Slashdot Mirror

We have no measurements at all on what any sort of fake news could of did. You cannot compare a nebulous quantity like this.

Hmm, I suspect that advertisers would disagree with you. They spent lots of money, they want results. You may not trust them, but they do have measurements.

While we have real studies on the likely number of illegals who voted. Studies that show the numbers are in the hundreds of thousands to millions.

Oh really, and you can cite these studies? Sean Spicer couldn't. And I can find other reports that say numbers such as you and Trump claim are bogus.

Sorry, but actual prosecutions are so low, that you have to ask, if your allegations were true, why isn't anybody being charged? You know that does include Trump voters.

I'll believe you care when you get that woman charged. Absent that, I'll believe you don't even care.

Meanwhile, half of the votes in the recounts we did, in Hillary majority districts, could not even be recounted because of problems.

And these problems were? How many Trump votes were included? You know what I noticed about Michigan though?

2,279,543(DT) 2,268,839(HC)
2,564,569(BO) 2,115,256(MR)
2,872,579(BO) 2,048,639(JM)
2,479,183(JK) 2,313,746(GWB)

Hmm. Something odd about how the vote dropped precipitously in 2016. Perhaps you should explain that, instead of chasing a dubious phantom that is ENTIRELY the responsibility of the Republican state government. Because they could have improved the voting systems if they wanted, they could have managed any errors. Mysteriously, they instead chose to gerrymander the state.

And while I suspect you don't want to admit it, if you believe there are indeed millions of unlawful voters, the you can't trust ANY election returns, there are no legally elected officials anywhere.

That means we have an illegitimate government. At all levels. Federal, state, and local.

Good luck calling for all of them to be removed.

I doubt you have the integrity to try.

There's a bit more information about why "Dirac electrons" (electrons behaving relativistically instead of classically) are important for quantum computing here:

http://www.michigandaily.com/n...

A week or two ago, a bunch of countries signed an treaty that allowed for publishing materials for the disabled.

So now various groups like HathiTrust (who won their lawsuit by The Authors Guild) can now share their work with groups from other countries. Unfortunately, the treaty had been modified to exclude audio visual works.

It might be that individual countries still have laws that apply (eg, the US does, but they still might not've been in full compliance), but we don't yet have an international treaty for doing it. My suggestion would be to host the website in Antigua.

I can't argue about the security theater, obviously.

  On the subject of El Al, here's a bit more reading.

    2002 El Al LAX shooting is terrorism

    2002 Security guards on Israel's national airline El Al overpowered a man who tried to hijack a flight from Tel Aviv to Istanbul

    2006 El Al bombing foiled by German authorities

    2010 - Former head of El Al security says "... we have learned nothing from our past security breaches, including the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001." ... "We changed from FAA to TSA and guys with new uniforms. The only group being punished is the American traveler who must now endure longer lines."

    Shit. Even El Al says the TSA is dumb.

    But at least several contractors have made an awful lot of money in the process. Oh wait.. Our taxes are paying for that multi-billion dollar mistake. That was an estimated $6.9 billion estimate in 2010, and the number keeps climbing. But hey, it's the US budget. We can always burn up as much as we want, and raise the debt limit. I asked my bank, they said they wouldn't raise *my* debt limit, so I'm a bit confused how this whole thing works. Maybe I shouldn't have said I needed to raise it by $1.2 trillion.

I think the University of Michigan researchers have a rather different weapons platform in mind:

http://media.www.michigandaily.com/media/storage/paper851/news/2006/02/20/Science/Sharks.The.Initial.Frontier-1620047.shtml

There have been media studies that have shown that watching violence on television increases aggressiveness in the short and long term. This is not directly a study about video games, but it is counterintuitive to think that video games where you actually participate in onscreen violence would have a lesser effect than television.

At the very least it is a fact that kids will imitate violent behavior they see. This is the reason that you don't see cartoons anymore with Daffy Duck being shot in the face, Porky getting his head snapped in a suitcase, or Sylvester getting hit in the head with a frying pan by Tweetie Bird: Because kids did these things to their siblings after seeing it on television. Obviously a kid isn't going to have a laser gun or a katana or something like in a video game, but instead he's just going to whip a cup or rock at his brother and yell ZAP.

the game doesn't even have to be culturally unacceptable violence. Studies have shown that even things like watching a football game on television has the same effect. I'm not saying it's turning them into little killbots, but there is evidence that onscreen violence does increase aggressiveness.

When you say "worth it", presumably you mean "worth the cost". What cost?

How about, not worth the measly drop by $0.50USD/barrel according to USDOE? As well as the impact on wildlife, but more on that in a moment.

When was your last vacation in ANWR? How about your friends? Their friends? Anyone you've heard about in the news vacationing there? Anyone planning to vacation there?

Ah, I see. Land has no intrinsic value unless it makes for a good holiday. Interesting argument.

ANWR is a wasteland. It's only fit for mosquitoes and reindeer and the reindeer aren't particularly bothered by oil drilling.

