Slashdot Mirror

Or one might get the impression that to criticize SJW stupidity is to burn karma by triggering a group that actively seeks to suppress speech they dislike.

Interesting how the post with the completely anecdotal rebuttal gets upmodded, seemingly oblivious of the events occuring at campuses like Evergreen college in Washington state, and the violent protests at Berkely to just name a few.

If the antics of anti-free speech SJW types on American campuses are going viral on social media and are making headlines on mainstream news, chances are good that foreign audiences will become aware of it and that reputation will be branded against campuses that aren't a hotbed of this kind of activity.

To curtail the continued rapid construction of coal fired power plants, strong action was taken in April of the same year by the National Energy Administration (NEA), which issued a directive curbing construction in many parts of the country

IOW, it was only for part of the nation, not for all. There is a reason why China will build so many.
Over all, 1,600 coal plants are planned or under construction in 62 countries, according to Urgewald’s tally, which uses data from the Global Coal Plant Tracker portal. The new plants would expand the world’s coal-fired power capacity by 43 percent.
And this is JUST China's building of new plants, of which 4/5 of these will be in CHINA.

Well, I can see why you continue to hide who you are. After all, your bosses in China have told you to NOT out yourself.

Here is an article that is less than 5 months old, and shows REAL numbers about what Xi/China are up to WRT building new coal plants. China is NOT cutting coal plants. They are growing them, but will pay each plant to run for less time, UNTIL the demand increases due to EVs.

These companies have a very narrow definition of employee quality that they peddle to insecure managers.

What they don't take into account is the influence their systems have on the level of 'psychological safety' that employees feel in organizations. The level to which they are willing to challenge dominant (but often wrong) ideas, or share new thoughts. In short, by over-measuring these systems actually limit the ability to innovate.

Ironically, one of the organizations that has pointed to psychological safety as the key factor for good teamwork is Google:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/0...

A good example of a company in this 'human risk management' field is Red Owl, which recently got bought by another risk management company, Forcepoint. Amongst other things, their software aims to weed out potential whistle blowers.

A concept I've been working on to help us talk about the long term issues at stake here is "Social Cooling". The website explains the large scale chilling effects which are created by our unprecedented ability and desire to manage risk.
https://www.socailcooling.com/

The "all whites are racist" stuff belongs to the lunatic fringe. "All whites are privileged" is what you're actually looking at, and that';s pretty much true.

The NYT run this horrible article a couple of days ago, though of course they'd be outraged if anyone run an article by a white person questioning whether his children could be friends with black people

Can My Children Be Friends With White People?

The irony is of course that the sort of people who write for the NYT are privileged. Not because of their race but because of their wealth and the fact that people like them have a monopoly of access to the media. Their sort of views are all over the place, and the views of people critical of them are completely purged out both old media - the NYT and the TV networks and new media - the Internet.

Without saying what you what question you want to answer

What is the best way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

Scaling up nuclear power is the best way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It was not a mistake for France to use nuclear. It was a mistake for Germany to stop using it. I do not know why you do not understand that. Germany picked coal over nuclear which is a grave mistake.

And comparing to Norway is simply moronic

Norway is the cleanest country in the world. 97% of their electricity is clean. See the chart half way down You will see Norway is 1st, Sweden(91%) is 2nd and France(89%) is 3rd. Not mentioned in the article is Iceland which is also very clean because they use geothermal. Not every country can build enough hydro or geothermal to power their society because of environmental concerns. Germany is really bad because they are only at 34%. That means energiewende has been a failure.

Comparing successful countries (Norway, and France) to unsuccessful countries (Germany and the United States) is basic analysis. It is not moronic. It is basic logic.

Why is France cleaner then Germany?

The answer is of course nuclear power.

Yeah! I mean, it's not like we give billions of dollars to other industries like oil. Or have paid trillions of dollars in protecting those same interest abroad.

But it's not just oil. How about the $5.3 billion in improper subsidies for Boeing for the Dreamliner? Or that Boeing and Lockheed get billion dollar subsidies for launching absolutely nothing into space. Pork-barrel spending is never truer than in aerospace. How about the $20 billion we give to farmers to NOT GROW CROPS.

Do you know what Big Oil, Big Aerospace, and Big Agriculture all have in common? They are predominantly located in red states. Not that all subsidies are republican-related of course. $1T goes to medicare, medicaid, and ACA. $366B goes to safety net programs. Hell, $1.5B goes to the entertainment industry every year.

