Slashdot Mirror

...the blue helmets, ...

These ones?

Primarily rich people and real estate investors wild be hit, while the middde class homes a bit farther inland will increase in value. Win/win.

There was a story on this recently in the Washington Post.

The study found the drop in prices appears to be driven primarily by investors buying multiple properties or second homes. Such buyers tend to be wealthier and better educated than owners who occupy their coastal homes, said Ryan Lewis, an assistant professor of finance at the University of Colorado and a co-author of the study.

“Sophisticated buyers ... demand a discount to bear the risk of future sea level rise,” Lewis said in an email.

So the rich people and the real estate investors are the ones getting properties cheap(er).

As opposed to the violence in European football? The ones we hear about every single year, including where a certain group has said women should be barred from the first few rows of a game?

You never hear about mass shootings in Texas

Oh really? Never hear about them?

I guess this list is bogus. No mass shootings you say? Perhaps you're not looking hard enough.

The controversy involves a plan to move all of the Defense Department's data -- classified and unclassified -- on to the cloud.

That is an excellent idea! It should be rolled out as soon as possible.

Sincerely,

China.

Hmm. Lets just explore for a moment who is demanding racial segregation in the US.

http://www.spiked-online.com/n...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
https://www.thecollegefix.com/...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/5...
https://www.washingtonexaminer...

Are those "rich reichtard nazis"? I'm not familiar with the term, so I'll have to assume so for the moment.

which Kaspersky refers ...

Why are we reading anything originating from a KGB-controlled source again?

"In the US, far left is currently mainstream"

bwahaha...

Left: - universal healthcare - environmental protections - marijuana legal - hate speech outlawed - no coal plants

FAR left, is above plus - universal income - 50%-90% corporate tax rate - all drugs legal - proportional representation - nationalized critical industries (energy, water, internet) and some too big to fail businesses or businesses in the national interest - no more nukes, nuke plants or any polluting power plant. renewables only. - cap higher end wages

So I very much doubt that the "mainstream" in the USA is "far left". I think you guys can barely get to the centrist position.

I know its said time and time again, but the USA version of "left" is considered center or center right by other 1st world democracies.

You left out their most extreme positions and you know it. For example:

Left:

- general disdain for white people and favor affirmative action type programs. I think this is unique to the US. - OK to openly fly job ads that specify no white males unless they are gay - general disdain for Christians as a group - general disdain for anyone from "fly over" states, the south, or just not from a city - amnesty for all illegal immigrants is acceptable. Multiple times is fine too. - Abolish ICE so that enforcement of immigration laws is handicapped - force people to use an ever expanding list of new pronouns depending on what they identify as that day - deplatforming / censorship is OK as long as it's hate speech. Note that hate speech is very broadly defined and full of exclusions.

Far Left:

- wants reparations for slavery, always calculated to be in the trillions of USD - segregation in the form of safe spaces where only "people of color" are allowed - abolish borders altogether, anyone can come in any time and stay however long they like

Think I made this garbage up? Here are some citations:

https://www.inc.com/suzanne-lu... https://www.thecollegefix.com/... https://www.theatlantic.com/bu... https://www.washingtonpost.com... https://www.washingtontimes.co...

Most of those "adaptations" failed quickly (often violently, "President" turns into dictator fast - see Turkey, and Russia

The common western fallacy of thinking that just because a foreign leader is disliked abroad, he must be at home, too. Putin keeps getting elected because he remains popular in Russia, while the best the opposition can put forward are convicted felons. Those convictions could be legit or purely political, but your party is weak-assed-weak if that's the best you can put forward. It would be like 2020 rolling around and the best person Democrats could find to run against Trump is William Jefferson, given a 13 year sentence after dirty money was found in his freezer.

No, it's not the same.

See, here's the thing. I should be able to walk into a polling place and vote. And, after the election, the ballots will be audited to determine whether my vote is legitimate.

I'd rather throw out a million votes from illegal immigrants after the election than prevent someone's 90 year-old grandmother from voting because she, wisely, does not have a driver's license.

For example, here's someone who voted twice. Guess what? They caught her. Here's an article with a bunch of other examples. They caught these people.

My sense is, in those days people cared a lot more about how history would judge them, thus the primary motivation was to establish a stable democratic system.

