Slashdot Mirror

This reminds me of that ridiculous article (and accompanying video) saying that color film was biased towards white people. Around 3:30 in the video they have white and black people stand in front of a face-following camera and it doesn't work for the black people. Everyone acts like this is some sort of Harry Potter wizardry against the black man keeping him down when it's vastly simpler than that.

For progressively darker skin, progressively higher light on that skin is required to reveal its contours. The fundamental problem is that white and light-skinned brown people have their normal skin color shades in the midtones when a scene is properly exposed while darker-skinned brown and black people are closer to shadows. To expose properly for facial recognition of dark brown or black skin, you have to overexpose the midtones to bring up the shadows. Since people rarely take photos on purpose that are exposed for the shadows while blowing everything else out, it should be fairly obvious that facial recognition (and early ISO 32 color film and small-sensor cameras like webcams and phone cameras) will have a very hard time with dark skin. Sure, it could be a lack of data in some instances, but it's far more likely to be the fact that the skin absorbs more light and photographs are generally exposed too low to reveal enough detail for the machines to analyze.

If you think this is "racist" you're saying that the nature of light itself is racist. I don't feel like I should have to explain why that position is really stupid.

Making NK understand they are one button push away from having their country totally annihilated. Ridiculing the little "Rocket Man" has also been a novel approach instead of genuflecting to the little fucker and succumbing to NK extortion over the past 50 years. Throwing the annihilation threat on the negotiating table should have happened 50 years ago.

Another bellicose moron without a clue. Your "street bully" mentality leads to devastating wars that kill millions. There's a reason we don't use wars to resolve disputes unless absolutely unavoidable. A little thing called World War II taught us that's a really bad idea. Belligerent asshats can't seem to remember that.

Oh and just so you know... Here's what war with North Korea would look like

Yeah, "false alarm".
Ignore the rats leaving the ship.
Nothing to see here, move along...

This is part of Humpty-Trumpy's "Making America Great Again" by eviscerating all those "job killing" regulations like:
* roll back protecting the environment: clean air/clean water, allowing coal companies to dump into rivers
* roll back privacy and corporate limitations in communications: killing net neutrality
* remove banking regulations https://www.washingtonpost.com...
* remove protections for Seniors in Nursing Homes: https://www.democracynow.org/2...
* giving National Park lands to developers: https://www.vox.com/energy-and...
and dozens more ever frighting yet to be seen "de-regulations" that reduce citizen rights, protections, and hand our wallets to corporations. All the while the GOP protects Trumpty by replaying a slow motion Saturday Night Massacre: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
People, the only way to change this is campaign finance reform. It has to start at the State level. The GOP is worried about a midterm slaughter and the Kock Brothers alone are using $400M to try and change past performance: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/2...

"I learned long ago (back in the days of dial-up BBSes), never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw[1]

You want a Real Argument AC? Let's see. First, what you are doing here is actually an Ad hominem attack - you are attacking me for having a low UID - not what I wrote. I did not attack anyone, I was merely commenting on the tactics used by trolls. Look at the story now and you'll see that my comments on moderation have already been validated to some degree.

Or did you want to fight about Trump and the memo? In that case Carter Page is a very suspicious character. I'm not surprised the FBI was interested in him. What we know is that this memo is intentionally biased, leaving out the full extent of the evidence brought in the initial FISA warrant. At that time Steele was still a reliable informant for the FBI. To obtain a warrant one does not need the statements of informants to be sworn testimony, so under the Gates rule the combination of a credible informant along with the accumulation of other evidence, the FISA warrant would not be illegal. How the informant came by their suspicion is not at all important - the courts assume that informants are acting in their own interests and are quite likely to be lying. That is why they need additional investigative evidence, which the FBI already had on Page. Once they had that first warrant the continuations where likely based on the ongoing evidence of collusion and other crimes obtained through their investigation. But this memo has been carefully crafted so as to ignore the full evidence, and we know that because other people who have seen that evidence say so. You might not believe them, but then who can say without seeing the evidence?

What I see is that the same republication FBI agents that were instrumental in swinging the vote in Trumps favor, were also concerned that their new dear leader was surrounded by people with links to Russia, and started looking into them to remove the danger to the president. Then the president lost the plot...

[1] In case you think that is also an Ad hominem attack, note that I did not specify who was the pig...

In 2016. opioid overdoses claimed 64,000 lives.

No, that was the total for all drugs. Opioids did just, but up to 14,550, from 12,727 in 2015.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and...

Are you trying to claim Trump is more coherent than Obama? Trump loses his train of thought mid-sentence all the time when giving speeches.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/op...

https://www.theguardian.com/tv...