Personally, I'm very interested in the coming electrification of the auto industry and have invested my own money into it. It was a smart move. Anyone with half a head could see it coming a decade ago.

http://www.motherjones.com/pol...
http://nation.time.com/2011/04...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03...
https://www.economist.com/news...
https://www.techdirt.com/artic...
https://www.cbpp.org/research/...

I was successful in accomplishing a remote, non-cooperative, penetration.

So it looks like Judge Roy Moore can find a back-up career if his run for Alabama Senator falls through - once these planes get to be 14 years old, of course.

(More seriously, wouldn't a "cooperative" penetration be just like logging in and not an exploit/hack?)

extortion (ek-stor-shen)
n.
1. Illegal use of one's official position or powers to obtain property, funds, or patronage.
2. The act or an instance of extorting something, as by psychological pressure.
3. An excessive or exorbitant charge.

"Hey, management: stop opposing unionization and we make the bad headlines and lawsuits magically go away"

Wow, that was a hard one. Not saying that's what is happening here, but it's not exactly a mind bender to put that one together. And it's not like some in the UAW haven't resulted to extortion in the past. And doesn't this all sound eerily familiar to what the UAW says about Nissan after getting their ass kicked in a vote to unionize a plant in Mississippi? Yeah, yeah; "Perhaps recognizing they couldn’t keep their workers from joining our union based on the facts, Nissan and its anti-worker allies ran a vicious campaign against its own work force that was comprised of intense scare tactics, misinformation and intimidation." Who talks like that? Do you think they have a boiler plate press release with these quotes on them that they just change the company name on?

Funny how the UAW goes whining to the NLRB with complaints, and whines to the press about how terrible the workers are getting it, yet they keep getting bounced out on their asses BY THE WORKERS even after forcing a vote. The result is that the UAW conducts a "corporate campaign" to shame the employers and hopefully sway some minds towards a 'yes' vote in the process. It's shameful shit, and they've been doing it for years.

But yeah, a lawsuit over racism probably doesn't have anything to do with a campaign like that...

Sorry, but all evidence shown so far seems to indicate Kaspersky software works just fine, Not caused system compromises, AND
any case where Kaspersky "exposed" or "leaked" secret files were Kaspersky working like it's supposed to --- not Kaspersky violating any privacy expectations; you
just don't get to run "secret" potentially-malicious programs on desktop computers without the possibility of malware samples of your suspicious code going to the AV vendor for analysis.... I can accept that, and I think most people SHOULD accept that with zero objections.

Yep all a vast liberal conspiracy with 0 evidence from other parties that Russian intelligence has been using Kaspersky at all because Trump has an R next so any negative news must be by the democrats.

It is not like a foreign independent intelligence agency found any proof of this at all.

Sorry shill, but it is not 'propaganda' when corporate raiders like Carl Icahn have decimated American businesses for 40 years following the same tried and true formula that keeps lining their pockets and leaving companies saddled with debt and teetering on disaster

It is inevitable that stockholders will eventually band together against Musk and force him to drop the 'dreaming' and make them some damn money. And even if Musk is smart enough to put an effective 'poison pill' in place, he will still be exposed to stock shorters who will spam investors with negative news in hopes of slowing the growth of the company and making themselves money while strangling funding for new developments

It takes 30 of them to consume the same amount of resources that you do.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01...

Which is too damn many people. Of course now someone will scream "racism" just because its mentioned.

It takes 30 people in developing countries to consume the same amount of resources as you do, BigChigger.

The problem isn't their overpopulation. It's your overconsumption.

https://www.nytimes.com/intera...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I must have missed the provocation that happened before Bush took office.

somebody will taunt him and he'll hit the nuclear war button in his underwear.

And then that somebody will learn they messed with the wrong dick'n fried beans.

In any case, I agree that

Really, you agree that that slipshod, incoherent, thoughtless post is what it means to be an American?

That's damning by association. Don't you dare insult America like that again.

Further, if you want to understand how to parse the language, and avoid the misunderstanding that the 2nd only applies to militias, there are lots of articles out there which discuss how to parse it in the context it was written in, such as this pretty long article about it.

Lots of articles? True. But that's an empty and vacuous article that fails in the second paragraph:

But the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights is indeed a well-crafted sentence.

No, it is not. It's poorly written, and an honest historical analysis would admit it. The most damning thing? He doesn't deny the facts of the inconsistent written versions. So by his own words, he should know better.