That mattered to them, but the primary motivation was to salvage the nation. There was widespread discontent at the time, in no small part due to the Continental (currency) having become worthless. In essence, the founders had financed the revolution with money they printed willy-nilly, and with IOU's. The wealthy merchant class (who had financed the war), particularly, was hard hit by this -- if your wealth was in agricultural land and slaves you were in pretty okay shape, but those who held their wealth in currency got brutally hosed. That's a dangerous thing to do to folks who have already shown their willingness to devote their own resources to armed rebellion.

Madison himself cared a lot about his image, and edited his notes after the fact to paint himself in a more favorable light. Reading his Notes with this in mind alters the view pretty considerably. If it's something you're really interested in, the Anti-Federalist Papers point out many perceived flaws in the Constitution and the concerns raised in public debate at the time, e.g. the establishment of a permanent aristocracy, which one might argue has been in evidence since the mid-nineteenth century.

Never mind how damned much reading that is. :-)

"Lot's" in my parent comment should have been "Lots".

The linked story says, "As nebulous as the rating system is ..." Worse than nebulous, which is "unclear, vague, or ill-defined". Probably foolish.

Washington Post story: Facebook is rating the trustworthiness of its users on a scale from zero to 1. Quote from that story: "... Facebook has given people more options, some users began falsely reporting items as untrue, a new twist on information warfare..."

Another quote: "But how these new credibility systems work is highly opaque..."

"Lot's" in my parent comment should have been "Lots".

The linked story says, "As nebulous as the rating system is ..." Worse than nebulous, which is "unclear, vague, or ill-defined". Probably foolish.

Washington Post story: Facebook is rating the trustworthiness of its users on a scale from zero to 1. Quote from that story: "... Facebook has given people more options, some users began falsely reporting items as untrue, a new twist on information warfare..."

Another quote: "But how these new credibility systems work is highly opaque..."

They also had pro Bernie Sanders ads, pro/anti Hillary ads, pro/anti BLM ads, pro/con immigrant ads, every hot button topic..the works, from both angles.
The idea was to sow discord and division, more than to promote any single candidate or party (namely, Trump), at least at the primaries stage, and then secondarily, I think, maybe bolster the fringe elements of each party, both Trump and Bernie, just to stir things up more.. because they were perceived as outside the political mainstream.
This only works insofar as Facebook ads are really that effective, which is doubtful. The only people they'd most likely, potentially affect would be the undecided independents, as most Rs and Ds tend to vote along party lines regardless.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

BTW, just because something is a corporate entity doesn't mean the people who run it can't have a collective political bias too.

Strictly speaking the states do amend the constitution (well are part of the process at least). No amendments to the constitution can be passed without the states involvement.

There are actually four ways. (1) Both houses propose an amendment with a two-thirds vote, and three-fourths of the state legislatures approve. Twenty-six of the 27 amendments were approved in this manner. (2) Both houses propose an amendment with a two-thirds vote, and three-fourths of the states approve the amendment via ratifying conventions. Only the 21st Amendment, which repealed Prohibition, was passed in this manner. (3) Two-thirds of the state legislatures call on Congress to hold a constitutional convention, and three-fourths of the state legislatures approve the amendment. (4) Two-thirds of the state legislatures call on Congress to hold a constitutional convention, and three-fourths of the states approve the amendment via ratifying conventions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

on Friday August 17th, 2018: https://twitter.com/ariannahuf...
https://www.thriveglobal.com/s...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And sadly Musk rejected that advice:
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/s...

One of the things Matthew Walker says in his book on sleep is that sleep-deprived people have poor judgement about the effects of not enough sleep on their cognition.

If Musk has paid attention to that tweet I sent and got more sleep, might he have not have made the subsequent tweet about taking Tesla private which not was him under SEC investigation and facing multiple shareholder lawsuits?

Blacks in the U.S. had a much lower rate of fatherless homes and crime before the "War on Poverty" started in 1964 and the government took over as the "Dad" in families, incentivizing single motherhood. In 1950, the single motherhood rate for blacks was under 20%. Now it's over 70%.

When you pay trillions of dollars per year for something over decades, you shouldn't be surprised when you end up with more of it.

Apparently avoiding a chip implant which his implicated in higher incidents of cancer is not one of those rights or protections.

