Slashdot Mirror

It's short-sighted and stupid.

The end result will be torches and pitchforks. And even (some of) the rich know this.

TSA Pre Check allows members of both parties to skip on by quite easily: https://tsatoday.wordpress.com...

Of course, we do have one noted case of an elected official being illegally detained (per Article I Section 6) by the TSA: http://www.politico.com/news/s...

So we can deduce from that and the article, that some TSA employee was overcome by his attraction to the curly hair and had Paul scanned as the alternate gender, in order to generate an anomaly in the crotchal region which would have to be thoroughly investigated. Ewww.

TSA Pre Check allows members of both parties to skip on by quite easily: https://tsatoday.wordpress.com...

Of course, we do have one noted case of an elected official being illegally detained (per Article I Section 6) by the TSA: http://www.politico.com/news/s...

a vote for hillary is a vote for wall street. Lets be frank where most of our problems begin.

Here's a very interesting article about research into police abuses nationwide and the Justice Department's responses (or lack of them):

http://www.politico.com/magazi...

Contracts are only valid when both parties negotiate on good faith and without undue pressure.

Sure, which covers the vast majority of existing Internet Service Provision contracts.

best way for the government to enforce valid contracts are to ensure that the ISPs can't use their monopoly or duopoly to deliver less than the customer was due when the contract was signed.

Even if an ISP put the exact description of what they plan to do — such as "We may throttle your connections to certain content providers down to what we believe is reasonable" — it would still be against the net-neutrality as you, most of /., and the FCC see it. So, the ISPs' freedom to do what they want will be damaged.

Will this damage, the loss of an important liberty, help the individual subscribers'? Are you really arguing, corporation, whose CEO is golfing with the President will be seriously inconvenienced by the President-controlled Federal commission? Crony capitalism much?

Having traded liberty for a forlorn hope of improved Internet service, you will lose both and deserve neither. Serves you right — except I have to suffer along with you and I don't like it....

Well DUH - The SJW crowd has pushed and pushed and the group that they targeted as being "hateful and teh mean" has finally responded to their attacks IN KIND. So it's not surprising that they're "just like the SJW crowd".

Want a current example? Sabrina Erdely and the Rolling Stone magazine apologized to practically everyone involved in the rape article they wrote and published... EXCEPT the male fraternity that was accused, shutdown and subjected to harassment threats because of the now unsubstantiated rape claims in the article.

Why? Perhaps they're using the Dan Rather defense - The rape accusations are unproven but what they say is true. Because, to the SJW crowd, all rape accusations against males should be true until they're proven false. The same is not true for female on male rape, which is real, happens, but is pooh-pooh'd by even the SJW crowd because "Male privilege"

More true than you feared.

Why We Believed Jackie's Rape Story
Because it rang true for so many of us on the University of Virginia campus.

WHAT "rang true"? It was ALL fake. If it "rang true", one has to ask WHY THE HELL DID YOU WANT IT TO BE TRUE?!?!?! Why do you WANT men - especially white men - to all be seen as rapists?

So yeah, there's a problem here.

With the "SJWs" living on a planet where the sky isn't blue.

I am drained. I am confused. But I keep returning to one question. If everyone here believed Jackie’s story until yesterday — a story in which she is violently raped by seven men at a fraternity house as part of a planned initiation ritual — should we not still be concerned?

What a dumbass. If "everyone here believed Jackie's story", it never would have been repudiated. Those seven men would be in jail based on SJW "justice".

So yeah, we SHOULD be concerned, but not FOR those who scream "Rape culture!", but BECAUSE of those who do. Those who scream "RAPE CULTURE!!!!" have punished innocents in this case, and had they had their way the courts and police would have convicted them and jailed them.

And in so doing, they have cheapened the claims of every woman who was actually raped.

Way to go, assholes.

And the idiots even literally SAY they don't really care about reality:

Ultimately, though, from where I sit in Charlottesville, to let fact checking define the narrative would be a huge mistake.

What.

A.

Moron.

the secret service agents were caught because they failed to pay for it

..Unlike the DEA agents who got the Colombian capos to pay for the party...

Especially the Congressional Black Caucus

I've never heard a convincing argument for their position.

You're kidding, right? It's against the law to destroy records that are the subject of a subpoena.

2) Being a Republican in Congress talking daily about "family values"

You're talking about this guy! http://www.politico.com/magazi...

In any case, the first page of the search results from the string "Google lobbyist net neutrality" (without quotes) brings up this Politico story on the first page of the mobile search results returned by Bing, Google, and DuckDuckGo.

Here you go. Politico is a source in your Obama shill only bubble, right? As you can see, they changed the rules being voted on right before the vote. It then follows that the commissioners would need to re-read the thing so they can object to whatever cronyist bullshit Google had added. Hence, the delay, which, again the Republicans could have stretched to 30 days and still be within the rules.