I don't know why so many fools insist on sanctifying the specific wording of the Amendment, when they could accomplish so much more avoiding such wasteful and fruitless argumentation by engaging in a direct addressing of the particulars instead.

some other reading on the subject.

That's what it should mean to be American. Thoughtful, earnest consideration, by people with the integrity to realize that they cannot rest on the laurels of the past, that glorification of what was is a way to ignore what is, and that they need to be responsible for their own decisions.

This is the sort of thing that makes me think that the Second Amendment Advocates are worse than the Sixteenthers, they could make a legitimate and persuasive argument, but obstinately refuse.

If that's part of the plan then we'll hear about it, the federal government frowns on unlicensed reactors under their jurisdiction.

That was before Trump handed the keys to the Department of Energy to a guy who wanted to shut the whole department down, if he could only remember its name.

I say let Gates give it a shot. He can hardly make things worse than they'll be soon enough anyway, given the current bunch of drooling stooges in charge.

It will be awesome when these windmills are throwing ice in the winter, or flaming wreckage when they destroy themselves, including a toxic cloud of heavy metals. The noise and shadow issues may drive people mad, but are mild in comparison to raining death and destruction over several city blocks.

One might also pause and consider the pitiful amount of unreliable energy they produce, and that blanketing every available building still wouldn't make a dent in powering a city. Safety aside, locating the generator nearby would be attractive, if only there were a safe and affordable way to store the energy.

If you want to clean up cities, advocate for connecting the mains to a predominantly hydro/nuclear powered grid. This article is quite informative about our options for decarbonizing at scale, and the findings may be quite surprising.

No, I'm serious. Replace all parking lanes on arterials with barrier-separated bicycle and transit lanes. Destroy all vehicles other than public transit and bicycles using those lanes. Problem solved.

And that will solve the problem of pollution caused by burning agricultural waste in the fields how, exactly?

see: "Farmers’ Unchecked Crop Burning Fuels India’s Air Pollution"

There is already an established scientific consensus that nuclear power paves the only viable path forward on climate change. Germany has spent 100 of billions on renewables and have not made a dent in their carbon carbon emissions. Germany pollutes 10x as much as France. The New York times recently posted an analysis of the cleanest countries in the world, and they all use a combination of hydro and nuclear.

Good article here about the downfall of Sears https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0.... Some of it is certainly due to the sorry state of retail these days, but a large portion of it seems to be due to mismanagement and greed by the new owner of the company.

If you think about it, Sears was the original Amazon with their mail order catalog - you would think that based on that history, they should have been in a good position to compete with Amazon in direct internet sales. But instead of investing in this area, the company was raided as someones personal piggy bank, leading us to the current situation.

Bitcoin has essentially nothing in common with stocks. Stocks are ownership in a real world corporation that, ideally, pays regular dividends to share holders.

What about non-voting, non-dividend paying shares? Google class C's are non-dividend-paying and non-voting and are going for over a thousand bucks a pop. I suppose with a stock, if you sell it at a loss, you can write it off on your taxes. I doubt you can do that with bitcoin. Just need a Congresscritter to update the law and that will change (if they haven't already - if someone in the donor class starts getting involved with bitcoin, that should change).

The lion's share? Don't tell that to Sweden! Someone needs to check his own citations.

Did you bother looking at where the money is going? How is this not global socialism? Why is India getting so much money when they are a major polluter? They are already getting a lot of jobs transferred from North American companies. Why do they get even more money?

The lion's share? Don't tell that to Sweden!
Someone needs to check his own citations.

If the servers get compromised then it's game over. That's the same with paper ballots, if the central office is corrupt then there is no trust in the results. It is true that there needs to be some trust in the state officials; electronic voting would probably not work in some other countries where 146% voter turnout or 99% single party wins are common. But that's not the problem with paper or technology, it's the problem with the state.

For detecting that there is something fishy happening you don't need 80% coverage. Even a handful of mismatches would create a huge media storm (assuming free press) and a detailed investigation would be started. The same would happen if the election results would not resemble any pre-election predictions or polls.

Paper ballots regularly get miscounted, intentionally or unintentionally. In totalitarian countries it's also easy to fake the paper ballots, any reports would be just ignored or silenced (see e.g. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03... ). But this would require silenced press.

Estonia is currently at the 12-th place in the press freedom index (out of 180), which is a very different situation from e.g. Russia (place 148) or even US (place 46). What works in one country may not work in another.

