dumb.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad to see people working on this kind of thing, and I don't want to be that guy that dismisses every futuristic conceptbecause of a few practical obstacles, but I do wish tech journalists would present such things in a more realistic way. Lines like "... and his team are preparing to build a small-scale Clip-Air prototype. They have already initiated some contacts with the aerospace industry" tries to make it sound like this is something on the path to possibly being implemented, whereas the reality is "contacts with the aerospace industry" might not mean much at all.

He's right, the Leave EU campaign was based on lies and half-facts.
And immigration was one central theme and lie, along with the lie that £350 million will go towards the NHS.

The petition was actually set up several weeks before the referendum by someone on the leave side... http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

The UK very much was and is part of the EU.

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

We are on that list. Because we are a member state of the european union.

Or read this, from the UK newspaper The Independent:
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

"Britain can restrict migration from non-EU countries but is bound by European treaties and European law to accept migrants from other member states. Hence, the Brexiteersâ(TM) claim that we have âoelost control of our bordersâ and can only regain control of them if we leave the EU."

We _absolutely_did_not_ exempt ourselves from the EU definition of "freedom of movement", which is a component of the Single Market. EU citizens have freedom of movement into the UK as required by the Single Market.

We merely did not join the Schengen agreement. So we do not have a passportless border with Europe; we are not inside the continuous visa zone established as the Schengen Area.

But again: Schengen is not an immigration treaty. It is a visa zone. It does not redefine 'freedom of movement'. Membership of it does not change immigration rules for those states. The Schengen Area is not the border of the EU.

'Freedom of movement' -- the EU definition that dates back to the 1950s -- _does_not_refer_to_mere_travel_. It refers to the right to move your entire family as you move freely from job to job.

Stop reading "freedom of movement" as "freedom of passportless travel". That is not what the term means in the context of the Single Market. (And it does not apply to you as a non-EU citizen; Schengen is the only bit that does). It is not relevant in the Brexit debate. The right to remain and work is.

Really. Your interpretation is irrelevant and wrong. When the UK leaves the EU, many EU migrants in the UK will need a specific, separate assurance that they have a right to remain. The reason they need this is because we will leave the treaty giving them the right to live here. THAT is what freedom of movement is about.

SUN also seems to disagree with your view (now it does, it was the prominent proponent of leave): http://indy100.independent.co....

You do understand the difference between laws and regulations, right? http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

I presume you'll be demanding an end to the House of Lords at some point then given that that's even less democratic than the EU. A lot of billionaires are very pleased judging by the gloating in the press. I wonder what would happen to Sunderland if Nissan decided to relocate to the EU. This it's pretty funny as well. Principles can be wrong, but either way you can't eat them or live in them or wear them.

Part of the problem is when people won't see through the lies.

From TFA:

"What is the EU?" and "What happens if we leave the EU?" The former was the second top UK question on the EU after the results were officially announced.

Seriously, shouldn't they have been asking this before they voted?

If you think that's bad, read this and weep; "Leave voter regrets voting Leave when he realises it means we're now Leaving"

Yes, people who voted Leave have been on British television saying how shocked and worried they are that Britain is actually leaving the EU. "I just assumed we would stay in and my vote wouldn't matter!", they said. You couldn't make it up.

I suspected that Putin is funding many of the nationalist right wing groups in Europe. In other words, he likes stirring the shit. Brexit doesn't benefit the UK or Europe or even the US. It doesn't help when austerity is punishing the working class all across Europe and their voices are being ignored. It makes them easy marks for nationalist and right wing groups and con men. As the UK begins to negotiate its exit the EU will play hardball because if they make concessions, other countries might bolt too. A disunited Europe is exactly what Putin craves for. And if the US chooses the wrong president, it won't be their to help hold Europe together.

On a separate but related note: Texas secessionists are smart enough to understand what Brexit is and have been emboldened by it. Expect to hear more about Texit if Hillary becomes president.

There is more thorough analysis available, which basicly states, that the groups Remain and Leave have very distinct properties.

Remainers are younger than 45, live in large towns and have an university degree or are students at an university.

Leavers are older than 45, live in rural and small town regions, mainly in the East and North of England and in Central Wales, and have no university degree.