It boggles the mind how you have no idea that you are the useful idiots that Lenin used to spread Communism. Read the list of Communisms 45 goals to destroy the US such as:

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the U.S. [Note: In his book, "Reagan’s War," Peter Schweizer demonstrates the astonishing degree to which communists and communist sympathizers have penetrated the Democratic Party. In his book, Schweizer writes about the presidential election of 1979.]

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions, by claiming their activities violate civil rights. [Note: This strategy goes back to the founding of the American Civil Liberties Union by Fabian Socialists Roger Baldwin and John Dewey and Communists William Z. Foster and Elizabeth Gurley Flynn among others.]

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for Socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations that are under Communist attack. [Note:The success of these goals, from a communist perspective, is obvious. Is there any doubt this is so?]

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV & motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all form of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings," substituting shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. " Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and TV. [Note: This is the Gramscian agenda of the "long march through the institutions" spelled out explicitly: gradual takeover of the "means of communication" and then using those vehicles to debauch the culture and weaken the will of the individual to resist.]

Which party does this sound like? Trump has put more pressure on the Russians than any President since Reagan, Obama mocked Romney for calling the Russians the biggest threat but had no problems asking them to be patient until after the election when he would have more freedom.

You want to talk treason, start there. How about you show a single shred of proof of treason that Trump committed?

This mother's daughter almost drowned, because the mother stopped watching her for a short while.

This article says the symptoms of drowning are not obvious. The article quotes five statements. Quoted statements 3 and 4 say that when someone is drowning, it's impossible for them to raise their arms and wave. (I'm not a doctor or a psychologist, so I don't know if the article is right.)

Black unemployment falls to lowest level on record

Black unemployment rate falls to record low

Black unemployment hits all-time low

Do people believe that presidents create jobs?

Here's someone who does:

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

"“I’ve created over a million jobs since I’m president.”
— President Trump, remarks on infrastructure, Aug. 15, 2017

“I think if we continue to create jobs like I’ve done — over 1 million since I’ve been in office, way over 1 million.”
— Trump, remarks at rally in Phoenix, Aug. 22, 2017

And here's someone who thinks that presidents can destroy jobs:

Washington Times...

I guess if presidents can create jobs, they can also destroy jobs. Or maybe they can only do one or the other, depending on whether you are from the same political party as the president. In fact, there's probably a newspaper article, or a passage in the Bible, or a clause in the Constitution that will support whatever you to believe.

Has anyone on Slashdot ever changed their view of an item of "fake news" changed based on something they've read? I doubt it...

Do people believe that presidents create jobs?

Here's someone who does:

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

"“I’ve created over a million jobs since I’m president.”
— President Trump, remarks on infrastructure, Aug. 15, 2017

“I think if we continue to create jobs like I’ve done — over 1 million since I’ve been in office, way over 1 million.”
— Trump, remarks at rally in Phoenix, Aug. 22, 2017

If only the State of California didn't consistently slash it's forest-fire fighting budget. But it's more important to build a 160 kph train from Bakersfield to Modesto, so...

Virtually everyone in America believes that there are necessary limits to 2nd amendment rights. For instance, you can not own an anti aircraft gun in this country.

Given this, quite a lot of states have decided that having their citizenry living in perpetual fear that they could be shot over a stupid confrontation by a lunatic ( https://www.washingtonpost.com... ) is something that should not exist in a civilized society.

In California, I can speak my mind generally without fear of some one shooting me or at the least trying to intimidate me with their firearm.

Distribution is a service.

When economists talk about "distribution", then mean the distribution and allocation of goods and services. Economists don't care what logo is on the truck making shipments. They care about how many trucks are going to what places.

Capitalists see subsidies as Lemon Socialism. Liberals see subsides as a form of capitalism. The capitalists have a better claim: The TARP bank bailout, and the auto industry bailout were both passed by Democrats, and opposed by Republicans.

Partisanship somehow changes the merits of an argument? That's an... interesting... approach to debate. Politics aside, it's worth noting that the auto bailout ended up costing the US government about $14 billion, while TARP as a whole (including the auto bailout) actually ended up turning a $86 billion profit overall. All together, the program seems to have done exactly what it was intended to do: reduce the shock of the financial crisis, stabilizing the economy to protect against further snowball effects.