OK, there seems to be a belief here that "only the US foots the bill" and that "the US must pay $100Billion" recurring in a lot of posts here. It's false, there is a grain of truth behind, it can be considered entirely true only in Trump-Reality. "So as part of the Paris agreement, richer countries, like the US, are supposed to send $100 billion a year in aid by 2020 to the poorer countries. And that amount is set to increase over time. Again, like the other provisions of the agreement, this isn’t an absolute mandate. " (https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/6/1/15724162/trump-paris-climate-agreement-explained-briefly) Also see https://www.nytimes.com/intera... which shows that per-capita, 10 countries have pledged more than the US. In short: All "rich" countries contribute, the biggest total contribution is the US but not the biggest per-capita contribution, and it's not a mandate anyway.

In this article from the NY Times, people from SGI say that they eventually gave up on the lava lamps and just took pictures of the lens cap which meant that they were essentially using electronic noise!

Fascinating!

I also recall that in the early 2000s Google was using this very technique. You could go online and view images of the lavalamps. Unfortunately I can't find any good references to it. Sorry!

Will

Here's some stuff discussing Target's ability to identify customers who are expecting. This is, apparently, big business.

I found that a Master's degree helped me get jobs. Especially early on when I didn't have a ton of experience. My tuition was free, since (at the time) was a Ph.D. seeker with a fellowship. Only cost was the opportunity cost of not working an industry job, which was further offset by the fact that I had a (small) stipend.

Most people pursue Ph.D.'s because they want to do academic research as their "day job" or because they're eying one of those fancy NFL money jobs in AI or finance.

Also, you may not have heard that a sitting US Senator is currently on trial for bribery, and it looks like it will go to jury deliberations soon. If he's convicted, he will be forced from the Senate and his seat will be filled by the Governor, who is of the opposite party. Guess that's not news -- not something you're supposed to know about -- either.

When facts fail, bring the insults. Another propaganda tactic one finds in ample supply at the MSM. Usually it's more politely phrased than this to maintain the figleaf of civilized discourse, but it's there.

That said, I'm feeling gregarious today so I'll respond to your insults with civil conversation and present an example of the kind of propaganda the MSM engages in all the damn time. The following NYT article contains a "minor factual error" that's not at all germane to the topic of the story: it refers to Philando Castille as "an unarmed black cafeteria worker" despite all sorts of reporting to the contrary that he was armed, informed the cop that he was armed, and was high as a kite at the time he reached down fast and sudden to grab his license. That's the sort of deviation from "perfection" that matters in context.

I guess the fact that the guy that just left NPR was also the head of the NY Times escaped you.
Here - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/1...

They are about as leftist as they come.

If you don't like NPR, here are some other sources:

https://phys.org/news/2017-11-climate-real.html

http://blog.ucsusa.org/rachel-licker/what-is-the-national-climate-assessment-the-most-comprehensive-report-on-climate-change-in-the-u-s

http://www.themorningsun.com/article/MS/20170822/LOCAL1/170829886

And links to the actual document:

PDF file draft as of June 2017: https://assets.documentcloud.o...

New York Times link to the draft report: https://www.nytimes.com/intera...

National Academy of Sciences Review of the Draft report: https://nas-sites.org/americas...

Actually, tons of people are building coal plants. The Chinese are planning 700 more coal plants:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...

While not an optimal solution building new coal plants that can be fitted with modern carbon and sulfur dioxide scrubbers is a damn sight better than keeping old highly inefficient coal plants in operation. So if people have their hearts set on building more coal plants at the very least I'd prefer them to build the new, more efficient and reasonably clean variety. Plus, there is always the option of punishing coal plant building countries with carbon tariffs on their exports if they slack off on scrubber installation.

The problem here is that most of the international agreements being done in regards to the environment gives exemptions to China and India, because they have to "Catch up". China gets a free ride to build some of the most polluting industry in all of our history because of political interests and business interes

First of all, the problem with the treaties is that because the large polluters (US included) have such a varying level of enerfy infrastructure the treaties signed are not binding. The Paris agreement is about common emission goals that countries ought to strive to reach, there are no mechanisms in it to impose sanctions on nations that fail to meet theirs. So to speak of 'exemptions' in such a treaty is nonsense to begin with, you can't be 'exempt' from sanctions that do not exist in the treaty. Would it be good to have some kind of sanction system in place? Yes, yes it would, but if you think the US government would ever agree to internationally binding treaties that would impose sanctions on US trade should its goals not be reached, you're occupying an entirely different political reality than I am.