Her "enemies" are quoting State Department Rules

And then, there's that whole common sense thing that Government Business should be done on Government assets.

While there is no law prohibiting her actions, State Department rules clearly prohibit it.

State Department rules clearly require government assets be used for government communications

I don't know if you know many rich people, but any established wealthy person is not going to taint themselves with this junk. The likely market will be teenage kids of rich people, and new and upcoming rappers/football players.

That's "many rich people." What you're describing are self-made entrepreneurs, who maybe break 1-2 million of net worth -- a small subset of all rich people, almost by definition -- their spouses and children outnumber them without even counting athletes, celebrities, successful startup (i.e. Facebook) employees, and lottery winners (but I repeat myself), actual and pseudo-royalty throughout the world (especially the middle east), and successful criminals with gaudy taste (loan sharks, bookies, etc.). And many self-made entrepreneurs are still subject to ostentatious displays of wealth. Never underestimate the allure of the status symbol, regardless of practicality. Where do you think high heels came from?

I will be very disappointed if Clinton opponents don't use some version of an ad that highlights this.

And following that, the Democrats will put up the exact same ad, but featuring Jeb Bush.

There have been a bunch of Republicans who have admitted to using their own (non-governmental) email systems, two of which were also former secretaries of state:

Condoleezza Rice

Apparently not: http://www.politico.com/story/...

wow.
You neo-cons are just as bad as ever. Lies from both sides continue over and over and over.
She was NEVER in-line for being president.
Here is a factual explanation of the situation, without your own set of lies mixed in.

http://www.politico.com/story/...

Actually, that IRS the dog ate my email somewhat failed.

It turns out that asking IT to look for backups of the email is more productive than looking for it personally. Its just a matter of time needed to sort through it if anyone in government is still interested.

She did however break clear and unambiguous State Department Rules.

The fact that she is a Hypocrite is a bonus.

Am I the only one concerned that Google's lobbyist had something slipped into the proposed regulation LAST NIGHT? We the people weren't allowed to see the regulation before it was voted on, but SOMEHOW Google's lobbyist got their hands on it and proposed a change to PART OF the committee. Not even all five of them, just the three who voted yes. Of course, since the original draft wasn't public, there's no way to know exactly what sweetheart deal was slipped in to benefit Google. That's all this Title II regulation will be... A handout to special interests.

The Tea Party has issues with Obama's policy which are valid and have nothing to do with Obama's race, yet they get cast as racist by the political commentators in the media, and the media reports this as news.

Because so ,many of them ARE racist. Your excuses aren't helped by the fact that every issue they've whined about for the last six years was done first by Bush, from deficit spending to pushing immigration reform to signing statements. But they DGAF till the black guy was in office. They only alternative is that they are as willfully stupid as the Obamabots who spent six years bitching about Bush and the Patriot Act only to yawn when Obama not just extended it but signed the NDAA into law.

They're either idiots, or racist idiots. Take your pick.

No profit left behind: Across the country, Pearson sold the Los Angeles Unified School District an online curriculum that it described as revolutionary - but that had not yet been completed, much less tested across a large district, before the LAUSD agreed to spend an estimated $135 million on it. Teachers dislike the Pearson lessons and rarely use them, an independent evaluation found.

I live in New York, so I know that everything you say about Andrew Cuomo is true.

Here's somebody who can explain it better than I can.

http://www.politico.com/magazi...?
In The Arena
The Plot Against Public Education: How millionaires and billionaires are ruining our schools.
By BOB HERBERT
October 06, 2014

what have you "won" exactly?

You "win" Turkish citizens annoyed with their government -- a win in the only venue likely to be able to create change there.

i stopped reading there

how did that work with cuba? iran? north korea? china?

what you're asking for is massacred citizens

iran for example

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2...

no matter how many intelligent, forward thinking students you have agitating in the cities, the government just calls up busloads of basiji thugs from the countryside and cracks skulls until change seekers shut up in fear. or worse:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

slow stead engagement is what really works

reactionary inflexibility simply means no change at all

welcome to reality

this is you:

http://www.politico.com/story/...

pragmatism, flexibility, realism, compromise always wins

inflexible ideological dogmatism is how you lose and are ignored

Does anyone think the sponsors of this legialation have serioulsly considered the issues of user access and cost?

I sure do think so.

the mantra of "free markets"

Yes, leave it to Illiberals to criticize free markets. Government take-over did so well for railroads, public transport, and telephone-service, what could possibly be wrong about adding Internet to the mix?

