Slashdot Mirror


Trump Will Get Power To Send Unblockable Mass Text Messages To All Americans (nymag.com)

President-elect Donald Trump will have access to a system which can send unblockable texts to every phone in the United States once he becomes the president. From a report on NYMag: These 90-character messages, known as Wireless Emergency Alerts (or WEAs), are part of a program put in place after Congress passed the Warning, Alert, and Response Network (WARN) Act, in 2006. WEAs allow for targeted messages to be sent to every cell phone getting a signal from certain geographically relevant cell towers (or, in a national emergency, all of them). While it'd be a true nightmare to get screeching alerts from your phone that "Loser Senate Democrats still won't confirm great man Peter Thiel to Supreme Court. Sad!", there are some checks and balances on this. While President-elect Trump hasn't shown much impulse control when it comes to his favorite mass-messaging service, Twitter, the process for issuing a WEA isn't as simple as typing out a 90-character alert from a presidential smartphone and hitting "Send." All WEAs must be issued through FEMA's Integrated Public Alert Warning System, meaning that an emergency alert from the president still has at least one layer to pass through before being issued. While FEMA is under control of the executive branch (the head of FEMA is selected by the president, and reports to the Department of Homeland Security), the agency would have a vested interest in not seeing their alert system bent toward, uh, non-emergency ends.

555 comments

  1. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    LOLOLOLOL

    1. Re:LOL by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Funny

      My sig proven as accurate as ever

    2. Re:LOL by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Scott Adams?

      --
      No sig today...
    3. Re:LOL by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I'd love to get texts from our new president. It sure beats getting random texts from shops I occasionally buy something

    4. Re:LOL by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      I was thinking Douglas Adams. Where's my towel?

    5. Re:LOL by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      "Mostly harmless" my ass....

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    6. Re:LOL by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Charles Addams.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    7. Re:LOL by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      For reference, below is my sig, in case I change it soon or it's filtered out of mod-mode:

      Rigged! Comedians & cartoonists conspired to get him elected

      [See, I've learned good documentation and coding practices. (Pats self on head)]

  2. Don't give him ideas by NotInHere · · Score: 5, Funny

    Journalists, be careful what you publish. Don't give donald ideas!

    1. Re:Don't give him ideas by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have been woken at 2am by idiotic Amber Alerts about incidents hundreds of miles from my home. If there was some way to block these messages, I would do so. I don't think Donald is going to be any worse than the bozos already abusing this system. The kidnapping of a blonde white girl by her non-custodial parent, is not a "national emergency".

    2. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be a moron and put your phone on silent at night ? Or preferably all day.

    3. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Since he isn't doing this, hasn't done this, doesn't this fall under "fake news"?

    4. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It certainly falls under "not news."

    5. Re:Don't give him ideas by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have been woken at 2am by idiotic Amber Alerts about incidents hundreds of miles from my home. If there was some way to block these messages, I would do so.

      Blocking Amber Alerts on iOS is simple. Go to Settings -> Notifications, scroll down to the bottom of that page, unselect "AMBER Alerts" (and/or "Emergency Alerts"). I assume it's equally easy on Android.

      But back to the subject at hand... I held my nose and voted for Hillary, but I'm getting really tired of these "Trump may do this" and "Trump might do that" propaganda pieces that are spewing forth across the web. I'm nervous about his presidency; but the election is over - let's see what he actually does, and then react if necessary.

      I'm old enough to remember similar hysteria from back when Reagan was elected. Early on, his administration tried to do some pretty darn stupid things, like attempting to let ketchup count as a vegetable in school lunches. I remember Bill Clinton's early day missteps as well ("Sorry, we don't talk to the military"). But between the politics of Washington DC and the court of public opinion, the initial lunatic fringe crap gets self-corrected pretty darn quickly. The Republic will survive.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    6. Re: Don't give him ideas by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Some of us cannot turn off our phones at night. I had to deal with my Father dying of leukemia for 3 years or so, then an over-anxious Mother who was having panic attacks and then we found she was developing Alzheimer's. For 10 years, I had to be on call 24/7 because I never knew what would happen or if that out-of-town phone call was a friend or an EMT or someone calling on their cell phone to tell me she needed help or was in serious trouble.

      It must be a wonderful privilege to live in a world where it's easy to imagine not having to be on call 24/7.

    7. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are three levels of alerts you CAN turn off - Amber alerts are one of them. Just turn it off. The others are "severe threats" and "extreme threats". Like you, I have had Amber alerts in the middle of the night, "shelter in place due to pipe leak" (in a town several miles away), etc. I turned all of these off several years ago. Much happier without them. Too bad we can't turn off the DrumpfAlert though...

    8. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have been woken at 2am by idiotic Amber Alerts about incidents hundreds of miles from my home. If there was some way to block these messages, I would do so. I don't think Donald is going to be any worse than the bozos already abusing this system. The kidnapping of a blonde white girl by her non-custodial parent, is not a "national emergency".

      Get a better phone? I can pick and choose - presidential, extreme threats, severe threat, and Amber alerts. Currently only have presidental allowed and don't really expect to ever see one, regardless of everyone's hand-wringing about Trump.