Second of all: why do you think it'd be realistic not to account for the fact that massive infrastructure overhaul will not happen immediately and give these countries realistic timeframes in the treaties? China at the moment gets roughly 2/3rds of all its energy from coal and has 4 times the population of the US with increasing private car ownership and you think giving them 13 years time to turn their greenhouse emisions downward (the paris agreement limit for when China's promised it will reach peak CO2 emissions is 2030 and they've also agreed to reduce their carbon intensity by 60 % by the same date, which means they have 13 years time to essentially redo the majority of their energy production) is somehow excessive? Wtf?

Thirdly, do you realize that China has very much woken up to the fact that it is within their own national interests to cut down on emissions? The level of pollution in many Chinese megacities is so bad (quivalent to smoking 1.2 packs of cigarettes just for breathing the air) its having significant adverse health effects leading to increased health care costs and declined productivity if they are not addressed. It's a major issue in domestic Chinese politics because the people don't like the status quo at all, which means if they keep making things worse they'd push the country towards increasing political instability which is certainly not something they want. The idea that China will just keep building polluting tech even though they're already struggling with massive pollution issues is not based in reality. They're building massive amounts of nuclear power plants and heavily focusing on renewables, but as is obvious to anyone with half a brain, this level of change will take a few years to accomplish. They're currently on the track to meeting their 2030 goals.

China’s carbon dioxide pollution output has already slowed more than the government promised in the Paris agreement, and that trend seems likely to continue, many experts say. China’s emissions are likely to peak years before the 2030 date that the government pledged as part of the Paris agreement.

“China is very close to making the turn in its carbon dioxide emissions. It will very likely be before 2030 and — in the very best case — may already have happened,” said Niklas Höhne, a founding partner at the NewClimate Institute.

International pressure may have played a part in curbing China’s emissions, but the main reasons have been domestic: an economy less dependent on heavy industry and coal, and public discontent over air pollution. That widespread anger has reinforced Chinese leaders’ efforts to cut smokestack industries, and those cuts are

Actually, tons of people are building coal plants. The Chinese are planning 700 more coal plants:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...

Ukraine isn't a part of NATO and thus not a US vassal state.

... and therefore open to be invaded and annexed by Russia. Sucks to be them, right?

Crimea had a free and fair vote to join Russia - the same kind of vote a lot of people would like to have in California to see if they want to join Mexico.

Do you hear yourself? Free and fair? and Californians want to secede to Mexico? You got a cite for that? Your credibility has dropped to zero with that one.

The biggest threat to world peace is American imperialism and NATO is merely their tool.

What imperialism? What country is the U.S. attempting to annex, militarily or otherwise? Imperialism suggests that "vassals" pay to the emperor state. If NATO is paying so much, where's the fucking money?!?!?!? why the FUCK is the U.S. in DEFICIT if its world-wide "empire" is paying "tribute" to the emperorship?

Hey, Germany! Make me a new Mercedes and send it to me damn quick, you little "vassal" you, your Emperor commands it!

Oh, fucking shee-itt! Imperialism! Fuck!

(collect myself, now) As NATO is concerned, if any member wanted out, they're free to go. On the contrary, former Russian "vassal states" joined NATO at they're earliest opportunity. Flaming shit-sticks I can't believe I go on with this

Russia a long time ago lost its place as a superpower. Now it's a regional power with nukes.

You're not fooling anyone, you know. Read that last statement. Read it again, particularly the last two words. Note that they have not one, not three, but seven-fucking-thousand nukes that-we-know-of, and have exploded the largest nuclear explosion in human history, as well as time-tested ICBM technology to deliver them nukes any fucking where in the fucking world.

That means, when they fuck around with a neighboring country, annexing the best part for itself, their adversaries have to think twice about what kind of response to make, lest some armed conflict escalates out of hand, and a trigger-happy missile guy feels threatened and presses a button that dusts the entire northern hemisphere. With that much nuclear death and inter-continental reach, your power is not "local," nor would Putin permit it to be.

Russia may be no China in terms of productivity and growth (and imperialism), but they're damn proud and a small fraction of them are unimaginably wealthy. The country with the largest land-mass in the world will never settle as a "regional power". For one, that's why they fuck around in Syria: to maintain a strategic foothold in the Mediterranean. A "regional power" would have no interest in propping up a shit-kicker dictator like Bashar al-Assad with weapons and planes and troops on the ground... but a super-power intent on expanding its sea-power presence sure fucking would.