I love this example of a Trump speech:

“Look, having nuclear — my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart — you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world — it’s true! — but when you’re a conservative Republican they try — oh, do they do a number — that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune — you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged — but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me — it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are — nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right, who would have thought? — but when you look at what’s going on with the four prisoners — now it used to be three, now it’s four — but when it was three and even now, I would have said it’s all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don’t, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years — but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.”

https://www.snopes.com/donald-...
https://www.theguardian.com/tv...

Here are some more examples:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and...

Stick with me here...

One of the problems with Obamacare has been insurance companies pulling out of sparsely-populated areas because they weren't profitable 'enough' -- low-density population doesn't generate much revenue and since they can bail on a per-county basis, they do bail rather than spread the costs around the entire state. That has left a lot of counties with just 1 obamacare insurer, which is then free to jack the prices up because they literally the only game in town.

So Nevada said to the insurance companies - when it comes time to pick insurance companies to handle the state medicaid contracts, you get bonus points if you also offer obamacare plans too. The result? The 2 new insurance companies that won medicaid contracts for Nevada are also on the ACA exchanges for the entire state. So, unlike many other mostly-empty states, obamacare is pretty robust there. And, FWIW, this was done by a republican governor.

https://www.vox.com/energy-and...

I suggest you use news that isn't 20 years old. The most recent bids in Colorado for new solar are cheaper than old coal.

On the other hand, it's either intellectual lazy or indicative of topical ignorance to yell "SAUCE OR FAKE!" in response to references to mainstream news closely related to the topic at hand. But here you go:

Original poster of video Trump retweeted was banned:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tec...

Trump has engaged in harassing behavior that others have been banned for:

https://www.vox.com/culture/20...

Twitter's newsworthiness defense, pretty much reiterated in TFA:

https://www.recode.net/2017/9/...

I hope these facts will persuade you to stop spewing lies.

Clearly one of you is lying, it's not hard to guess who...

At absolute best your table of lies, if we pretend they are true. Still only say American states are just as murdery as each other, and say nothing about other places with sensible gun laws.

Ugh, here we go.

https://www.vox.com/cards/poli...

https://www.vox.com/policy-and...

I hope these facts will persuade you to stop spewing lies.

Ugh, here we go.

https://www.vox.com/cards/poli...

https://www.vox.com/policy-and...

I hope these facts will persuade you to stop spewing lies.

I don't know about polling, but this was fairly insightful:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and...

Both parties are doing this, so this isn't a Republican or Democratic thing.

Too bad Marsha through a giant bloody wrench into your equivalence argument.

Twitter's ban on Marsha Blackburn's ad mentioning "baby body parts," explained

"I fought Planned Parenthood and we stopped the sale of baby body parts," said Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) in a recent ad announcing her run for Senate.

Planned Parenthood was in the business of giving American's the tools to exercise their legal rights at their own discretion.

Such research is legal, and researchers say it is helpful in developing treatments for diseases like HIV and Parkinson's disease.

Very few people feel good about abortion. The difference is that some people put a higher priority on the outcome of parenthood.

When today's overstretched, unprepared single mother at age seventeen turns into tomorrow's crack ho at age twenty-three (by then with three children), it only serves to perpetuate the cycle of human misery. I'm in favour of a future where all parenthood is planned parenthood, entered into by young adults fully prepared to be overwhelmed by the responsibility of the whole thing. Which I believe is inevitable, if arriving on a very slow train.

Canadian Indian residential school system

In Canada, the Indian residential school system was a network of boarding schools for Indigenous peoples.
:
The network was funded by the Canadian government's Department of Indian Affairs and administered by Christian churches. The school system was created for the purpose of removing children from the influence of their own culture and assimilating them into the dominant Canadian culture. Over the course of the system's more than hundred-year existence, about 30%, or roughly 150,000, of Indigenous children were placed in residential schools nationally.
:
At least 6,000 of these students are estimated to have died while residents.

But, hey, let's get all hot and bothered about abortion instead, because we sleep soundly enough while feeling a little bit bad about the abuse of Indigenous children.

Blackburn didn't think twice about portraying the use of foetal tissue by scientists devoted to the cure of Parkinson's disease as a macabre, immoral market in tiny human giblets.

I'm sure she'll bring this same tact and discretion to the net neutrality debate. Oh, yippee. (When a Democrat says something equally ripe, it's usually about how some chosen Wall St insiders are the only people qualified to fix the financial sector's abuses—a proposition greeted with feeble Republican dissent, if any.)