Your partisan analysis of subsidies also doesn't mesh with a socialist perspective. To a socialist, subsidies are a governmental decision that something risky is of such benefit to society that the risk (financial or otherwise) should be offset. In a totalitarian state like the USSR or DPRK, the state-run company in that area would just go order work on that project... and open the door to corruption because the state will ensure the project's success, no matter how poorly it's managed or how wasteful it may be. With private industry, however, the subsidies have to be financial offsets, either ensuring a minimum income or covering some expenses outright.

What's offensive to a socialist is the use of subsidies and financial incentives to support projects that aren't directly in the public interest. For example, I know of a particular company that promised to upgrade their factory in a small town, but only if they got a nice tax cut for a few decades (similar to a more-publicized event). While that made for nice headlines about "creating jobs", it hurt the town in the long run. Since the company's normal taxes were a significant percentage of the town's budget, local projects actually lost funding in order to keep the town's budget balanced. Sure, some folks got a new shiny office building, but the high school roof started collapsing.

Unfortunately, that's been a recurring theme with American government policies lately. A notable example is the coal industry, which is subsidized by about $850 million annually, yet only employs about 77,000 people. That's about an $11,000 cost per person per year, ostensibly to keep those 77,000 jobs. The question is, of course, whether we need those jobs as a society. To a socialist, that $11,000 would likely be better spent funding career education and training to support other industries (or even bringing new skills to the coal industry), with the key benefit being that even if the coal industry collapsed, the society would still have a larger wealth of skills to continue progress.

Again, it's a matter of philosophy. The socialists want societal improvement to be the primary goal of government, with industries benefiting indirectly. Who actually owns the company is relatively insignificant at this point.

Let's leave aside the difference between having a human physically show up and having bots click on a website link. Let's leave aside also that the types of ID required might be aimed at certain demographics, like in Texas where a gun license is an acceptable ID to vote but a student ID from a state school is not an ok ID https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/jun/26/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-says-you-can-vote-texas-concealed-/. Let's put aside also that North Carolina Republicans deliberately optimized their voting ID system to minimize African-American turnout https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/29/the-smoking-gun-proving-north-carolina-republicans-tried-to-disenfranchise-black-voters/. Putting all of that aside why are so many people focused on in-person voter fraud when the evidence and consensus of actual experts is that absentee ballot fraud is an actual and serious problem especially in local elections?

He promises many things, and - usually with delay - delivers.
- we have landing Earth orbital rockets (supersonic retro-propulsion is vital for Mars human exploration)
- we have reusable rockets
- we have the most powerful rocket available for fraction of the price of the next one in launch cargo capabilities
- we do have model 3
- power grid stability: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

His rocket technology can truly open space for sustain human exploration with ~$2000/kg to LEO (FH) through asteroid mining. I remember very well the time, when people were saying that landing an orbital rocket in Earth gravity well is not possible, then that relaunching is not possible, then that it is possible to relaunch, but it will never be profitable - now they are quiet.

People might not like Mr Elon Musk personally, I do not know the guy, but I am happy he peruses his dreams.

Really you dumb fuk? You haven't heard about this before? You haven't heard of Tommy Robinson who was put into prison? If you really haven't heard about this ish before you need to take your head out of your a$$.

Government agencies from San Francisco to Stockholm to Berlin to London have had issues and have covered it up. Not all the rape and crime issues are the same. It's the silencing of reporting that counts.

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal....
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
https://www.independent.co.uk/...
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-en...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news...
http://wjla.com/news/inside-yo...

I haven't vetted these articles. It just shows that if you were at all paying attention you would have seen this.

What's as disturbing as the physical violence is the coordinated news blackout. This is horrible. Not discussing a problem doesn't make it go away.

Did not Bayer just acquire Monsanto for 66 Billion ? That amount should just about cover the damages that are going to be discovered. This cover up is going to make Mesothelioma look like a common cold. Bayer knew long ago that Round-Up was malignant and caused a wide variety of issues, up to and including Colony Collapse Disorder, or the disappearing Bee issue felt around the world.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

At least be consistent with your bias. If voter fraud implies fraud by voters, election fraud implies fraud by election workers, which are not "The government" they are local volunteers and workers.