Drop a lid and open your eyes. This is planet Earth, and shit is what it is. If anything, under Trump, American influence in the world is receding, at least if you pay too much attention to his don't-wanna-pay-for-anything Tweets, while China and India expand their reach and Russia stumbles forward in its cold-war daze. All the playaz iz playin, making their moves every fucking day. Free yo

> Really. Is it that hard?

No, it's not. There are some examples out there. So if you're asking for information, here you go:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/1...

http://www.philly.com/philly/n...

What is that hard though, is to understand why your comment got modded insightful.

If you're demanding no less than the full set of ads involved: it's natural to expect the tech firms involved would hold back, because the whole thing is very embarrassing for them.

> and certainly not any journalist's outright lies about this

Aha, herein lies a big part of the problem. Trump has convinced you that "the media" is the enemy, it's all fake news. That is one of the steps that autocrats take, to discredit a free and open press, to remove one of the points of accountability on them.

My interests have not been represented in quite a few years. I am white, heterosexual, have medical insurance provided by my employer(s), college educated with BS and MS degrees in my chosen professional field, widowed, no kids, make too much money to claim lower bracket tax deductions and not enough money to take advantage of the higher bracket tax deductions, and practice no denomination of religious beliefs.

In fact, you are exactly the demographic that the Democratic party represents. Sure, they give some lip service to progressive ideas and identity politics, but that's because that's what people like you want to hear. But the establishment Democrats do nothing to support policies to actually help the poor and working class - they help people like you. It's why urban centers on the costs are so blue.

Uh, I'm not sure where you get your information however the Democrats haven't supported the middle class and especially the white, male middle class for years. They emphasize support for minorities and the working poor who are abundant in the urban centers on the coasts.

Yea, I'm calling bullshit on that. As I said, they pay lip service to it, but these days, the party really represents the well-to-do.

In the past, Democrats could support progressive, redistributive policies knowing that the costs would fall largely on Republicans. That is no longer the case. Now supporting these policies requires the party to depend on the altruistic idealism of millions of supporters who, despite being relatively well off, often feel financially pressed themselves.

The Democratic Party’s pursuit of well-off whites undermined its ability to deliver gains for all workers.

So no wonder Democrats are enamored with all of that rhetoric about inequality and class warfare. Their constituents, the audience they are addressing, are far more likely to live in the American equivalent of Rio de Janeiro, a class society starkly divided between squalid, hopeless, crime-ridden favelas and safe, beautiful downtown playgrounds for the rich. The Democrats are arsonists posing as the fire brigade, offering to solve a problem they created.

The Democratic party once represented the working class. But over the last three decades the party has been taken over by Washington-based fundraisers, bundlers, analysts, and pollsters who have focused instead on raising campaign money from corporate and Wall Street executives and getting votes from upper middle-class households in “swing” suburbs. Democrats have occupied the White House for 16 of the last 24 years, and for four of those years had control of both houses of Congress. But in that time they failed to reverse the decline in working-class wages and economic security. Both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama ardently pushed for free trade agreements without providing millions of blue-collar workers who thereby lost their jobs means of getting new ones that paid at least as well.

Heck, with the colorful and imaginative names that blacks are giving their kids these days, I'd have thought that it would NOT target them, since they use so many uncommon spellings and uncommon names? I'd have thought you'd have a whole lot more "Robert Cooper" vs "Shaquillia Jackson" born on any given date?

You mean like Reince (Prebius) or Barron (Trump)?

Honestly, I'm guessing we white people use rare names just as often. Possibly more now since African Americans realize we discriminate against black-sounding names. (I can provide links for studies proving we do in fact at least subconsciously do that if anyone for some reason is skeptical). And the rate of creating actual new names is probably really low. You didn't even in your example. There are about 14 Shaquillas for example. Just because you don't know anyone with those names doesn't mean black parents are just mashing letters together.

Anyway, I doubt the software is unbiased. Given that voter fraud is literally rarer than people named Shaquilla, the people buying this software are using it for only the purpose of blocking likely democratic voters as they admit. If the software were unbiased and blocked a good number of white republican voters, the customers would be pissed. The software undoubtedly has plenty of "black box" area to ignore white names.