In general, Remainers are profiting or hope to profite from Globalization and free movement, because they are young, well educated and live close to the economic centers. Leavers are much older, less well educated and live in regions which are hard hit by globalization and are in a long economic downturn. They were children or young adults, when UK joined the EU, and they feel they never got anything back during their lifetime, while all the profits from the economic cooperation went somewhere else.

I think you're only partly correct. There is definitely an age divide issue, but it is being seen more as the Baby Boomers final "fsck you" to the Millenials. The Baby Boomers are mostly retired, or close to retirement, had good "jobs for life" with good pension plans during the economic boom years, own their own homes (bought when property was cheap) and often investment properties too. So they are pretty well insulated from any negative fallout from Brexit

I'd say David Cameron is now regretting blocking a move to allow 16 and 17 year olds to vote in the referendum.

There is more thorough analysis available, which basicly states, that the groups Remain and Leave have very distinct properties.

Remainers are younger than 45, live in large towns and have an university degree or are students at an university.

Leavers are older than 45, live in rural and small town regions, mainly in the East and North of England and in Central Wales, and have no university degree.

In general, Remainers are profiting or hope to profite from Globalization and free movement, because they are young, well educated and live close to the economic centers. Leavers are much older, less well educated and live in regions which are hard hit by globalization and are in a long economic downturn. They were children or young adults, when UK joined the EU, and they feel they never got anything back during their lifetime, while all the profits from the economic cooperation went somewhere else.

I think you're only partly correct. There is definitely an age divide issue, but it is being seen more as the Baby Boomers final "fsck you" to the Millenials. The Baby Boomers are mostly retired, or close to retirement, had good "jobs for life" with good pension plans during the economic boom years, own their own homes (bought when property was cheap) and often investment properties too. So they are pretty well insulated from any negative fallout from Brexit

I'd say David Cameron is now regretting blocking a move to allow 16 and 17 year olds to vote in the referendum.

http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
Remain has taken 96 per cent of the vote in the EU referendum in Gibraltar, the first area to declare.
More than 19,300 people there voted for Remain compared to just over 800 for Leave.

What this law is designed to do (and needs to be done in Vancouver BC, Seattle WA, Portland Oregon, and San Francisco California) is stop people from hoarding property from the people who live in the city and need that property.

The obvious solution to a shortage of housing is to BUILD MORE HOUSING. Last year, SF rejected 95% of all building permit requests, and most people don't even bother to submit a request. Despite soaring demand, the number of new housing units is near zero. So the result is high prices. Duh. NYC and other cities are not much better. The problem is driven by NIMBY and BANANA voters. It is absurd to blame this on Airbnb.

You're missing the point. The issue is _not_ a genuine shortage of residential housing. The issue is speculators gobbling up residential properties and turning them into permanent short-term rentals via Airbnb and similar web sites. This artificially reduces the stock of available residential property for people who actually live and work in the city and need a full-time home; and it drives up the prices/rental of the properties that remain.

This kind of legislation is becoming increasingly common here in Europe too. It's still perfectly legal to rent out your spare bedroom via Airbnb; but not an entire property that you don't actually live in yourself. And most people are fine with that. The only people complaining are the ones who were trying to create short-term rental empires.

There are plenty of other options for tourists and business travelers who just need somewhere to sleep and shower for a week or two. It's about prioritising people who live, work and pay their taxes locally, over folks just passing through and property speculators. And rightly so. Even Airbnb says it's about people "sharing their own homes", not running a full-time rental business.

Also, your premise is flawed. More guns = more murder. https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Have you actually read the paper in your first link? Here's data from their Table 2:

Gun ownership 1.009 (1.004, 1.014) .001 For each 1 percentage point increase in proportion of household gun ownership, firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9%
Percentage Black 1.052 (1.037, 1.068) .001 For each 1 percentage point increase in proportion of Black population, firearm homicide rate increased by 5.2%
Gini coefficient 1.046 (1.003, 1.092) .037 For each 0.01 increase in Gini coefficient, firearm homicide rate increased by 4.6%
Violent crime rate 1.048 (1.010, 1.087) .013 For each increase of 1/1000 in violent crime rate, firearm homicide rate increased by 4.8%
Nonviolent crime rate 1.008 (1.003, 1.013) .002 For each increase of 1/1000 in nonviolent crime rate, firearm homicide rate increased by 0.8%

Well, the proportion of households with firearms has been debated ( http://dailycaller.com/2015/03... ). That article suggests that the proportion of firearms owners has been either constant or increased. Which, according to the study you linked, SHOULD increase firearms deaths, all other things being equal. Of course, things are not equal. But consider the changes in America over the past ~10 years:

-reduced economic security
-persistent high unemployment
-amplified racial tensions
-increased use/abuse of prescription drugs
All of these should ALSO contribute to higher firearms deaths. And yet the numbers have declined. How to do you reconcile this?