    9. Re: Don't give him ideas by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I dunno about Android, but iphones have a night mode that's highly configurable. Calls and texts you want make noise and the rest doesn't.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    10. Re:Don't give him ideas by Nunya666 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have been woken at 2am by idiotic Amber Alerts about incidents hundreds of miles from my home. If there was some way to block these messages, I would do so.

      Blocking Amber Alerts on iOS is simple. Go to Settings -> Notifications, scroll down to the bottom of that page, unselect "AMBER Alerts" (and/or "Emergency Alerts"). I assume it's equally easy on Android.

      I don't get enough Amber alerts to be annoyed by them, but your post made me curious about turning them off on my Android (Galaxy S5). A quick search on DDG revealed that, on Samsung Galaxy phones, it's a setting in the Messaging app. Interestingly, there is also an option for Presidential Alerts that is checked/selected/enabled and it cannot be unchecked.

    11. Re: Don't give him ideas by sunking2 · · Score: 1, Informative

      What ever did they do before there were phones....

    12. Re:Don't give him ideas by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      You can turn off Amber Alerts on Android.

      How you do it depends on what version of Android. Under Marshmallow, you open the messaging app, then open "Settings", "More" (under "ADVANCED SETTINGS"), then you will see "Emergency alerts". Under that option you can turn off Amber Alerts.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    13. Re:Don't give him ideas by SecurityGuy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, he's not the president yet, so he doesn't have the ability to do it.

      It's not news, but it's also not fake. It's basically an opinion piece, which is hardly new to /.

    14. Re:Don't give him ideas by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 1
      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    15. Re:Don't give him ideas by PRMan · · Score: 1

      You can block Amber Alerts in Android in settings. Since Amber Alerts are unfortunately more likely to be an ex-wife trying to get her ex-husband in trouble than an actual emergency, I turned it off.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    16. Re: Don't give him ideas by Calydor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In many cases, wait until it was too late.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    17. Re:Don't give him ideas by jellomizer · · Score: 0

      Well I would quit about all this doom and gloom. Trump is set to be a horrible administration, and I am still POed at all those people who got hooked on Clinton's Emails (After he look to hire someone who leaked information to a journalist he was sleeping with)

      But I besides his big mouth I doubt he is going to use the American Alert system as his personal toy. He has so many more ways to address people then abusing the alert system.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    18. Re:Don't give him ideas by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      The Lard Ass and Chief has never suffered from having a single creative thought

    19. Re:Don't give him ideas by PRMan · · Score: 1

      Can't block Presidential Alerts on Android unless you root it.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    20. Re: Don't give him ideas by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      Poor A/C one has only to put a simple spam filter on the what ever the Lard Ass and Chief coughs up.

    21. Re:Don't give him ideas by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      I can't hardly wait to see this new Lard Ass and Chief exit office and the only gig he can get is opening a grocery store, in Iowa.

    22. Re:Don't give him ideas by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Can't block Presidential Alerts on Android unless you root it.

      You can't block Presidential Alerts on iOS either. "Emergency Alerts" can be disabled, but that is a broader category which apparently covers stuff like tornadoes, floods, zombie invasions...

      I've never gotten an Emergency Alert on my phone. I did disable Amber Alerts, though, after an incident where I got a half-dozen alerts in a short period of time regarding an abduction that happened hundreds of miles away. The alerts aren't really useful, either - very short messages with little detail except perhaps a car make/model plus sometimes a license plate number. Since Amber Alerts also show up on signs over our area freeways/roadways, and since they're really only useful if you're driving and happen to see the vehicle in question, I don't think disabling them on my phone makes a difference (other than to improve my safety, since they're distracting and annoying).

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    23. Re: Don't give him ideas by Straif · · Score: 2

      Most of these emergency alerts (Amber Alerts/WEAs) will cause your phone to ring regardless of the sound settings; it's kind of the point.

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
    24. Re: Don't give him ideas by KingKaneOfNod · · Score: 1

      He's got you by the pussy too, huh?

    25. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just turn off your phone when you go to bed. Or leave it in another room and if someone complains about being unable to contact you say you must be a heavy sleeper because you didn't hear it.

      (Also as a non US person I have to ask: wtf is an amber alert?)

    26. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What phone do you have?

    27. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is "Sorry, we don't talk to the military" about? I can't find anything about it using google.

    28. Re: Don't give him ideas by kbg · · Score: 0

      No Android just generally sucks. You can't even put it into airplane mode automatically.

    29. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What misstep are you referring to? Your quote of "Sorry, we don't talk to the military" only has one result on Google, which is your own comment:

    30. Re: Don't give him ideas by johanw · · Score: 2

      There exists call blockers that have whitelists: if it recognises your parents or friends number the call will go through, otherwise the caller will get a busy tone.

    31. Re: Don't give him ideas by johanw · · Score: 1

      Not out of the box, but there are 2 general solutions for that: the free https://play.google.com/store/... and the paid https://play.google.com/store/...

    32. Re:Don't give him ideas by johanw · · Score: 1

      "Presidential Alerts"? I've never seen that on any Android and also never heard of it, is that something specific for US firmwares or so? If so, try installing a non-US firmware if it exists for your device.