The residential school system harmed Indigenous children significantly by removing them from their families, depriving them of their ancestral languages, exposing many of them to physical and sexual abuse, and forcibly enfranchising them. Disconnected from their families and culture and forced to speak English or French, students who attended the residential school system often graduated unable to fit into either their communities or Canadian society. It ultimately proved successful in disrupting the transmission of Indigenous practices and beliefs across generations. The legacy of the system has been linked to an increased prevalence of post-traumatic stress, alcoholism, substance abuse, and suicide, which persist within Indigenous communities.

Right, if we just ban abortion, all the problems are gone now—for a sufficiently large value of small, clueless, slumbering mind.

Yes, the pressures in public economics are long established and well understood, but how the individuals choose to comport themselves within this framework still admits to egregious yodelling and jungle vines.

.... and what about the health externalities from fossil fuels, troll? What do those cost?

$55 billion in health costs and another $33 billion in environmental costs

Take the drug war. If it were eliminated, violent crime would be significantly reduced, along with 90% of the no-knock raids. Protects the first responders. Literally everyone wins, except drug dealers and the DEA administration.

Don't tell me, tell all the jackoffs who voted for and support Donald Trump.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and...

https://www.theguardian.com/us...

Presidents don't make the law in America. Do you want President Trump to assume that power?

Take the drug war. If it were eliminated, violent crime would be significantly reduced, along with 90% of the no-knock raids. Protects the first responders. Literally everyone wins, except drug dealers and the DEA administration.

Don't tell me, tell all the jackoffs who voted for and support Donald Trump.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and...

https://www.theguardian.com/us...

But then you have liberals who advocate taxing the "rich" (which is easy for people like the Clintons to advocate, for example, when the bulk of their money goes through their foundation, and also easy for people with family to advocate since the taxes under discussion always on income, not on wealth), or granting legal status to illegal immigrants (all the while taking advantage of their illegal status to pay them below poverty wages and otherwise take advantage of them). And you also have conservatives crusading for morality while living secret lives awash in the very sins they publicly condemn, and claiming to want to reward hard-working people while perpetuating a crony-capitalist oligarchy.

Odd that you give such short shrift to the Conservative hypocrites. Let me help you by pointing out Donald Trump's scam with his foundation, or the accusations that Trump hired illegal laborers while actually taking advantage of their status to pay them below poverty wages and otherwise take advantage of them.

There's plenty of others, but you really should make more of a conscious effort if you're going to want to appear to actually be even-handed.

Either way, the point is that it is par for the course for politicians in general. I am not sure how to fix it, but term limits might be a good start. And not just term limits on a particular office, but something like a 10 year limit on serving in any federal elected office and the same thing for state-level office. I'm not sure what else might work, but as the electorate we have to do something.

Sorry man, we tried term limits. Didn't work.

You're going about it wrong. Doesn't matter if they're in there for a year, or for life, the problem is still the problem, of who and what they are. What you want to do, is instead take away some of the tools for exploitation, such as voter disenfranchisement and gerrymandering.

We have to quit with the "this person is despicable but I am going to support them anyway because of how much worse I think the other party's person is." That crazy thing about the US 2016 presidential election is that it seems like there were more people voting for Clinton to vote against Trump and more people voting for Trump to vote against Clinton than people that voted in actual support of the candidate for whom they cast their vote. Think about what that says of our political system and our society.

The Simpsons were telling you that back in the 1990s. Why didn't you listen? Of course, you could have learned about that even further back in American history, like with the Election of 1876, the Election of 1860, or the Crooked Bargain that resulted in 1824. Not to mention the whole business with Thomas Jefferson and John Adams.

Remember the Naturalization Act of 1798? No? How about the other Alien and Sedition Acts?

Huh.

Well right now there's violation of the emoluments clause, soon there might be obstruction of justice, and we'll have to see if there's anything criminal about colluding with a foreign government to influence an election. He doesn't even need to have committed a crime, he could be impeached for mental incompetence.

You don't somehow think that all of the missiles that North Korea has been firing were somehow summoned by magic since the start of the Trump administration, do you? They were obviously being worked on during the Obama administration. What we are seeing is the flowering of Obama's work. (Or do you blame Her?)

For what? North Korea wasting their limited resources on a tool that's only useful when you want to provoke an ill-tempered boob who will go off on freak out over them, then erroneously claim to send an aircraft carrier to deal with it?

So what you're saying is that at best, he's par for the course. "Par" is not what we were told to expect.

Trump hasn't even been in office for a year yet and he already has far more rigorous sanctions in place than Obama achieved, has China cooperating, and missile defense is getting a big boost in funding.