Some studies suggest that ownership rates are declining, yet firearms continue to sell because existing owners are stockpiling. ( http://www.independent.co.uk/n... ) A doubling of firearms from 4 to 8 is a huge proportional increase, but we haven't seen a commensurate rise in violent deaths within this gun-owning demographic, which is disproportionately rural, middle-class, white men. ( http://www.pewresearch.org/fac... ) How do you explain this, given your assertion that more guns = more murder?

Let's concede that in an absolutely literal sense, firearms and deaths are positively correlated....in the way that 0.00001 is technically a positive non-zero number.

From the table above, income inequality has 5x as much of an impact on violent deaths as firearms proliferation. Same for the pre-existing violent crime rate.

Taking steps to fix society's other ills will do more to reduce the violent death rate than purely controlling the number of firearms. Given that time and labor are limited resources, allocating them efficiently to solve problems is paramount. If the weapons proliferation alone is a small fraction of the cause of deaths in America as I've demonstrated above, then focusing our efforts here is a misallocation of our energy.

And this doesn't even touch on the logistical difficulty/inefficiency of trying to collect 300 million+ weapons from a country the size of a continent. If the US's War on Drugs is anything to go by, expect an abject failure in a weapons crackdown.

You joke, but that's actually a more coherent plan than half the "Leave" campaign can put forward for real.

The quality of the "debate" around the EU referendum has been one of the most depressing things I think I've ever seen in our political system, and that's saying something.

I've been following the Brexit debate and It seems to me that most of the people being polled by TV crews just talk about 'feelings', they 'feel' they are getting a bad deal from the EU, they 'feel' Britain is carrying the rest of the EU financially, nobody seems to have bothered to check. Then there is a whole legion factual errors like blaming the EU for things the UK government screwed up. Things like failing to fully exploit the latitude given by EU rules to crack down on benefits scammers, the education system which was to a large extent laid waste by UK govt. mismanagement and which is also why UK businesses like importing well educated workers from places like Poland. I fail to see why immigration is a such a horrendous problem in the UK when unemployment among immigrants is lower than among native Brits, EU immigrants are on average better educated and commit less benefits fraud. Attacking foreigners is just a way of diverting people's attention from the failures of the UK political elite like fucking up education. Then there is bullshit like the UkIP claim that 29 million Romanians and Bulgarians will be coming over to the UK courtesy of the EU, 29 million is actually more than the combined population of those two countries or the 350 million pounds sent to Brussels that turned out to be about a third of that amount on closer inspection. I spent some time this weekend watching Nigel Farage debating on IQ^2 (IIRC) against Nick Clegg. Farage was making outlandish claims like "The EU plans to set up an EU army, navy and airforce the day after the Brexit vote!!" If I was Clegg I'd show up to any debate against Nigel Farage with a big old handheld sign that reads [Citation needed] and waive it around whenever Farage opens his mouth and lets fly a totally invented factoid which, on average, seems to be every third sentence that leaves his lips. Apparently, when debating these days, it is more important to spew totally unfounded claims, clown around and be entertaining than actually out-debating your opponent.

That might be the case where you are, but many countries have functioning taxi industries which are not monopolised, provide good service, and are safe.

Not in my experience. And, in any case, you leave out one important factor: price. Taxi monopolies may well serve the interests of the well off who can afford to take the government licensed operators, but that doesn't mean that they are good for society.

I guess someone pretending to be a doctor and selling Draino as a health tonic is just engaging in "voluntary exchanges of goods and services" and should be left alone...

That person would be guilty of criminal fraud even in the complete absence of medical licensing.