    33. Re:Don't give him ideas by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      There are plenty of ways to silence Amber alerts to your phone.

      I managed to get rid of the Ambers while still keeping major emergencies like approaching Hurricanes (not that you don't know a Hurricane is coming, but it's damn boring in the final hours waiting for it to arrive, hearing the EAS work was at least some novel amusement, unlike Amber alerts at 2am on a Tuesday.)

      I think mine was an Android system option - most phones also have a power button, global volume controls, etc.

    34. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Feels bad to have to explain to people on /. how to google, but one obvious thing to try would be "bill clinton" "talk" "to the military". Oh see, it brings up results.

    35. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love that it sounds plausible enough for you to ask! MAGA!

    36. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's 70. When he finishes his third term he'll be 82 and probably not looking for another job.

    37. Re:Don't give him ideas by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Over 50% of the Amber Alerts I've gotten, by the time I got it, I checked the status within a few seconds, and they were resolved. The system is broken if I get the alerts (of an unresolved issue) only after they've been resolved.

    38. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try searching Snopes.com

      I got many more results on google. You need to tailor your search more. Try searching on "Clinton don't talk to military" (without quotes) and then use the date filter to search 1992 through 2000.

    39. Re: Don't give him ideas by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The priority messages bypass all filters and volume settings. They are designed to wake the country if China invades, then the SMS codes were handed to a Failed TV personality.

    40. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Here in Europe we don't have any of that, being a relatively safe place where people rarely freak out. I did however notice a greyed-out section for Presidential Alerts which had Putin's name.

    41. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When white girls go missing, an entire emergency system is put into action to ensure the Mexican rapist who abducted her is caught.

    42. Re: Don't give him ideas by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure whether Apple allows you to block Amber Alerts, but Android *absolutely* does... and you don't need root to do it, either. Launch text messages, go to settings -> advanced -> wireless alerts, then (cell broadcast) settings. From there, you can de-select amber alerts.

      (disclaimer: Nexus 6p, Android 6.0.1)

    43. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My phone has a setting for amber alerts and other community messages.

    44. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Results, yes.

      The only possibly relevant result is about a staffer saying "I don't talk to the military,"

      I can't find any quotes like that from Bill Clinton.

      If you're so fucking smart, then find what he's talking about and link to it instead of being a cunt.

    45. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No relevant results.

      If you're so fucking smart, then find what he's talking about and link to it instead of being a cunt.

    46. Re: Don't give him ideas by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I didn't vote for Trump, and I'm not happy that he's going to be president, but hysterical articles like this are just getting silly.

      America will survive Trump, just like it survived G.W. Bush, Jimmy Carter, and Herbert Hoover (among others).

      If Trump actually tried doing this, and the Republicans in Congress didn't stop him by modifying the statutes the FCC is tasked with enforcing, they'd be kicked out *wholesale* by angry voters in 2018 (the Republican Party almost never supports primary challengers against incumbent Republicans, but challenges DO happen anyway when voters are sufficiently pissed). Trump has plenty of hot (fart-scented) air, but if you accepted as true everything some Democrats are saying right now, you'd think he was literally omnipotent or something. He's not, any more than Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and even Reagan & before were.

    47. Re:Don't give him ideas by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Blocking Amber Alerts on iOS is simple. Go to Settings -> Notifications, scroll down to the bottom of that page, unselect "AMBER Alerts" (and/or "Emergency Alerts"). I assume it's equally easy on Android.

      I would like to get Emergency Alerts ("flash flooding in your area for the next two hours") while disabling Amber alerts ("child abducted by parent 500 miles away." Seriously. The last Amber Alert I got was two months ago for an event 383 miles away.. which had happened 18 hours earlier). How do I do that?

      I don't mean to sound like a self-absorbed asshole, but an emergency alert should really be something that is an emergency FOR ME. And other people in my area.

    48. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iOS lets you selectively turn off Amber alerts and/or "government alerts". Android surely has a similar setting somewhere. It would be bizarre if Apple allowed *more* configurability than its competitors.

    49. Re:Don't give him ideas by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      The only possibly relevant result is about a staffer saying "I don't talk to the military," I can't find any quotes like that from Bill Clinton.

      I should have been more clear. It wasn't Bill Clinton, it was a staffer (and as I recall, as soon as Clinton heard about it he did his best to demonstrate it was NOT the position of his administration). Just like it wasn't Reagan who said ketchup should be considered a vegetable, it was one of his underlings that made the proposal.

      When there's a significant sea change in Washington - especially with the President - it seems you usually also get a few zealots riding the coattails of the new administration. Those people tend to be myopic, thinking they've got a stronger (and more extreme) mandate than is actually the case. They also usually get slapped down and/or replaced before too long, since pragmatism wins out in the long term.

      I suspect the presidents actually find those zealots useful because it helps them get a sense of just how far their mandate actually reaches - without having to risk losing personal political capital on a missteps (that may be harder for a narcissist like Trump, though).

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    50. Re:Don't give him ideas by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      I disabled the Amber/Silver alert thing after the first one came in. Took all of 2 min to find and remove that annoyance.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    51. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you literally just go into your phones settings and shut off amber alerts.