GOG will sell you games outright, DRM free, no spyware, no post-sale disabling possible, which are yours forever with no phoning home or other shinanigans, and if you buy on sale they have unbelievably good prices.

As a bonus, if you make stores like that "THE place to get games", as in that's where the buyers all went, then companies will have to follow and deliver DRM free product.

Or, you can just bend over and take it from the likes of Steaming Origin etc etc and teach companies that you are OK with the ability of post-sale clawback.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...

It seems to me that Google is becoming more and more abusive.

When I go to web pages, often the NoScript and Ghostery add-ons list one or more Google processes. Google is following web site visitors everywhere.

Google allows cell phone providers to prevent updates to its Android operating system. That forces people who need security to buy new cell phones.

In general, it seems to me that hardware and software providers are becoming more and more authoritarian. They take advantage of the fact that most people don't know much about technology.

In my opinion, Microsoft's Windows 10 is NOT USABLE! How can you deliver a computer to a customer when you know what you are delivering is spyware? One article: Windows 10 is possibly the worst spyware ever made. Quote from that story: "Buried in the service agreement is permission to poke through everything on your PC." A previous comment about Microsoft: Window 10 Spyware.

Technology companies are not only abusive in their design of products, they are abusive in other ways, also:

Microsoft: Microsoft Is Filled With Abusive Managers And Overworked Employees, Says Tell-All Book.

Apple: Cupertino Mayor Says Apple 'Abuses Us'

Apple again: Criticism of Apple Inc.

Adobe Systems: Adobe Flash, The Spy in Your Computer -- Part 1 Adobe seems to me to be one of the original abusers. The company demonstrated to others that average people don't know how to protect themselves from technology abuse.

Adobe Systems rents software: Software as a Monthly Rental

So the US didn't give north korea a boatload of stuff, food, oil, etc.? http://www.nytimes.com/1994/10... Excuse me but you musn't be on the same planet that I am. I don't call $4bn bribe a non issue.

If it is accurate, then it reflects poorly on Trump. If it is not accurate, then it reflects poorly on Clinton.

My point being that the NYT/WashPo/CNN etc all talked about Russian collusion when they thought Trump was guilty of it, despite having no evidence of a crime. Then it came out that Clinton's campaign had illegally paid for the Steele dossier from Russia - the illegality comes from paying a law firm to pay FusionGPS which eventually paid him. The FEC requires campaign expenditure over $200 to be itemised. I predict the Democrat supporting media will simply stop talking about Russia at this point.

And I'd say if you're interested in truth, don't trust any of these news sources. They'll report things they know to be untrue, or at least have no evidence for if they think that report will help their party. And they'll not report things for which there is evidence if they think reporting those things will hurt their party. In fact the NYT freely admitted it was giving up old fashioned notions of impartiality and checking things were true before the election

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/0...

I.e. what news they report is solely determined by whether they think it will move things in their direction politically, not whether they actually think the report is true or not.

And incidentally engineers and 'nerds' are hardly immune to this sort of intellectual dishonesty and sloppiness as any arguments over the merits of hardware or software will tell you. Fanboys exist in both politics and engineering.

How much money did the Clintons get from Wall Street again? (asking for a friend...)

https://www.politico.com/magaz...
http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/2...
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/1...

"it is reasonable to assume that there were approximately 10,000 Microsoft millionaires created by the year 2000" Other sources put the number at more than 12,000 millionaires and 4 billionaires by 2005. How's Robin Hood doing on that front?

Philippines, the call center capital of the world, since 2010.

The AC is right. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04... DDT is the good example of this.

It is a good example of "think of the children!" Mosquito netting is the #1 most effective remedy against malaria and it doesn't have any negative impact on the environment. Note that science has proven DDT has negative impact on the environment at large and some of our bird species are still recovering from it. Your "Science" wants to allow it for this because "think of the children" at least according to that article. No one is arguing that DDT isn't effective against mosquitoes, especially not science. DDT even kills the almost unkillable bedbugs, which are resurging in the US as a problem. Yet we're not advocating a return to using DDT because the costs are too high, you just won't see them tomorrow or next week. That's part of being a first world country, you don't think about just tomorrow or next week, you consider long term impacts and make decisions based on what happens next year, next decade, and possibly even 100+ years from now.

The AC is right. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04... DDT is the good example of this.

Those new 700 plants are around the world including china. China also abandoned plans for building 100 power stations. Here's a more recent link from this year. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...