What you should be more worried about is the hundreds of thousands of people in the US alone that are killed by licensed doctors every year. It's just as bad, if not worse, in the UK. And medical licensing is in large part responsible for the absence of effective control mechanisms for preventing this.

Yes, really. So you can buy a rifles with a Bible verse on it. That is completely equivalent to Muslims tossing gays off buildings or Iran executing gays. Yes, completely equivalent! Why, put a Bible verse on your gun and you're as bad as burning 19 women to death because they wouldn't let you rape them.

Go up to a Christian in Rome and state you're gay. The worst that will happen is they'll tell you you're a sinner and you need to repent or go to hell. Now do the same in Mecca, and the Government will try you and sentence you to execution. Yes, I can see your point. A verse on a firearm is 100% equivalent with how you'll be treated by the rest of Islam for coming out as gay!

Not really.

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

I'm British myself. We stopped listening a long time ago. Nobody really protested.

Given that vast portions of Morse usage are nothing more than an emergency signal that in most areas of the world won't be heard anyway, only 180 years after we started using it, in practical terms it's dead and means nothing. It's certainly no good as a communications medium any more if we you have to check the map to see if anyone's listening, and it won't be long before NOBODY anywhere is listening.

It doesn't turn them into predators, it just attracts them as predators.

Death metal music attracts sharks, documentary crew finds out

> My only question is---if Trump is so racist, sexist, and prone to violent reactions--why hasn't that popped up in his past?

Like his first wife saying he raped her? (and his lawyer defended him by saying it is not rape if she's his wife)
Yes she stopped calling it rape, but she has not recanted her description of events which are clearly rape.

Or when the feds sued him for not renting to minorities?

Companies have grown very obnoxious: Samsung's TV which listens to what is said in your home so it can deliver targeted ads http://money.cnn.com/2015/02/0... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/tech... and Microsoft's Windows 10 which spies on everything you do http://bgr.com/2015/07/31/wind... http://www.independent.co.uk/l...

Unlikely people would buy a Samsung's TV if they knew about this, but Microsoft has a virtual monopoly we can't avoid. Time for the FTC to stop these repugnant companies for abusing their dominant positions.

It's almost as if they have no fucking idea what they're talking about.

Actually, they often don't. :D

Despite the national outcry, the UK already has these high-density farms anyway. And they exist because they aren't illegal. Europe is not some magical place where companies pass over new efficiencies because they aren't for the greater public good - Europe is just generally quicker with bringing in regulations to prevent it.

It amazes me that our so called analysts then laugh at Russia for what they sometimes called its "rustbucket military hardware."

That was until [in Syria], it delivered a shock to us us in the west, with its successive wins on the battlefield, despite having less hardware compared to the west's.

Similar levels of unstable individuals?
Considering that "police officer" ranks in the top ten jobs for the most psychopaths, I don't trust your assessment.
Citation: http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
http://time.com/32647/which-pr...

For most types of cases, the plaintiff can file either in their local district jurisdiction, the defendants local jurisdiction or, if it crosses state lines, in federal district court. Again, normally, the defendant then has the option to file a motion to change the jurisdiction if they don't like it and the judge in the case will then rule on a change of venue. Because of a "glitch" in patent litigation law (whether this "glitch" is accidental or not is another matter), the normal rules don't apply. The plaintiff can file in any district court and as such, patent trolls shopped around for the most favorable district there is. The judge is under no requirement to allow a change of venue and it appears that this judge almost never approves such a request. He's also extremely biased towards patent plaintiffs and his court receives considerable revenue from these lawsuits compounding a potential conflict of interest. In short, the whole system is broken. If you're in Europe, take note that the US government, or more to the point, our corporations, are trying to force our patent system on you using the TTIP.

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

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/26/...
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

Yeah, show how it is done Australia and Venezuela!

The medieval period ("dark ages") was not dark.

The ‘Dark Ages’ were a lot brighter than we give them credit for

So you would approve of a return to those bright days?

The ‘Dark Ages’ were a lot brighter than we give them credit for

John Whittingale is an old friend of Rupert Murdoch.

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

Right now sex change / gender reassignment ops are a bit of a trick. Now... if one could swap heads between two people who identify as the opposite gender, imagine how transgender people in Alabama will be treated. The birth certificate is for the body (the genital area specifically), not the head. If it were for the head this debates would even exist in the first place.