    52. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A President has the power to do many things but if that power gets abused that power may come under scrutiny resulting in the President losing that particular power. As Commander in Chief he can unleash the most power military on the planet for 90 days before his decision can be over ruled by Congress. This particular power is defined as such so the President can immediately act to counter an imminent threat without standing around arguing about it with Congress. By the time those negotiations were finished the invasion or destruction of the US would be complete. The power to pardon convicted criminals, which all the Presidents do right before they leave office, could be encumbered if the President started pardoning convicted murderers or those whose crimes were so egregious that the public would get up in arms about.

    53. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have these things called "cars" now, they can travel hundreds of miles in only a few hours...

    54. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, you're doing it wrong.

      You're meant to freak out and be bitter and uncooperative for the next 8 years.

      You might get lumped in with the rest of the "racists" if you keep saying wrong-speak like that.

    55. Re:Don't give him ideas by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can always kill the phone's sound before bed, and check messages when you get up. You kids just don't understand that answering your phone, whether talk, text, email, amber alert, or presidential alert is NOT MANDATORY. If you're driving, leave the damned thing in your pocket, whoever is attempting contact can wait until you get where you're going.

      Stop being a slave to your phone!

      If it looks like there may be tornadoes that night, you might want to let the presidential/amber alerts annoy you.

      Previewing this, I laughed; this font makes "tornadoes" look like "tomadoes" (I've seen "tomatoes" misspelled like that before).

    56. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just don't give a shit,

      Fuck your mother.

      Fuck your father.

      Ungrateful cunts the both of them.

      Turn your fucking phone off, or even better, toss it in a fucking river.

      Sleep easy at night. Live your own life. Be rested. Be well. Fuck them.

    57. Re:Don't give him ideas by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Waste of money when aluminum foil works.

    58. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called "Do Not Disturb" on the iphone, and it's pretty easy to set up...

    59. Re: Don't give him ideas by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Those were all bad presidents. My grandmother, born in 1903, said Coolidge caused the depression but Hoover was a terrible president, too. Most historians consider Lincoln's predecessor, James Buchanan, .was history's worse.

      I never thought I'd ever see a worse president than Carter, but GW proved me wrong.

    60. Re:Don't give him ideas by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      I got a half-dozen alerts in a short period of time regarding an abduction that happened hundreds of miles away.

      So was the abductor the mom or the dad? Or was this one of those rare events where the kid was snatched by a concerned grandparent?

    61. Re:Don't give him ideas by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      like attempting to let ketchup count as a vegetable in school lunches

      I believe that succeeded

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    62. Re: Don't give him ideas by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 2

      I can't put on a whitelist doctors that I don't yet know in case she ends up in the ER. There were also times when someone, like a substitute caregiver, would call and their area code was someplace away from us because they still have the same cell number from before they moved. I made a reference to this in my post.

    63. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's cute, you still think this is a regular election.

    64. Re: Don't give him ideas by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 2

      I guess you missed the entire point of what I said. Parents with terminal diseases - you can't just ignore those calls and if it's an emergency or there's a new caregiver on duty you don't know, the call could be from numbers or area codes you don't recognize. You can't just silence the phone and figure you won't be getting an important call.

      I alluded to that before - guess you didn't read that part of the response.

    65. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These aren't fucking Amber alerts, you probably aren't aware of them because Obama has never sent a presidential alert.

    66. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other news: Obama Will Lose Power To Send Unblockable Mass Text Messages To All Americans

    67. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called, many of us have real situations where we can't blanket Do Not Disturb because we might need to take calls from emergency personnel due to loved ones.
      We don't need Trump tirades, but we do need to know if our Mom has an Alzheimer's episode...

    68. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You will get no traction trying to make the spoiled nerd-brats here understand what it's like living a life where there are actual responsibilities.

    69. Re:Don't give him ideas by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Blocking Amber Alerts on iOS is simple. Go to Settings -> Notifications, scroll down to the bottom of that page, unselect "AMBER Alerts" (and/or "Emergency Alerts"). I assume it's equally easy on Android.

      The government is probably going to ban the option to turn those off.

    70. Re:Don't give him ideas by mysidia · · Score: 1

      All the Amber alerts I have ever seen [Which were pretty frequent] were "abduction" by non-custodial parent, and turned out the child was not in any real danger. So I turned them off.

    71. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      presidential alerts are the next Twitter

    72. Re:Don't give him ideas by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 0

      Here you go you stupid shit.
      http://articles.baltimoresun.c...

      I used his search above, "Clinton don't talk to military", and added "-trump" when the first page of results were all about Hillary Clinton instead of Bill Clinton.

      That link was the third link after that very simple search. You stupid shit.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    73. Re:Don't give him ideas by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

      > I would like to get Emergency Alerts ("flash flooding in your area for the next two
      > hours") while disabling Amber alerts ("child abducted by parent 500 miles away."
      > Seriously. The last Amber Alert I got was two months ago for an event 383
      > miles away.. which had happened 18 hours earlier). How do I do that?