Except it turns out those sanctions are a failed policy that only harms the innocent North Korean people, China is, as usual, lying, and putting money into missile defense has been a favorite way to waste tax dollars since the Reagan years.

He seems to be making progress that Obama couldn't.

So far, your examples are only repeated examples of waste, fraud, and failure.

That's not a common definition of progress. Admittedly, to somebody trying to sabotage America, it would seem different.

Lets see what happens between now and the end of the eighth year of the Trump administration.

Let's see what happens between now and the end of the next year.

I'd say this year, but eh, you won't have any results.

If I do a search for "How Podesta got hacked" every article I find says it was because he clicked that bit.ly link to the .tk address controlled by the spearfishers. And then typed his password into a page that looked like Google.

E.g.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and...

To the IT team's credit, they did send along a legitimate Google link - not the original phishing email's bit.ly link - to change Podesta's password and instructed him to add two factor-authentication to his account for an added level of password security. But the legitimate Google link didn't seem to make it to Podesta, and instead he must have used the "poisoned link," giving his password to hackers and opening up his personal email to unwelcomed eyes.

They didn't spot the bit.ly link or if they did they didn't mention. They did send a legitimate Google link, but they didn't point out the link in the original email - a bit.ly link that went to a .tk address - was obviously a phishing attempt. That's not a typo, it's a massive fuck up.

Why you think the location of the server being in a datacenter vs a basement is a tell for how stupid you are. It comes down to who is administrating it, not it's fucking Internet pipe or power failure resiliency.

Well if you've worked in a big organisation, you'd know that running your own server at home is verboten because people who run their own servers take shortcuts administering them and risk getting hacked. Organisations have policy on security and as soon as you run a server at home with your own admins you run the risk of screwing up because those admins don't know what that policy is. Plus of course you've got data the rest of the organisation doesn't have access to. You might not comply with laws. Though of course in HRC's case having private data and not complying with laws was the reason she did it.

She had a server when she was at the State Department for example and some of the emails were 'born classified' according to Reuters.

http://www.newsweek.com/questi...

In the small fraction of emails made public so far, Reuters has found at least 30 email threads from 2009, representing scores of individual emails, that include what the State Department's own "Classified" stamps now identify as so-called 'foreign government information.' The U.S. government defines this as any information, written or spoken, provided in confidence to U.S. officials by their foreign counterparts.

This sort of information, which the department says Clinton both sent and received in her emails, is the only kind that must be "presumed" classified, in part to protect national security and the integrity of diplomatic interactions, according to U.S. regulations examined by Reuters.

"It's born classified," said J. William Leonard, a former director of the U.S. government's Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO). Leonard was director of ISOO, part of the White House's National Archives and Records Administration, from 2002 until 2008, and worked for both the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations.

"If a foreign minister just told the secretary of state something in confidence, by U.S. rules that is classified at the moment it's in U.S. channels and U.S. possession," he said in a telephone interview, adding that for the State Department to say otherwise was "blowing smoke."

Reuters' findings may add to questions that Clinton has been facing over her adherence to rules concerning sensitive government information. Spokesmen for Clinton declined to answer questions, but Clinton and her staff maintain she did not mishandle any information.

"I did not send classified material, and I did not receive any material th

I heard ZERO indictments of him about his political leanings

https://qz.com/1055466/the-alt... basically calls him a liar when he denies being 'alt right'.

Then there are the suspicious string of articles all basically going, "Damore is an alt-right [hero|martyr]":
https://www.theguardian.com/co...
https://www.usatoday.com/story...
https://www.recode.net/2017/8/...
https://www.huffingtonpost.com...
https://www.vox.com/culture/20...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://www.newsweek.com/who-ja...
http://nymag.com/selectall/201...

Maybe that was just because there was too much material to get to boring stuff like that in his 15 minutes of fame.

No, it's because his political leanings are by all accounts very much aligned to the people trying to demonise him, hence the multitude of articles trying to position him with the people they don't like.

I hesitate to say 'conspiracy' but it sure as fuck doesn't look like independent and honest reporting to me.

Right. But people didn't say "Oh you ignored this study, here's a link". They just tried to silence him by getting him fired. Gizmodo accused him of writing an 'anti diversity screed', and reproduced it without any of the charts and hyperlinks

https://gizmodo.com/exclusive-...

Vox called it a 'sexist screed' and said it reflected a 'divided tech culture' and said it ignored 'well documented gender biases'

https://www.vox.com/identities...