At the Correos de Cuba and the hotels, you have access to practically all news websites such as lemonde.fr, bbc.com, El Nuevo Herald (a Miami-based Spanish-language daily) and even to dissident sites. This is also the case for government employees with a computer and Internet access.

“I haven’t opened Granma for years,” says Luis, who works for the culture ministry. “I get my news from Google and the BBC website and I have never had any problem getting to websites operated by government opponents.
In fact, of all the news stories I wanted to read on the Internet, only one has been blocked.

North Korea:
I don't know what really happens in N. Korea. All I know that I hate Kim Jr Il hair style, his chubby face the same as I hate gangnam-style. But, while some N. Korea stories seem to be a propaganda's productions, the horrible stories about S. Korea are real: they covered mass killings, abuse, for "preparation for Olympic 1988", or disable-slaves in salt farms, which:

Although 50 island farm owners and regional job brokers were indicted, national police say no local police or officials will face punishment, despite multiple interviews showing some knew about the slaves and even stopped escape attempts.

Vietnam:
this country just got out of wars in 1991.

In our system of Cartel Capitalism - there really isn't a difference between the government and the large companies that buy influence.

That's just populist mind-killing tripe.

There's a significant difference. The US Gov has to pretend to follow the US Constitution (don't forget that many of those working in Gov still believe that too) and other "nice stuff". The Large Corps don't.

Where's your 2nd amendment in Disneyland? Where's your freedom of speech in Facebook? Good luck using the Freedom of Information Act on Apple. And you can't even pretend to vote for/out the CEO of Monsanto.

Your beloved Bill of Rights and Constitution may become more irrelevant once you stupid folk get the Small Government many of you keep asking for. Obsessing over quantity instead of quality.

Anyway back to the topic: http://www.independent.co.uk/l...
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/...
The tech industry seems rather fond of Hillary Clinton.

See also: http://gizmodo.com/facebook-em...

I'll just leave my usual links here. You've probably seen most of them before

In Praise of Idleness, essay
A town in Canada tried it.
Humans Need Not Apply
Ooh, a new one. Canada is going large-scale now? linky
Sweden is starting to take it seriously as a political issue. linky

Solar may be in some contexts cheaper, but that may not continue for the long-term. Solar power experiences value deflation, where the more solar power there is, the less it is worth (because unlike conventional power sources, it all peaks at the same time). This can lead to serious limits on how much solar a given area is likely to have http://www.vox.com/2016/4/18/11415510/solar-power-costs-innovation. Either the cost per a panel needs to go down by a lot, or the storage and transmission costs need to improve by a lot. The last link includes an estimate that in order to really get solar to succeed one needs an approximate cost of around $0.25 per watt. If one improves batteries and transmission that may not be necessary, especially if we have enough other sources of power, such as wind, nuclear, hydroelectric (which unfortunately has probably gotten close to its peak in much of Europe and North America), tidal, and geothermal. Nuclear is going to definitely be a part of any long-term solution, but one has silly things now like Sweden trying to give up all fossil fuels at the same time they phase out nuclear power http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/sweden-first-fossil-fuel-free-country-in-the-world-a6684641.html and they call that "green."

At least in most places, we're very far from where solar can be even without improved transmission and storage. In much of the US, you can get home solar and have it pay back in a few years. The solar panel cost guide is a good place to start http://www.solarpanelscostguide.com/. Or, if you want to help other people out while helping the environment you can donate to Everybody Solar http://www.everybodysolar.org/ which helps get solar panels for non-profits like schools, homeless shelters and science museums. Every little bit helps.

Also, deflategate, he got the ideal gas law all wrong, and made an ass out of himself claiming that the ball couldn't have lost pressure.

http://physicsbuzz.physicscent... http://www.digitaltrends.com/h...

Yeah, so?
Hawking has made mistakes http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/stephen-hawking-admits-the-biggest-blunder-of-his-scientific-career-early-belief-that-everything-8568418.html,
Einstein has too http://discovermagazine.com/2008/sep/01-einsteins-23-biggest-mistakes,
and so has Newton.

Most famous scientists have till their death defended a claim that was shown wrong long before.

I don't know about you, but I'm generally in favour of interested tapirs.