      If you want to do that at home, and you live in North America...
      * block the messages on your cellphone
      * get a weather radio for USA http://www.nws.noaa.gov/nwr/ or Canada https://www.ec.gc.ca/meteo-wea... depending on where you live

      They work in standby mode, and come on when the appropriate signal is transmitted.

      --

      I'm not repeating myself
      I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    74. Re: Don't give him ideas by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      But most phones still should have separate settings for those Broadcasts. Separate, yes, active by default, yes. Look for "cell broadcasts". I can confirm that I have those settings and turned them ON, hoping that someone would be clever enough to finally use them for public alerts. Still nothing, but it worked when I was in the US.

      --
      bickerdyke
    75. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly, there is also an option for Presidential Alerts that is checked/selected/enabled and it cannot be unchecked.

      Well, citizen, you have opted in. There's no denying it.

    76. Re: Don't give him ideas by antdude · · Score: 1

      So, you hate your parents? :(

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    77. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We should respond at the same time.

    78. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that you don't realize how much damage Reagan's administration accomplished speaks volumes.

    79. Re: Don't give him ideas by kbg · · Score: 1

      No you are incorrect, those only work for Android 4.2 and lower. The feature was removed by the idiots at Google, the same for enabling/disabling data mode. This is why Android generally sucks because it has no features for developers to control the phone.

    80. Re: Don't give him ideas by ckatko · · Score: 1

      Looks like your emotions were stronger than your will to find elegant solutions to your problem.

      I've spent over five years nearly bedridden throughout my 20's, with a chronic disorder. You don't see me flaunting it as if it's some magical way to win an argument.

      I mean, what are you really complaining about here? Has everyone missed that? You had to be on call for ten years, so A COUPLE AMBER ALERT TEXT MESSAGES are the horrible injustice in that equation? Where's the perspective?

      Your parents had to be "on call" at a time when there was no caller ID or message filtering at all. The phone rang, and you picked it up. It could be a wrong number, it could be a sales pitch, it could be your father dying, an invitation to dinner, or your child is dead.

      I can't even find an expression that fits how silly and pointless your complaint is. Your typical smug use of the word "privilege" fits perfectly with your lack of perspective.

    81. Re: Don't give him ideas by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Some of us cannot turn off our phones at night. I had to deal with my Father dying of leukemia for 3 years or so, then an over-anxious Mother who was having panic attacks and then we found she was developing Alzheimer's. For 10 years, I had to be on call 24/7 because I never knew what would happen or if that out-of-town phone call was a friend or an EMT or someone calling on their cell phone to tell me she needed help or was in serious trouble.

      It must be a wonderful privilege to live in a world where it's easy to imagine not having to be on call 24/7.

      Imagine what we did before the rise of mobile phones... If we were on call and didn't get to the phone on time, they'd leave a message or call us back in 10/30/60 minutes.

      So get your whinging arse off my lawn.

      If your employer is abusing your off time... that is because YOU have not set limits with your employer.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    82. Re:Don't give him ideas by dwillden · · Score: 1

      You can go into your phone settings and turn off those alerts. I did after a series of the exact same types of false or irrelevant alerts. I have happily slept through the last couple alerts. Many I know have silenced the alerts as well thanks to such abuses of the system.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    83. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which blocks the "EMT or someone" that might be calling him. I feel for the guy.

    84. Re:Don't give him ideas by dwillden · · Score: 1

      The one that prompted me to turn the alerts off for was the father supposedly kidnapping his children. What really happened was the father was out doing something fun with the kids, as the mother was filing for divorce and a restraining order. Once she got the order she immediately filed a child abduction report with the police and the Alert was sent out. The father was clueless as to what she was doing, (well he expected divorce papers soon, but not the rest). That was the final straw, if the system is going to be abused for hostile divorces then it is worthless.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    85. Re:Don't give him ideas by dwillden · · Score: 1

      Nope, these alerts over-ride the sound settings, and use the loudest most jarring alert sound they could find. You have to go into the messaging settings for your device and turn off the alerts. Just turning off the sound doesn't work.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    86. Re:Don't give him ideas by dwillden · · Score: 1

      He's a multi-billionaire. He doesn't need to get a job anywhere.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    87. Re: Don't give him ideas by Straif · · Score: 1

      Both phone OSes let you turn off Amber alerts as well as emergency alerts but without rooting and some modifications, if you are in the US, Presidential broadcasts cannot be disabled.

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
    88. Re:Don't give him ideas by dwillden · · Score: 1

      Sorry about getting hooked on multiple felony counts of mishandling classified information. Protecting the secrets of this Nation is something I find rather important, especially for the person sitting in what is basically the second most important position in this nation.

      As opposed to someone who is sometimes mean to people. Trump was not my ideal candidate, but he was far better than the Queen of Corruption.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    89. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I pity your parents.

      They really raised such an great example of an asshole.

      Trolling? No, just making a statement using the same lack of logic and personal attacks your post uses, which is why you're such a great example of an asshole.

    90. Re: Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's dealing with his parents, and you're bitching about his handling that situation?

      Wow. I wonder who the whinging arse is in this case?