No, you've got it wrong again. The fraud is being perpetrated by elected officials and their appointees, not "election workers" in the sense of the people who show up to work polls. It's happening from the county level right up to the statewide official level. Just look at two secretaries of state that are currently running for governor: Kris Kobach of Kansas and Brian Kemp of Georgia. Both men are as corrupt as the day is long and are barely staying one step ahead of the courts (who are closing in, nonetheless). Kobach is now overseeing a recount in his own election. The self-dealing, fraud and outright theft with these guys is astonishing.

https://www.kansascity.com/new...

https://www.kansascity.com/new...

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Virginia - as a number of other states decertified the touch screen voting machines last year.Virginia scraps touch-screen voting machines as election for governor looms.

The primary system used here is a Optical scan paper ballot system.Voting Equipment & Electronic Pollbooks Certified for Use in Virginia. It is still theoretically possible to hack the system, as the only truly secure computer is one that is never turned on, however the paper records are available, and can be recounted,

Recounts happen even with well run automated vote counting and even with well run voting processes Virginia 2017 Election results including recounts.

If you want to be part of the solution, register, and vote.

Shrug. I imagine this isn't captured by every state; and in any case, I can implement EVMs to pare down the data to just Voter ID and not attach to ballots, which would capture the usual public data only (that you voted on a particular date). I quite like that approach anyway.

When it comes to EVMs, I implement various configurable options by implementing them in separate assemblies, and then removing those assemblies performing non-necessary functions from a deployment image (i.e. the programming code to do a particular thing simply does not exist in the EVM). Can't use a function that doesn't exist. In this case, the class to store certain voter information would simply store less, and the option to capture more-detailed voter identifying data wouldn't appear because reflection would not find a class exposing such a thing.

Amusing to see Donald Trump's voting history. I'm pretty sure these are by registration at the time, and not by ballot votes.

Why don't you take your faggot (gaping) ass to a Muslim bakery and tell them you demand they bake you a SSM wedding cake and sue THEM for refusing?

Because I live in a state where the mosques were vandalized and the legislature had a freakout over a utility sink. There are no legal grounds for me to do so, in fact, a judge disrupted a court proceeding over his ire over the Supreme court decision, by refusing to let two parties settle a divorce because of a feigned complaint about Obergefeld v. Hodges.

Maybe you live in a state where you would have legal grounds. So why don't you? Is it because the Muslim bakeries were happy to bake a cake, and if you tried to sue them for refusing, the Judge would ask why you committed perjury. Some of us remember your heavily edited video was falsified.

You are a deceitful, hypocritical, bloviating, shallow-minded, shit-spewing, garbage-flinging Right-wing buffoon.

Keep repeating yourself.

This is public information.

And it's wrapped in limestone rather than granite, my bad.

Suppose, for example, that some highly qualified, methodical and determinedly unbiased researcher has conducted a brilliant set of experiments which appear to show that people of one race are consistently superior to people of another race in some important way. The work appears to be extremely well-conceived and well-executed. Now think about which universities you're familiar with would be interested in employing her and funding her research. TU would care only about the quality of her research. SJU would give at least as much weight to the potential social impact.

This is actually quite common, especially in medical and sports sciences.

But Haidt is talking about the social sciences. I guess I should have said "people of one race are consistently superior to people of another race in some important area of cognitive ability", to make the point clearer. (Note that I'm not making the claim that such exists; merely proposing a hypothetical of a scientific result. If you find yourself unable to grant the hypothetical premise, you should think about what that means.)

If social justice was not interested in truth, rational argument and careful wide-ranging research without artificial limits then it wouldn't be so strong in academia.

It should also be noted that the phenomenon Haidt is describing is less about the goals and behaviors of academics, and more about the goals and behaviors of administrators and students. Yes, researchers want to study whatever they find interesting and they tend to have a very narrow focus and relatively little concern for the big picture, especially when they're in the process of producing substantial new results. This focus is necessary and appropriate. It's when the researchers become older and their work is mostly supervisory, or when academics go into administration which leads them to be primarily concerned with internal and external relationships, that the suppressive influences arise.

A minority of students (about 20%, according to recent research) have begun demanding that their university experience be made "safe" for them, with extensive demands for trigger warnings, safe spaces, and suppression of ideas that contradict their notions of social justice. SJUs are the ones who listen to these student demands and similar external pressures. TUs are the ones who declare that students' must be exposed to the broadest selection of views. As Chicago University put it in its letter to the class of 2020:

Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called “trigger warnings,” we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual “safe spaces” where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own.