Vox didn't try to address his arguments, they all said he was

The memo's stereotype-based arguments and cries for less empathy sparked immediate controversy

In Damore's memo, he states that women are more "neurotic" and have a lower "stress tolerance" than men, and that these characteristics - not systemic harassment, routinely being passed over for promotions, or other well-documented instances of sexism in tech culture - are the reason why women do not succeed as often as men do in the high-pressure industry.

He also argues that men have a "higher drive for status" than women, and suggests that this factor, rather than well-documented gender biases in the workplace, may be responsible for the lack of women in leadership positions both at Google and in the tech industry as a whole.

Finally, Damore calls for Google to "De-empathize empathy," arguing that "being emotionally unengaged [with the issue of diversity] helps us better reason about the facts." He decries political correctness, discounting the very concept of unconscious bias and arguing against unconscious bias training for Google employees.

Google's VP of diversity said it 'it advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. and also refused to link to it because "itâ(TM)s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages". I.e. no one addressed his arguments - they caricatured them and effectively labelled him a heretic to the diverse faith.

And you haven't addressed his arguments. You put rational is scare quotes, implying he's actually motivated by sexism.

And I think we can all agree that as traumatic as being downvoted on slashdot is, it's not as bad as being fired. Also look at the the difference in institutional power between the two sides of the argument. The CEO and VP on one side and some hapless engineer on the other. As soon as the engineer disagreed with them, they fired him. Which was a sign to other engineers not to argue with their ideas.

Not to mention most of the media immediately sided with Google and denounced him.

In the old days the left would say that racism/sexism was 'prejudice plus power'. I.e. that white men could be sexist and racist because they held institutional power, but non whites and non men could not be because they did not. The problem with that is that the left holds institutional power these days, at least in the media and at Google. So in that case Damore could at worse be prejudiced, not actually sexist.

Transportation is moving to EV faster in China.

Xi is shutting down coal. Trump is trying to force people to use more, even when they don't want to because its uneconomical.
America is not building newer cleaner more efficient plants, they are continuing to use older dirtier less inefficient ones.
By 2020, every Chinese coal plant will be more efficient than every US coal plant.

If current U.S. regulatory trends continue, by 2020, every coal plant operating in the United States would be illegal to operate in China.

Keep peddling your bullshit. At least you admit hundreds of plants are closing even if you still lie about the reasons.

By 2020, every Chinese coal plant will be more efficient than every US coal plant

And here is another fresh fact filled article.

She is a leftist in the American since which includes social issues.

Clinton decided not to support a UBI, and she has publicly stated that single payer health care is dead in America. She has punted on the issues that liberals care about most. So no, no she is not a leftist in any "since".

I guess Europeans have a more simplest view of left in right (bought by corp - must be right or centrist.)

It's just that simple, yes. Supporting corporatism is a centrist position. And I was born in Santa Cruz, California.

We're going to discriminate because safety is more important than being politically correct?

Cool, looking forward to banning white guys from owning guns.

Personally, I do not even have a particularly solid opinion on the matter that he was discussing in that memo. But I find it quite telling that one side (Mr. Damore) cites studies and such (as biased and wrong as they might be), while all the other side does is whine and say "it can't be true". Well, if the latter is the case, go right ahead and cite some studies that clearly show Mr. Damore is wrong. Or shut the fuck up.

Uh oh. It looks like you've been tricked by the propaganda. Mr. Damore does cite a few studies but that doesn't make his arguments well researched or well supported. Appeals to Authority are fallacious if the authority isn't an expert on the topic or there is no consensus of expert opinion on the topic. Mr. Damore's citations generally fall into the latter category where multiple experts have indicated that he cherry-picked studies with outlier results or troublesomely flawed methodologies to justify his positions. There were a lot of stories, like this one, looking at where his paper falls short on the facts.

I read Damore's paper and found it hamfisted and littered with evidence of the author's shallow understanding of the topics he was writing about. I wasn't particularly offended by it, but then again I wasn't targeted by Damore. However, Damore set himself up for failure by writing about something he knows very little about and he even used a title, "Google's Ideological Echo Chamber", that set him up for failure. Generally, if you want people to listen to what you have to say, it's a good idea not to offend them with your opening line.

Damore cluelessly and artlessly insulted his employers, insulted his peers and boorishly prattled on about his own superiority. I think that's actually a charitable characterisation of his writing, because I am sure that there are many other people who not be so kind. If you're white and male you should consider whether you're also blithely oblivious to racist and sexist subtexts.