      He mentioned one parent had Alzheimer's. Maybe one day your parents will have that and you'll have to deal with it. Sometimes answering a call now instead of 10 minutes can make a major difference. They can get frustrated on not getting an answer or having a concern settled immediately and that can lead to damaging behavior including wandering off and getting lost. In the past, well, people would wander off and get lost or injured or killed.

      If your parents ever develop Alzheimer's, tell them I'm sorry that they have such a hideous disease and that they have such a whinging arse who doesn't give a fuck about others as a child.

    91. Re:Don't give him ideas by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      I turned off Amber Alerts after a similar incident. I did get an Emergency Alert, but there really was a tornado not too far away, so I still have that one on.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    92. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flight mode. Manually enabled, or with something like Llama or Tasker at a reasonable time. Re-enable (again, manually, or via some rule engine in the morning). Not only will you not get annoying alerts, you won't get email notifications, text messages, cold-calls, arbitrary notifications from apps... And you'll find that you aren't wasting battery all night long.
      Since I don't have a charge-point near my bed, I charge before going to sleep (whilst at the PC) and I find that typically, flight mode overnight only allows about 3-5% battery drain, leaving plenty for the day ahead.

    93. Re: Don't give him ideas by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Those were all bad presidents. My grandmother, born in 1903, said Coolidge caused the depression but Hoover was a terrible president, too.

      Yeah, everyone agrees that Hoover really sucked as a president.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    94. Re: Don't give him ideas by dwillden · · Score: 1

      the voters almost never support primary challengers against incumbents of either party, but challenges DO happen anyway when voters are sufficiently pissed.

      FTFY

      Both parties keep incumbents.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    95. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guaranteed, Trump will be his own zealot.

    96. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have been woken at 2am by idiotic Amber Alerts about incidents hundreds of miles from my home. If there was some way to block these messages, I would do so.

      Blocking Amber Alerts on iOS is simple. Go to Settings -> Notifications, scroll down to the bottom of that page, unselect "AMBER Alerts" (and/or "Emergency Alerts"). I assume it's equally easy on Android.

      Anyone know why the Amber Alert system blows? I don't mind getting Amber Alerts and would like to keep them on so I can help, but I get the same thing (off hour alerts for locations 100-200 miles away).

    97. Re:Don't give him ideas by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      I have been woken at 2am by idiotic Amber Alerts about incidents hundreds of miles from my home. If there was some way to block these messages, I would do so.

      Blocking Amber Alerts on iOS is simple. Go to Settings -> Notifications, scroll down to the bottom of that page, unselect "AMBER Alerts" (and/or "Emergency Alerts"). I assume it's equally easy on Android.

      But back to the subject at hand... I held my nose and voted for Hillary, but I'm getting really tired of these "Trump may do this" and "Trump might do that" propaganda pieces that are spewing forth across the web. I'm nervous about his presidency; but the election is over - let's see what he actually does, and then react if necessary.

      I'm old enough to remember similar hysteria from back when Reagan was elected. Early on, his administration tried to do some pretty darn stupid things, like attempting to let ketchup count as a vegetable in school lunches. I remember Bill Clinton's early day missteps as well ("Sorry, we don't talk to the military"). But between the politics of Washington DC and the court of public opinion, the initial lunatic fringe crap gets self-corrected pretty darn quickly. The Republic will survive.

      Well, he's draining the swamp by filling it with alligators. Thinking outside the box!
      Saving American jobs from going to Mexico by having the government pay companies to employ Americans, rather than socialistically have the government employ Americans! Thinking outside the box!
      Letting the free market work unimpeded by picking particular companies to pay off to employ Americans, rather than socialistically having the government pick winners and losers to get government funds! Thinking outside the box!
      Avoiding conflicts of interest by removing himself from running his businesses, and letting his children run them, and also letting his children be his unpaid presidential advisers! Thinking outside the box!

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    98. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when do you *hear* voices? Dont deny it... your signs are consistent and explainable. Are you Human or some Afroasian kin?

    99. Re:Don't give him ideas by syntotic · · Score: 1

      Really? How many girls did you lose already? I was triggering states of emergency by the second hour I was rollerblading. Police would tell my mother to wait till next day. My rollerblading sessions were twelve hours flat, urban skating, at twelve. It is OK to have a National Hour.

    100. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Previewing this, I laughed; this font makes "tornadoes" look like "tomadoes" (I've seen "tomatoes" misspelled like that before).

      I've seen pom.xml and have it confused in my head for porn.xml.

    101. Re:Don't give him ideas by dave.haku · · Score: 1

      Previewing this, I laughed; this font makes "tornadoes" look like "tomadoes" (I've seen "tomatoes" misspelled like that before).

      I've seen pom.xml and then have it confused in my head for porn.xml.

    102. Re: Don't give him ideas by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      I have Android phones that even on silent the Amber Alert comes through and despite many searches there does not appear to be a way to turn off the alerts on some of the free or prepaid phones. Removing the battery seems to be the only way to disable the alerts.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    103. Re:Don't give him ideas by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

      Can't agree more but with the election over the competition for clicks mandates an ever increasingly salacious headline.

      Soon we'll get back to the same old tired threads about global warming, universal basic income, Microsoft bashers... you know, stuff we haven't seen on Slashdot before...