This has resulted in a protected monopoly for these ISPs. [...] treat the ISPs as utilities so that their rates will be controlled

Yes, an earlier mistake of our government letting corporations have monopolies (of cable TV) still needs to be dealt with. But the price-control you are advocating in the next paragraph only makes things worse. Because the incumbents are much better versed in dealing with the government regulators, than a newcomer will ever be.

And, while you are accusing Republicans of baby-eating, it is the Democrats who are owned by the Big Cable.

This is really a free market in content

So, free market in content is a good mantra, but free market in service provision is bad? Or did you change your mind by the end of typing your post?

Why is it good? why is de-industralization good? it is killing old people in Europe who can't afford the 'green' energy at three times the price (Google it).

If you understand math, then you should see Climate Scientist Murray Salby's presentation on climate change - he lays out the math for for you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
If you want to rant, fine - but please watch the video first and understand the math. Then we can have a discussion.

ps. Obama is smart, but not exceptionally smart. At least, Ben Stein doesn't think so:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/...

Stop putting elected people on pedestals. They don't have the competence to decide what is best for you nor me - only we do.

The last time the Republcians had the large majority in the House was before the 1929 stock market crash. Something to think about.

While fun to point out, I don't see that as especially relevant. The republicans of the early 1900's are in no way comparable to those we are living with today. Back then they were the progressive party. TR created the federal environmental conservation movement! 40ish years earlier, republicans freed the slaves! Unfortunately at some point, something went drastically awry*

*IM(logic based)O

The lowest voter turnout in 72 years chose the Republican Party to be in charge of the Senate. The last time the Republcians had the large majority in the House was before the 1929 stock market crash. Something to think about.

Maybe it has something to do with thing like this: The Cult of Neil deGrasse Tyson

I find it very amusing to hear from all these one-man Supreme Courts, constitutional scholars all, willing to declare in internet chat-rooms that the President has violated some part of the law, at least in their own mind.

But please, here's your chance. Quote the relevant case law that makes you think you know more than judges who have spent their lives studying this stuff.

Bitch slap for you!

Opinion here

The Court holds that the Executive Action is unconstitutional because it violates the separation of powers and the Take Care Clause of the Constitution.

Given that Obama openly abdicated his responsibility merely three weeks ago, this is a remarkably fast federal court slapdown.

And given that this opinion was only filed today, your request for case law or opinions was rather disingenuous, wasn't it?

I find it very amusing to hear from all these one-man Supreme Courts, constitutional scholars all, willing to declare in internet chat-rooms that the President has violated some part of the law, at least in their own mind.

But please, here's your chance. Quote the relevant case law that makes you think you know more than judges who have spent their lives studying this stuff.

Bitch slap for you!

Opinion here

The Court holds that the Executive Action is unconstitutional because it violates the separation of powers and the Take Care Clause of the Constitution.

Given that Obama openly abdicated his responsibility merely three weeks ago, this is a remarkably fast federal court slapdown.

And given that this opinion was only filed today, your request for case law or opinions was rather disingenuous, wasn't it?

Everyone wants to throw their hands up, powerless to do anything real about the big slurp data problem because we feel we're powerless against our government, lest we be traitors, seditionists, or get put on a no-fly list. Blacklisted, barred, or simply fucked in the data mines.

The Koch Bros are financing even more, see http://www.politico.com/story/... for questions, so that we can all be individually profiled beyond what we're already hooked to.

Breaches and security can't hold back the lakes and oceans of data we're amassing and hoarding, and sooner or later (if it hasn't been already), various of your personal events will be conflated to something that puts you on a radar screen somewhere. Liberty is in the crapper, and the hacker groups are financed by taxpayers, who are unwitting or willfully ignorant of the influence of big money on their legislatures. Behavior analysis will be light and soft, but the consequences deep. Just wait and see.

He just managed to spend $4.5M on a splashy political campaign in NZ. In a country of 4 million people that's a very expensive campaign.

That's barely over $1/person. Compare that the the $1 billion for Obama's campaign and $1 billion for Romney's campaign (and $7 billion total election expenses in 2012), and it makes KDC look like a cheap piker.

I mean, no one — not even you — has any evidence of it.

except we do. the docs snowden leaked contain entries going back to around ~2005 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29 PRISM is a clandestine anti-terrorism[1] mass electronic surveillance data mining program launched in 2007 by the National Security Agency (NSA) and government survialence has been consistantly leaked on slashdot since it started in 1997, going back to CARNIVORE, RAPTORE, and this: Narus

Citation needed.

This is the war on drugs
Reagan declares war
This is parellel construction, basicly allowing cops to either plant evidence, and effectively nullifies reasonable suspicion.
This is civil foreiture. As you can see, the government can now just take your stuff without having to provide evidence
far less conviction in a court of law, jury of peers or not

Empty words.

hey mr pot, the kettle called, your fucking black.