As for Boaty McBoatface, surely we all knew from the start that wouldn't be the name? They never promised (or even suggested) that the name with most votes would actually be used. At least it gave us Trainy McTrainface and Horsey McHorseface. So there's that.

SK is definitely better off, but the difference is not as dramatic as you have been led to believe.

Here's an example of the difference. I think it shows just how false your assertion is.

Neat how the RWNJ's are ignoring the part where that's talking about prosecuting companies

Distinction without difference. The First Amendment protects us all. Of course, the totalitarian assholes seeking to prosecute opinions would start with the most prominent targets. But they'll get to the less known eventually. Right here is another such asshole, allowing his opponents to hear his sacred truth only once. If they aren't convinced the first time, they are "deliberately lying" and should be prosecuted: "why WOULDN'T we?" — he passionately asks.

What would such bigotry achieve? The serene unanimity as in Saddam Hussein's Iraq and today's North Korea, that's what. Scratch a "climate alarmist", and you'll find a Che Guevara T-shirt underneath...

Same as the cigarette and asbestos industries spent decades denying that their products were inherently harmful.

Cigarettes caused discernible harm. Perhaps, asbestos did too (if you snorted it). No real harm has been caused by "deniers" — whether they are right or wrong. And even Mr. Nye is not accusing them of such — only of hurting his feelings: "hurting my quality of life as a public citizen".

Look, Denialists, lets make a deal: you guys can all move out to the Maldives.

The islands of Tasmania and Kodiak stopped being peninsulas only a few thousands years ago. Are you going to blame the early humans' burning fires for that?

Is it, perhaps, the fault of ancient Egyptians and Greek, that some of their cities are under the waters of Mediterranean? No? Why not? Surely plenty of contemporary priests blamed the populace's sins for angering the contemporary gods...

I find your attempts to blame Maldives' difficulties on me about as justified. Curiously, some alarmists have taken the same religious attitude too.

. . . . .this OTHER Slashdot headline on Federal Cybersecurity. Yep. Our vaunted Federal Cyber efforts are WORSE that pretty much everyone else, except maybe that guy who "rm -rf."-ed his hosting business. . . .

What do you think should happen to people who have knowingly endangered public safety because they were paid to repeat (and publish) lies?

Thank you for providing me with another exhibit. When your opponents are not merely wrong, but are enemies of the people, achieving 100% agreement becomes trivial. USSR, North Korea, Saddam Hussein's Iraq are all good examples of this serene unanimity.

A RICO investigation was conducted into the lies publicly told by cigarette companies

False. Tobacco companies got in trouble because their customers were disproportionally suffering of nasty diseases. Nothing of the kind can be demonstrated for "victims" of climate-skeptics.

Speech — including lies — is protected by the First Amendment. Keep your totalitarian hands off my Constitution, asshole.

Would you have accepted it if the AC cited The Independent?

Have a look at Trevor Phillips' bio - he was a Labour politician, running for Mayor of London. Granted, he wasn't too pally with Red Ken, but he's not exactly Nigel Farage.

And you think that's the most important criteria to use for determining who should use which bathrooms?

So you want this guy to use the women's restroom? That's the solution that makes sense to you?

Trump is a Nationalist. Sanders is a Socialist.

You can't have Socialism without Nationalism first because your weak borders will allow your country to be bled dry via invaders utilizing your social programs and not contributing as much to the economy.

So, what we need is Trump first, then a Sanders. Then we will have National Socialism. That's right, Hitler was basically just Trump & Sanders combined, and he really did nothing wrong. In fact, Syria, with its Social Nationalist party is being destroyed for the reason Germany was destroyed in WWII: Any country that frees itself from the usury of international banking and benefits their own people above the interests of international profiteers though implementation of both nationalism and socialism will be destroyed by the elite bankers who are the cause of every war. To say nothing of their media propagandists from the same "tribe" who reinforce the banker's interests.