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
    104. Re:Don't give him ideas by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      My Android (Samsung S5, IIRC) just tells me "no applications that can read notifications are installed," suggesting that it's not a core service of Android, but something that is packaged with phones intended for some (one?) market only.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    105. Re:Don't give him ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you are... insensitive!

      - Amber.

    106. Re:Don't give him ideas by lucien86 · · Score: 1

      Even cheaper than aluminium foil is the off button. Saves on battery life to. :)

      --
      Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
    107. Re: Don't give him ideas by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      I can't look at my phone at the moment, but I thought at least in Android, there was an option in settings to disable the emergency alerts. If they bother people so much, just turn them off.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  3. What. The. Fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What the fuck is this? I don't like Trump because I have a brain cell, but this is bullshit garbage. msmash/manish needs to go.

    1. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Trumpy got triggered, can't handle the news feed so he tries to censor it. Oh the irony with tiny hands...

    2. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Tries to censor"? Show me where that happened. You can't and won't.

    3. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Slashdot "editors" msmash and BeauHD are useful idiots of the Democrat party and anything they post can safely be ignored as alt-left political garbage. Since that crooked old bitch Hillary lost to President Elect Donald Trump they have been incessantly posting their hit-pieces in between crying into their pillows and applying massive quantities of Vaseline in a vain attempt to soothe their deep, burning butt hurt.

    4. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Dogtanian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What the fuck is this? I don't like Trump because I have a brain cell, but this is bullshit garbage. msmash/manish needs to go.

      I don't like Trump either- mainly because he's an openly self-serving sociopath, a narcissist to almost certainly pathological degree, a shameless bully with no target too cheap or low if it dares to threaten his dangerously thin skin, and an all-round, outright piece of shit.

      And I agree with you- this story (or rather, the Trump slant on it) is clickbait garbage of the type that's going to dilute and cheapen any legitimate criticism of him because people switch off after getting overwhelmed by opportunistic Trump-slanting of crap like this at the slightest excuse.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    5. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Dogtanian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The degree to which Trump gets obsessively defensive about the "tiny hands" taunts would actually be funny (#) if such a thin-skinned and easily (if not reliably) manipulated guy hadn't just been elected the "leader of the free world".

      Before he got elected, Trump projected his own narcissistic paranoia onto America when he claimed that "the world is laughing at us".

      The irony is that now he's been elected Putin *will* be laughing up his sleeves at America, at the fact the guy he wanted to win- the one who's easily manipulated into selling out his country's interests by a few flattering words playing on his ego- won the American election.

      (#) And believe me, given how shamelessly the guy has used- and continues to use- his power to bully anyone who doesn't agree with him, there's no-one I'd feel less guilty about taunting.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    6. Re:What. The. Fuck. by PRMan · · Score: 2

      This already exists. Look on your cellphone under Settings > Alerts. It's already been there for years.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    7. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...I don't like Trump either- mainly because he's an openly self-serving sociopath, a narcissist to almost certainly pathological degree, a shameless bully with no target too cheap or low if it dares to threaten his dangerously thin skin, and an all-round, outright piece of shit..."

      Wow..what an amazing coincidence! That is precisely word for word why many people don't like Clinton. It's uncanny.

    8. Re:What. The. Fuck. by HiThere · · Score: 1

      It's not a new feature. The "story" is because someone who exhibited a ...umh... loose control of his utterances used texting so verbosely during the campaign. Perhaps it was intended as a joke, but it's a joke with a *potential* barb in it.

      There's lots of things about the incoming administration where I feel "well, we'll just have to see how things work out.". This is one of the less serious ones, so *I* feel it makes a decent tension relieving joke. When I look at his nominated cabinet, this is the least horrible potentiality of the incoming administration.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    9. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love the way you employ psychiatric terms for personality disorders as a form of insult. It really gives a veneer of scientific weight and pseudo-intellectualism to your playground name-calling. It makes you sound smart. It really, really does.

    10. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I don't like Trump either- mainly because he's an openly self-serving sociopath, a narcissist to almost certainly pathological degree, a shameless bully with no target too cheap or low if it dares to threaten his dangerously thin skin, and an all-round, outright piece of shit."

      how is that any different than hillary?

    11. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I only ever saw one direct response, on one occasion to an insult made by Cruz or Rubio about the size of his hands. I don't recall seeing anywhere else where he ever brought it up. Seemed to be a simple, quick rebuttal which was merely something to the effect of "I'm fine with the size of my hands". I don't think that's either obsessive, or even really defensive. It's just stating a fact in response to an awkward and childish taunt. He does have many flaws, but inflating things like this doesn't serve any cause.

    12. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      I love the way you employ psychiatric terms for personality disorders as a form of insult.

      Anything intended as an actual insult was the "all-round, outright piece of shit" comment- and that's an honest reflection of my opinion of the guy based on what went before (and pretty much everything else he's done).

      But if there's such a thing as narcissism that goes way beyond the puffed up egotism that's par for the course with high-ranking politicians on every side and into delusional psychological disorder territory, I'm pretty sure Trump is there.