In contrast, Brown president tries to defend academic freedom while simultaneously defending safe spaces, trigger warnings and the de-invitation of speakers who have bad ideas. Her letter to the Washington Post is written so that it's easy to extract quotes arguing for unlimited academic freedom, but the overall narrative is the opposite.

If you truly haven't seen the suppression of academic freedom in the name of political correctness, I highly recommend that you read the first few chapter's of Steven Pinker's "The Blank Slate". Even if you don't agree with the larger conclusions of the book, the first few chapters provide a great overview of how extensively politically incorrect research has been suppressed over the last two or three decades.

It would be like the self-proclaimed "rationals",

....here's a tip: MOVE.

The entire midsection of the country is facing unemployment levels the lowest they've been in 20 years. Real wages are going up, and the cost of living is HALF (or less) than it is on the coasts.

Find out what REAL "quality of life" means when it's not measured in Starbucks per square mile. Where you can actually see the stars?

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Actually, better: no. Please DON'T move to the midsection of the country. It's terrible here. Much better to live in your car.

Most did not vote for him because they like him, but because they hate the utter hypocrisy, corruption, and inefficiency of the standard political class. [...] people have rational decisions as to why they do what they do.

The problem with your argument is that there is nothing rational about voting for Trump because you are against hypocrisy, corruption, or inefficiency — because Trump's whole life has been based on those things. He says things about revering women, but he abuses them and has raped at least one, by definition if not conviction. He runs businesses into the ground deliberately in schemes which leave him holding the bag and his investors holding their dicks. And his repeated bankruptcies have cost us all money, due to the many court proceedings which decreased the efficiency of the legal system. Supporting Trump because you don't approve of the status quo is cutting off your face to spite your face. And the proof is in the pudding, because Trump voters are hurt most by Trump's policies.

Trump voters want to believe that they are as intelligent as other voters, so they are defending their decision to vote for Trump to the bitter end in spite of the ample evidence that it was a terrible idea, since Trump as president is actually worse than the status quo. This is known as cognitive dissonance.

I am not a Clinton fan. I am not even inclined to give her a pass on her email server. However, Trump is provably worse as president than Clinton would have been. He is literally a worse president than Richard Nixon.

Trying to reach Trump voters who refuse to acknowledge reality is a fat waste of time. The goal now is to reach people who didn't bother to vote, and convince them to vote against Trump to avoid more of this shit-show.

TL;DR: Voting for Trump because you don't like corruption is goddamned stupid, and no amount of polishing makes a turd into a diamond.

You need a citation that there are no dinosaurs? You must not get out much. And why is slashdot now filled with anti-science dumbasses modding me down?

A meteor struck the earth, clouded out the sun. Plants and other animals disappeared, and dinosaurs died from not having those resources. A meteor did not hit each dinosaur on the head directly. Instead of a meteor we now have humans destroying all the resources. We are heading for another mass extinction. https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Football/basketball pays for the rest of the sport programs.

I do hope you're kidding:
28 Top tier Div1 teams spending more than they make
Schools prop up their football programs with student fees
Only 8 schools broke even or better in a 5 year period
Schools play loose with numbers to show athletics programs as more profitable to the university when those "profits" are really earmarked for athletics scholarships

And finally, just to blow the entire set of "profitability" out the window, note that most universities don't include a whole host of associated costs into the calculation of whether their programs are profitable. That last one basically calls into question any previous studies that do not explicitly account for a host of expenses that should be rolled into any sports program. Essentially regular students/parents/loans are paying for the sports programs at all universities with the potential exception of less than a literal handful.

But as a group, the new judges are indeed whiter, more male and more conservative than recent presidents’ nominees

Not racist or sexist, just a fact -- from an article analyzing the new court nominations. You're the one who seems a bit "upset". Why so touchy?

It would also be far better if we had actual journalists who knew their shit, instead of 27 year olds who uncritically accept a narrative. I'd expect journalists to all questions, not be simply the extension of the Democrat public affairs office.

D or R has nothing to do with this.