Perhaps the worst thing about his paper is that he failed to address any pro-diversity arguments in any way, presenting his argument like there wasn't even an other side to debate. There is an impression that Damore considered non-white, non-male peers to be inherently inferior, unless specifically proven otherwise to him.

Then, why look for a conspiracy?

Agreed, it isn't just the IEA, its everybody.
In recent years Greenpeace has been closer, but even they have routinely underpredicted the rate of installation. Basically nobody doing any serious forecasting has ever over-estimated it.

Frankly I'm far more terrified of a white woman in her pajamas who specifically called the police for help in the first place.

Apparently, someone has a problem with calling out people who see dog whistling everywhere as paranoid loons who see dog whistling everywhere.
All of the time. In everything. Everywhere.

So let me rephrase that...

Explain to me which of these statements is *political*.

You obviously lack the proper training.
You know... the kind that would help you understand that talking about "cutting taxes" is the same thing as going around shouting "Ni99er, ni99er, ni99er."

Which you'd know if you had proper training.
Just as you'd know that global warming is a Chinese conspiracy, that UN is coming for your guns, that Obama is a secret Muslim - who is also a secret demon.
And many other wonderful things you'd "pick up" from various sources with hidden messages.
You'd see ALL OF THE hidden messages and secret information. Everywhere. All of the time.

It's so sad to see smart people dissolve into "blame the foreigners", the oldest trick in the book.

Buddy, Trump's entire campaign was based on "blame the foreigners". Now all of a sudden you don't like that approach? Have you changed your mind because the Russians are white people? Because the same white nationalist sentiment that keeps Putin in power is what got Trump elected?

https://www.realclearpolitics....

https://www.vox.com/2017/8/12/...

https://www.theatlantic.com/po...

The "neighborhood factor," if there is really such a thing, doesn't really matter because gun control works in all neighborhoods: https://www.vox.com/policy-and...

Surely more smugness and namecalling will solve the democrats' problems!

There's three possible correlations:

Somebody likes oversimplifications, don't they?

I did a study on this for a graduate level statistics class. While I did not compare gun ownership rates I did compare the gun laws of various states. I suspect greater restrictions on ownership correlates to ownership.

You just invalidated your own purported study. It took you only two more sentences.

I guess if we look at the data one has a choice, robberies or rapes. Total crime is effectively unchanged but when one goes the other takes it's place.

Nope. You shouldn't guess, especially when it's easy to recognize the flaw in your premise.

You're just acting like "rapist" and "robbers" are interchangeable, but that really isn't very believable.

I'm not the only one that did this analysis, there are others that took similar data and came to similar conclusions.

And you didn't name them. Here's a something though.

They don't come to your conclusion. Or anything similar, unless you want the opposite to be similar.

There's lots of studies on "gun violence" which give a lot of nonsense.

I suspect yours fits under this same auspice.

Again, I looked at ALL CRIME, not gun crime, or this fiction that is "gun violence". Filter out the noise and you are correct, gun ownership does not keep you safe.

But if you add the noise of tax fraud and pilferage, then you can make whatever claims you want about how your gun keeps you safe.

It does mean that women should go armed because they are less likely to get raped when armed. They might have to hand over some cash to make a thug go away but that will save them from a more severe outcome.

You know, you might want to look up the statistical studies on rape. Or robbery.

The two groups are not as correlated as you seem to think.

But seriously, you're the epitome of a fanatic, so blind and zealous that your perception of reality is warped entirely to fit your bias.

No wonder you pretend so frenetically to have "science" on your side.

More guns, more violence.
More guns, more suicide.
More guns, more dead cops.
More guns, more dead kids.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and...

>> Despite environmentalist daydreams, gas and diesel engines will still be around and still be way most new vehicles are powered.

Yes they will still be around but they will be an increasingly expensive niche market. I'll bet that in 10 years they won't be even close to the majority of new vehicles.

https://www.vox.com/energy-and...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/w...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/b...

Weird how no one cared when Obama spent half his presidency golfing

Trump has golfed more than twice as much as President Obama.

http://www.politifact.com/trut...

He's done an amazing job dealing with three unprecedented natural disasters

He's done a shit job in Puerto Rico and has zero legislative accomplishments to his name. By any objective measure, Trump is an historic failure as a president, as a man, and as a human being.

https://www.vox.com/2017/10/1/...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/...

This article sums it up nicely. https://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/...

No one is replacing old nuclear power plants with coal.

Germany has done just that.
https://carboncounter.wordpres...

France too.
http://instituteforenergyresea...

Sadly, so is the USA.
https://instituteforenergyrese...
https://www.vox.com/energy-and...

Or maybe the USA is replacing nuclear with natural gas.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/j...