Hmm, let's see: Holywood & news media run by Jews, international banking cartel also run by Jews... Bolshevik (Communist) regime over 80% controlled by Jews even though they made up 2% of the population back then (they killed 12 to 20 million Christians, but no Holywood tearjerkers about that), and make up the same small percentage of western nations today while still vastly overrepresented in politics, media, and banking. Israel being isolationist, requiring DNA matches for citizenship, having a huge wall to keep migrants out... meanwhile Jews are peddling the suicidal "pro-migrant" agenda to white countries, even though whites are only 8% of the world's population and their birth rates are in decline. No one is saying Africa or China needs to be more diverse, and their populations are out of control so why is it only white countries that need to be "diversified" or have their populations reduced to save the environment? Genocide is defined as purposefully changing the ethnic makeup of a nation by the UN and NATO... So why is genocide promoted to only countries with people of primarily European descent? Why do the Jews teach their toddlers to hate everyone else? Could it be they're pitting their enemies against each the other? Muslims vs Europeans?

How was it that in only 5 short years Hitler was able to turn the destitute and starving Germany into an economic power house that nearly conquered all of Europe? Do you see now why the same people who fear your freedom from their private centralized banking economic control continuously smear and destroy those who promote the basic common sense ideology that is so beneficial for humanity? No? Perhaps you still only get your information from those who have a vested interest to slander both Hitler and Trump, and think yourself educated on the issue?

If the things in this post challenge your beliefs, then you are the ignorant one. You won't be able to keep burring your head in the sand for long. When your neck is finally on the line, you'll see that you must fight the same war against the same foes that Hitler did. Even General Patton came to realize, "We fought the wrong enemy" after winning WWII against those who should have been our best allies. It's terrifying to think that you actually have an opinion about politics while remaining willfully ignorant and having such a one sided and slanted view of history. Here's some basic fact checking to get you started down the path of light.

If you think I'm spreading ignorance, then prove it. See the information in the links I've provided. Perhaps the "above it all" augment that "both sides are bad" is just propaganda to neuter your mind? Perhaps the slanted media has warped your view, and confused you into thin

Funny, me too, somewhat. The current neo-liberal trade project which can be basically stated as "hooray for large corporations and f*** the 'people' incessantly in every orifice" (TPP,TISA,TTIP etc) bring us alienation, shit jobs, degraded environment, copyright and IP madness all negotiated in secrecy: http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

I don't trust Trump, of course, plus he'll probably start WWIII and then say 'He started it' (of course, that will solve the trade problems, and similarly to post Black Death, labour will be at a premium, but that's probably not a good reason to have it?). But, Hillary (like Cameron and his friends, here in the UK) is bought and paid for, Trump, Sanders and Corbyn are not.

Some people want to find discrimination or outrage everywhere...

Yeah, the plight of the all-American worker having his government and economic prospects ruined by imaginary illegal voting. Its right up there with the back-breaking work required to keep the South's gerrymandering in a league of its own. Breaks my heart...

The dallasnews story is based on allegations made way back in 2007. How did those pan out?

People are looking for any opportunity to remove people with Latin- or black-sounding names from the voter rolls. Florida has experienced a rash of this form of disenfranchisement. The state of Florida claims there are many thousands of people illegally registered as voters, and yet they consistently do this based on misspelled names and such... as if their computers couldn't tell the difference. Its a pattern of intentional voter suppression. Just the number of citizens reporting disenfranchisement totally swamps the confirmed cases of voter fraud.

You may think voter IDs could solve these issues, but in reality it would just move the nature of the allegations to ID fraud. It would pit xenophobes against the ability of many citizens to even hold an ID. ...and it would. As a gay person, I see the issue through the Right's burning desire to exclude. There are always new tactics -- like the War On Drugs or "religious freedom of for-profit businesses" -- to try and preserve for the standard-bearers the luxury of choice: to pretend different people don't exist, or else intimidate and abuse them with impunity.

Since you're so dismissive about the studies on this subject, I'll leave it there.

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

Seems like Forbes is vastly underestimating the cost. That's just the plan clean up, the cost of decontaminating the surrounding area is separate.

Of course it's an estimate because no one has ever done this before, and we still don't know the exact state of the reactors. Planned operations like the ice wall and robotic inspection have been failing, meaning more money is needed.

It's likely that the compensation bill will rise too, as it's unlikely those affected towns will ever return to what they were like previously and residents will need on-going support for decades. The main lawsuits were only filed recently because they were waiting until the last minute to see what TEPCO offered voluntarily. There are also criminal prosecutions starting against TEPCO staff which are likely to affect the outcome of civil suits.