The Republicans are decided more anti-worker. Trump has been appointing, and the Senate confirming, noticeably white, male, conservative judges at a record pace (with some analysis) If Kavanaugh gets appointed to the SCOTUS, then things may (will probably) be even less beneficial for workers, as noted by the articles I mentioned here.

So, ya, the "D" and "R" matter - overall.

D or R has nothing to do with this.

The Republicans are decided more anti-worker. Trump has been appointing, and the Senate confirming, noticeably white, male, conservative judges at a record pace (with some analysis) If Kavanaugh gets appointed to the SCOTUS, then things may (will probably) be even less beneficial for workers, as noted by the articles I mentioned here.

So, ya, the "D" and "R" matter - overall.

That Russian Agent ( Maria ) Has stronger ties to Oabma (met with his administration) than the NRA (basically did nothing with them).

The disinformation is strong with this one.

Make of that what you will... that and the fact that Obama did nothing about Russian interference despite being warned about a year in advance the Russians were trying to interfere.

Thanks disinformation guy but Obama actually did warn us but McConnell would only agree to a severely watered down warning.

What you and others have overlooked is that Obama obviously worked with Trump and Russia to prevent Hillary from being elected.

LOL! Where did you get that idea from, infowars?

It also fits with Obama being a stronger supporter of Russian actions that Trump. Trump has actually double-crossed Russia, once he was elected Trump proceeded to act directly against Russian interests (just ask 200 dead Russian mercenaries in Syria).

What you refuse to acknowledge is that Trump doesn't always agree with what the administration does. He's out of the loop on what actually happens because he refuses to even read basic information about what is happening.

I wondered, why is it that the summary mentions not just what kinds of false organizations were present that had to be removed?

Following the story link you can see for yourself:

"Aztlan Warriors", "Black Elevation", "Mindful Being", and "Resisters."

It is interesting so I actually looked into it. What they are doing is like before, setting up events so that opposing groups would appear at the same place. The obvious conclusion is that they are trying to create a violent political event to create even higher tensions in the US.

Huh! That's odd, not one of those groups represent Trump or Republicans in any way.

The point (in this case) isn't to promote one side or the other, it's to create violence.

It makes you wonder if groups are going to all the trouble to create false fronts on Facebook, how many people you see at protests are really there because what they are protesting, or how many are there to be paid to stir up trouble

Considering the Russians are in Russia, it would say it's very few. However, we do know of one Russian agent: Maria Butina who infiltrated the NRA.

I have thought a lot of Antifa people are probably not really wanting to burn cars/buildings, but that there are selected individuals added to stir up the mob just to create chaos.

Here's the problem with that idea... Antifa isn't burning cars or buildings. Feel free to link to an article to the contrary.

Literally the first Google hit.

Just fuck off. None of those websites are making anything uo:

Lifeway issued a statement saying stores will be pulling the remaining copies of the book from stores.

“LifeWay was informed this week that Alex Malarkey has retracted his testimony about visiting heaven as told in the book “The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven.” Therefore, we are returning to the publisher the few copies we have in our stores.”

https://wgntv.com/2015/01/16/b...

Thursday evening, Todd Starowitz, public relations director of Tyndale House, told The Washington Post: “Tyndale has decided to take the book and related ancillary products out of print.”

On Friday afternoon, Tyndale released this statement: “We are saddened to learn that Alex Malarkey, co-author of ‘The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven,’ is now saying that he made up the story of dying and going to heaven. Given this information, we are taking the book out of print.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And direct from the publisher's website:

Since 2010, Tyndale House Publishers has been the publisher of The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven—the story of Alex Malarkey, a six-year-old boy who was in a horrific auto accident that left him in a coma for two months. When he awoke from the coma, he related to his parents that angels had taken him to the gates of heaven. Tyndale has been saddened to hear that Alex is now saying that he made up the story of dying and going to heaven. This was the first time Tyndale had been told that Alex fabricated the story. We were alerted to his public statement on January 14, 2015, and have since confirmed Alex’s retraction with his father, Kevin Malarkey.

https://www.tyndale.com/news/t...

Now please tell me how quotes directly from the book's publisher are now fake, too.

Some form of criminal conspiracy. Educate yourself:

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Citations:

https://www.washingtonpost.com... google answer using search: total immigrant population https://www.fairus.org/issue/s...