Japan is almost famous for replacing nuclear with coal
https://www.equaltimes.org/jap...

In the UK natural gas is replacing coal and nuclear.
https://arstechnica.com/scienc...

I just realized I covered 5 of the "Group of Seven" so let's finish this out and see what Canada and Italy are doing.

Turns out Italy shut down their nuclear a long time ago and relies largely on natural gas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Looks like Canada is neither closing or building new nuclear, demand growth has been met with natural gas and hydro.
https://www.vice.com/en_ca/art...

Also in the above article is mention of Russia, China, and South Korea. More about that here:
http://www.world-nuclear.org/i...

So, let's review. France, Germany, Japan, and USA have all built significant numbers of coal plants in the past few years to meet growing demand and to make up for retired nuclear. Canada, UK, USA, and Italy rely heavily on natural gas and are building more capacity, while this might not be replacing nuclear it is another fossil fuel being used instead of wind and solar. China, Russia, and South Korea are actually making significant investments in nuclear to replace fossil fuels, which is still consistent with my claim that one must choose nuclear, fossil fuels, or lights going out.

Why do you write such nonsense? Fukushima Daishi had ordinary emergency power generators, like every plant. They did not rely on external power. However, perhaps that escaped you, the emergency power generators got flooded. And for some dumb reason no one came to the idea to helicopter a few military units in.

That's just so much nonsense in one paragraph it's hard to even come up with a reply. Do you really think that no one thought to helicopter in some generators?

In your country? All other countries that introduced wind and solar show that they are very reliabel and cost effective.

Oh, you mean like how last year the German government paid wind energy producers to sit idle to prevent damage to the electrical grid?
http://dailycaller.com/2016/04...

That doesn't sound very reliable or cost effective. Seriously, do some research before you post. You are looking like a fool.

It's bad enough that Trump's lawyer admits he has documents related to Russia in his safe.

The people who joined Mueller's team wouldn't join unless he had something very compelling. Add the fact that the NY AG is also involved so Trump can't just pardon anyone like a get out of jail free card. Mueller is going after Trump and co on multiple fronts, both from the Russian investigation side as well as RICO and tax evasion. Trump's current legal team are like the keystone cops. All the competent lawyers have quit in frustration over the fact that Trump won't take their advice and/or pay them.

Also, don't forget Felix Sater who is singing like a canary. Sater was involved in numerous Trump business dealings. The fact that it wasn't disclosed at the time that Sater was a convicted felon to the other parties is also highly illegal.

Then there's Trump's adviser Carter Page who has been under surveillance under a FISA warrant since 2014.

Funny. We were in Madisonville, 35 minutes from Hopkinsville off the center-line and had 2 minutes of totality. (Had my phone saying "STOP STOP STOP" right at the end. Never thought I'd actually "look at the sun" with binoculars!) and left at 3. I saw I-69 jammed for miles too. I figured roughly 20 feet per car, 5250 feet in a mile, 2 lanes, 2 occupants per car, so that's a K. We passed at least 15 miles so that's maybe 15K people stuck in traffic. I waved at them all as I drove past in the other direction.

It took us 6 hours to go 300 miles, same as it took to get there. In my case the heaviest traffic was construction in Memphis at 9PM, which Android's Sauron Maps warned me and guided around.

We had guys shooting some BOMBS after the fact. Not a gun, as we had a few of those too, I don't know what it was, any closer and I'd have run for cover. Luckily it was afterwards. Maybe they were trying to scare away the dragon eating the Sun?

Donald Trump colluded....

By committing what crime(s)?

I've never had anybody actually explain what crime was committed by Trump or his Campaign here. I've heard a lot of people claiming that there was a crime or multiple crimes, but nobody can point to any actual laws that they think where broken,. I dare you, come up with an actual law that got broken by Trump or his Campaign related to the Russians...

1) Donald Jr. attended a meeting with the intent of getting campaign assistance in the form of Intel from the Russian Government. This arguably violated campaign finance law. It's not an open and shut legal argument, but it isn't absurd either, and that he tried to get the info from the Russian government is abundantly clear.

2) Multiple members of Trump's campaign have been caught omitting foreign contacts from security clearance forms, in violation of the law.

3) Multiple members of Trump's campaign have been caught concealing payments from foreign governments, spawning money laundering investigations.

4) Trump's Attorney General (also a member of his campaign) lied to congress while under oath during his confirmation hearing.

5) IF Trump and/or his campaign conspired with Russian agents in the DNC hack, or in how to spread the contents emails they knew were hacked, then they're involved in a criminal conspiracy.