How about the impact on polar bears, arctic foxes and the millions of migratory birds that you didn't mention? The drilling pipelines plus the roads would weave a network across the area. The caribou calving grounds are there as well, as you mentioned. Consider not only the impact of drilling, but other unforseen consequences. *cough*VALDEZ*cough*

No problem. Read this artcle There's plenty more on the net. Try Google.

yeah. That article itself is biased. For example, this quote:

33% of Fox viewers believed that the "U.S. has found Iraqi weapons of mass destruction" "since the war ended". (Compared with 23% for CBS, 20% for both CNN and NBC, 19% for ABC and 11% for both NPR/PBS)

that shows that Fox viewers are BETTER informed than viewers of other news services. You see, Iraq DID have WMDs and some of them have been found.

From this article:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation \archive\200602\NAT20060215c.html

Now, I know what you're thinking: "omfg that doesn't agree with what I want to believe therefore I will purge it from my memory." and that's cool. You go right ahead and do that. That will give me the chance to post this link again in the future.

And this there's this story:
http://apps.michigandaily.com/blogs/thepodium/?p=5 2

about how they found 500 or so chemical munitions in iraq - you know, WMDs. Now, I know what you're thinking, "omfg those are from before 1991 so therefore I will ignore this story" and that's cool, you go ahead and use that logic. Just like if you're on probation for armed robbery and they catch you with a gun, you can tell the judge you bought the gun before you were on probation so therefore it doesn't count.

Look, I don't care. The fact is, we've got a "respected" news service (CBS) where somebody actually sits down at a computer and types of a memo and prints it and then they try to pass that off as a 1950's memo about Bush. But you guys go on and on about how Fox news is bias. Whatever. It's obvious where the bias is.

Hey -- it's even better than you think. The alternative in that election was named "Peters." There were some pretty amusing headlines the next day (e.g., "Cox inches out Peters"), like this one.

Shit, mine took 10 years (lived in Ann Arbor for 9 of them). Some of us had to work our way through school.

What a great town, though. Although if I was back there now, I'd probably be about 400 pounds after this wireless access is activated. The opportunity to surf away the day while hanging out at Blimpy Burger? Yummmmmmmmmmm...

As a University of Michigan student, I always read these articles with a bit of skepticism. The Daily isn't exactly a reputable journal of opinion. After all, they still believe that academic integrity is a problem.

Students in the dorms also received this e-mail in January regarding the possible subpoena of file-sharer's identities.

In the past, the Vice-President of Student Affairs sent a notice to any students whose information was released under subpoena, explaining that the U was going to do so, and what the reasons were.

Students in the dorms also received this e-mail in January regarding the possible subpoena of file-sharer's identities.

In the past, the Vice-President of Student Affairs sent a notice to any students whose information was released under subpoena, explaining that the U was going to do so, and what the reasons were.

Alright, let's go through what you're claiming here:

You and I can both be arrested with no charges, no trial or no access to a lawyer on the mere unsubstantiated allegation that we are somehow linked to terrorism.

Simply untrue. No one has been arrested with no charges, no trial, or access to a lawyer. However, those who commit acts of war illegally against this nation are subject to trial under military jurisdiction. You may not like this, you may think this should change, but you can't claim that this is something new -- this practice has existed since the earliest days of this republic (as I mentioned above, presidents Madison and Jefferson both used it, for example -- but perhaps you will tell us that the author of the Constitution didn't know what it said), and has been repeatedly upheld by the Supreme Court.

What act of war have the thousands of people who have been disappeared commited?

And here you go off the deep end again. No one has been `disappeared'. Not one person. Much less `thousands'. If you want to claim that someone has, you will have to provide examples. Otherwise, you're just spouting hot air.

You, I and everybody else in the world is now subject to being taken away without charges and without recourse to the law.

Simply untrue. Show us a single instance where this has happened.

The mere allegation that I am in any way associated with terrorists allows the governemnt to take me away without any due process whatsoever.

Again, simply untrue. This is the third time you've repeated this claim in one post, but repetition is not proof.

I know at least one person through my father in law to whom this has happened.

``My roommate knows this guy, and like his girlfriend has this cousin, and like her friend heard that...''

That's your `evidence'?

There was the article about the Intel guy.

Maher Hawash (``the Intel guy'' you say, and then expect us to believe that you're familiar with the case) is being held as a material witness in an ongoing case, to testify before a grand jury. Beyond the obvious point that if he was `disappeared', you wouldn't know where he was (duh!), this is a perfectly legal procedure, and is certainly not something new (the Material Witness Statute is twenty years old).

Within a short time, Mr. Hawash will be called to testify to a grand jury, presumably about the $10,000 which he is alleged to have given to the `Global Relief Foundation', a front organization with ties to al Qaeda, which even the UN calls a front for terrorism.

As with any material witness, Mr. Hawash has full access to the courts to appeal his detention, and must be released as soon as his testimony is needed or if his testimony has not been needed within a certain time. He may also, of course, be charged with a crime before that time. In either case, to claim that a.) this is a new procedure, b.) that Mr. Maher has `disappeared', or c.) that he has no access to appeal his case is simply lying.

There are articles about the thousands who were tricked into showing up at INS centers and have now essentially vanished off of the face of the earth.

Again, nonsense. Not one person has `vanished' off the face of the earth. Some people who were here illegally have been deported when they showed up as asked to (not `tricked' as you allege). But perhaps you have a problem with this?

Look it up. Find a single scrap of evidence to contradict this.

Believe it or not, every random claim you make is not automati