I just love quotes like the following;

The European forecast of Hurricane Sandy in 2012 was so far ahead of U.S. models in predicting the storm's path that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was called before Congress to explain how it happened.

According to this NOAA predicted the landfall four days ahead while the European system predicted it seven days ahead. While a longer warning is nice the real question is whether or not the three extra days are necessary. If they are not necessary then the NOAA computers are fine and we don't need expensive new computers. If it is, new computers need to be speced and purchased. Even then the speced computer may not be the fastest in the world.

It is not a question of being "First" but having the equipment to do the job. This also goes into a change in world philosophy. Instead of countries competing why don't we pool our resources and go much farther than any one country can on its own.

It's quite shallow. Another app harvesting data from schoolkids. Privacy policy is vague. Teachers don't care because it's useful. Parents try to care but don't really. There's really nothing new here that deepens the discussion about the continuing erosion of student privacy.

Anyone really looking for a good read on that subject should turn back to the May Politico article highlighted earlier on Slashdot. Also interesting to note is how some companies are pledging to no longer mine student data, as well as companies that were notably absent from signing that pledge, including the one that promised to stop collecting student data last April.

It's quite shallow. Another app harvesting data from schoolkids. Privacy policy is vague. Teachers don't care because it's useful. Parents try to care but don't really. There's really nothing new here that deepens the discussion about the continuing erosion of student privacy.

Anyone really looking for a good read on that subject should turn back to the May Politico article highlighted earlier on Slashdot. Also interesting to note is how some companies are pledging to no longer mine student data, as well as companies that were notably absent from signing that pledge, including the one that promised to stop collecting student data last April.

It's possible for a loose cannon to hit the target once in a while.

-- Joe Biden 2016 ? sure, what the heck...

if you want to be technical about the shutdown, it had to do with the individual mandate.

The same individual mandate that the House Republicans are suing President Obama for not implementing? They still haven't filed the lawsuit.

Obamacare is Romneycare is a system created by the conservative Heritage Foundation.

I just read an interesting article on how Mississippi tried to be ahead of the curve, create a Romneycare style insurance exchange way back in 2007, but when it became an Obama led initiative, they let politics come in and forced it to crash and burn, with huge amounts of collateral damage in unhealthy citizens and both lost and wasted money.

I know it's sometimes too easy to input racism in certain situations, but when it was espoused by a white think tank and rolled out by a white governor, it's OK. A black President says so, and now it's evil. The fact it hurts poor black folk more than it hurts poor white folk may or may not be intentional, but it is OK.

Bob Herbert explained this better than I can.

http://www.politico.com/magazi...?
In The Arena
The Plot Against Public Education: How millionaires and billionaires are ruining our schools.
By BOB HERBERT
October 06, 2014
(Bill Gates got the idea that high schools were too big and should be broken up. With no evidence to support it, schools around the country were broken up. Gates spent $2 billion and disrupted 8% of the public high schools. There were problems, such as the loss of science labs, electives, and extracurricular activities. Gates admitted it was a failure.)

I'm going to assume you're just being disingenuous or willfully ignorant.

Read the comment boards for Politico and read what Republicans and Tea Party are writing about the poor people who sell their votes to Democrats. Talk about the disingenuous and willfully ignorant.

But the cupboard is bare or so I have been told.

The South East vs the rest of Michigan differences are rather interesting: http://www.politico.com/2012-e... If Detroit keeps dropping in population it could actually have a pretty drastic difference in elections.

You gotta vote for people who will make it so

Oh, I am voting for such people alright. But the last couple of elections I was overruled by the inane majority, who consider the color of a candidate's skin more important, than his qualifications.

Our "affirmative action" President plays golf with big cable CEO(s), and the rest of his party is in the big media's pocket as well.

Meanwhile, the rank-and-file partisans are encouraged to hate the Kochs brothers...

Do you honestly believe that someone would be allowed to run for president of the USA who wasn't in big media's pocket?

You gotta vote for people who will make it so

Oh, I am voting for such people alright. But the last couple of elections I was overruled by the inane majority, who consider the color of a candidate's skin more important, than his qualifications.

Our "affirmative action" President plays golf with big cable CEO(s), and the rest of his party is in the big media's pocket as well.

Meanwhile, the rank-and-file partisans are encouraged to hate the Kochs brothers...

"More than one-third of Americans cannot name a single branch of the United States government"

The nation is lost! How do you think we got the assholes - we have in office - in the first place?! People are just fucking ignorant and dumb!!! Ideas of how to govern is useless if people don't even understand the basics fundamentals of the existing government they have already.

...because it might put favored liberal policies or politicians in a bad light. That's why Sharyl Attkisson resigned.