6) There's a lot of Russian money and investment flowing through Trump's business empire, it's possibly one of the only things that saved him from bankruptcy. It's extremely speculative, but it opens up the doors to money laundering, bribery, and a whole lot of shady things that might affect Trump personally.

7) Mueller has gotten a grand jury together, he clearly has some very specific crimes in mind.

what crimes did the Russians commit that had any affect on the election?

Are you daft? Were you in a coma last year or did you just forget about the months of coverage about Podesta's emails and the DNC hack?

How on earth is he doing this? Firing Comey? Asking him to let Flynn go? Is that all you got or is there more? You do realize that neither of these things had any affect on your supposed investigations.

You don't actually have to be successful in obstructing an investigation to be guilty of obstructing justice.

You also heard that Comey admitted that Trump wasn't under investigation before h was let go, under oath, after his departure, before congress. There is no obstruction here.

Obstructing justice on an investigation of your associates, and investigation that may grow to include you, is still obstruction of justice.

Also, the sky is blue.

Donald Trump's behavior is the literal definition of treason.

Only in your contrived "Trumped up" accusations of criminal activity by Trump would this be Treason. EVEN IF he did what you claim, you are claiming that what he did meets the Constitutional definition of Treason? LOL.. I think you are nuts..

I'm with you on this one, the literal definition of treason requires a state of war.

Considering how forceful and near-universal condemnation from women and women's groups in and out of tech has been to the memo, it is extremely difficult to believe that this Ask Slashdot was submitted in good faith. Particularly in light of the extreme ease of finding high-profile responses. Here is a (small) sample from a simple google search:

https://www.vox.com/the-big-id...
https://www.vox.com/first-pers...
http://fortune.com/2017/08/09/...
http://www.businessinsider.com...
https://patch.com/california/m...

If you really are that out of the loop, that should inform you pretty well. If you're begging the question, then the quantity of vile reactions in these comments have likely confirmed that it was worth it. I hope it is the former.

Considering how forceful and near-universal condemnation from women and women's groups in and out of tech has been to the memo, it is extremely difficult to believe that this Ask Slashdot was submitted in good faith. Particularly in light of the extreme ease of finding high-profile responses. Here is a (small) sample from a simple google search:

https://www.vox.com/the-big-id...
https://www.vox.com/first-pers...
http://fortune.com/2017/08/09/...
http://www.businessinsider.com...
https://patch.com/california/m...

If you really are that out of the loop, that should inform you pretty well. If you're begging the question, then the quantity of vile reactions in these comments have likely confirmed that it was worth it. I hope it is the former.

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/8/11/16130452/google-memo-women-tech-biology-sexism

https://www.vox.com/first-person/2017/8/10/16119334/female-coders-tech-students-respond-sexist-google-memo

http://fortune.com/2017/08/09/google-diversity-memo-wojcicki/

...

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/8/11/16130452/google-memo-women-tech-biology-sexism

https://www.vox.com/first-person/2017/8/10/16119334/female-coders-tech-students-respond-sexist-google-memo

http://fortune.com/2017/08/09/google-diversity-memo-wojcicki/

...

No, BLM is recognised as a Black Power movement.

By who? Is there an accreditation board somewhere? What criteria did they meet? Mysteriously, you don't identify any.

93% of Black homicides are committed by black people (84% of homicides against white people are committed by whites; while this is only a 10% difference, in the population sizes, a vast amount more white people are killed by non-whites than the other way round.

Mysteriously, you use percentages, not numbers, otherwise you'd have to admit a vast amount is....around 300.

Easily explained by the difference in population, and not particularly meaningful. No matter how much you want it to be.

If Black Lives Matter, then to get the biggest return, they need to address the (probably cultural, gangsta, edgy, which is so popular it's practically mainstream) issues in their own community first.

What issues are those, and why do you think they matter? Maybe you should address how people think it is a fabrication?

But that'd not get any political points and headlines. So nobody does it, or is even allowed to speak about it.

What are you talking about? It gets headlines, and lots of political points. Mysteriously, of course, you want to complain about that because it gets you political points. And you know what, people talk about it.

Maybe you should stop with your talking point where you claim they don't. Those points aren't even worth it.

Now if they allow crowd funding for legal funds of black people accused of murdering other people, with this weight of observable evidence in the public domain, then they get strung up for hypocrisy, as you rightfully put.

You'd also have to string up the folks who complained about money given to support Mumia Abu-Jamal. I wonder how many of them changed their tunes. Mysteriously.

Actually the more nailed article that explains why Damore's is completely and totally wrong is this one .