      I've absolutely no doubt that if he had lost the election he genuinely would have believed- and convinced his supporters- that it *had* been rigged. *He* couldn't possibly have lost.

      BTW, was it intentional that the tone of your comment came across as very Trump-like? (Albeit that Trump himself would almost certainly have been more likely to throw some direct insults among the snide sarcasm).

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    13. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ME TOO! I don't like Trump!

      This is the most uncontroversial speech. You are playing it very safe. You will not get unfriended on Facebook. Bravo.

    14. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      ME TOO! I don't like Trump!

      Pay attention. Though I agreed that Trump was a dick, that was a means to an end. (#)

      If I'd been a Trump supporter and said that the article was clickbaitified shite, you might accuse me of being partisan. If it's clear that I despise the guy (too) and I still think the article is Trump-exploiting clickbaitified shite, then it's more likely it's because it actually *is* Trump-exploiting clickbaitified shite.

      You honestly think I'm saying this purely for the sake of not losing friends on Facebook (which I don't use) and I'm a secret Trump supporter...(?!) Or should I be saying something controversial for the sake of saying something controversial?

      Whatever.

      (#) Although to be fair, he *is* a dick, and I don't apologise for expressing my opinion- it's just beside the point here. :-)

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    15. Re:What. The. Fuck. by rbrander · · Score: 1

      Thank you for putting "leader of the free world" in quotes. Can Americans stop using the term altogether? It's getting embarrassing.

      Leader, n: one whom others want to follow.

    16. Re: What. The. Fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hillary is a high-functioning sociopath. Trump is a garden-variety regular sociopath.

    17. Re:What. The. Fuck. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      Well, the Left and the Democrats have only themselves to blame. We all know this, right? Voting for Trump was the last, desperate move of ordinary Americans whose backs were up against the wall. Hillary promised open borders, Trans-Pacific Partnership, more free trade, more H1Bs, more exporting of jobs, and everything the heartless globalist political class wanted. They were going to stick it to America and they were going to make it HURT. On November 8th Americans' vision of America was going to die, Painfully.

      And why shouldn't they vote for Trump, anyway? Hillary was already a 93%, 98% favorite. At this point, what difference does it make? Go down in flames, with a protest vote. And then he won, go figure.

      If you want to know how we ended up like this, please watch this video: "President Trump: How & Why...". It is a must-view for people exactly like you for how the level of political discourse got so low. It's by a leftist, so you know he's telling the truth and has been fact-checked. It's really sad what he's saying and it is all 100% true. Never forget this: Trump is all your fault. If you had just been understanding and wanted to do what was right for Americans, this would never have happened.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    18. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >BTW, was it intentional that the tone of your comment came across as very Trump-like?

      Sad!

    19. Re:What. The. Fuck. by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      This has been in the cards ever since the hardcore Left took over the core of the Democratic Party. The ouster of Brendan Eich should have caused a great deal more pause than it did. You cannot simultaneously complain about McCarthyism and hound people out of their jobs for their privately-expressed political opinions without consequences. And the consequences are clear: if you tell approximately half of Americans that they are not merely wrong, but evilly so, and in serious jeopardy of losing their livelihood for agreeing with something in 2008 that even the victorious Democratic candidate for President nominally opposed, then you really have shot your wad against the people that you really should be trying to convince.

      Message: disagree with the party line for even a short time, even if your stance matches the nominal stance of the party's Presidential nominee at that time, and you're just a tick off Hitler. Well, shit, if you tell people that, don't be surprised when the response is a resounding FUCK YOU.

      A few of the more insightful lefties have penned pieces much like this: if you don't want Donald Trump throwing landmines, then don't call Mitt Romney a KKK'er. Call him a bad choice, a misguided choice, a guy who just doesn't know how to make this country the best it can be. Tear him down over and over again on policy, on opinions, on his potential impact on the Supreme Court. But don't say the guy is a racist bigot who wants to reinstate slavery, because once you do that to the biggest milquetoast around, it ceases to have any effect. Lots of people like him, and guess what? Once you've condemned them all as the scum of the earth for having the audacity to disagree with you, with the most generic Eisenhower-era liberal persona that I've seen since GHWB in a Republican candidate, they have lost any reason to try to seek compromise, because you have rejected it in toto.

      Obama was a savvy enough politician to skirt his "bitter clingers" remarks; he didn't need those voters to win. Hillary needed some of them. Cf. the Tom Hanks "Black Jeopardy" skit.

    20. Re:What. The. Fuck. by guises · · Score: 2

      going to dilute and cheapen any legitimate criticism of him because people switch off

      I don't think this is accurate. I had that experience with all of the accusations surrounding Hillary, wild stuff like how she stole a bunch of furniture from the state department, or how she murdered the cat of one of her former aids, and I did as you said and just stopped paying attention. That doesn't seem to be how the majority of people handled it though. It seems as though the nonstop accusations did have a very significant impact on how people perceived her, though none of those things ever even got as far as a trial, let alone a conviction.

      There's an old rule that if you repeat something often enough people will start to believe it, no matter what it is. Let me remind you that the difference between a religion, which we generally venerate, and a cult, which we generally denigrate, is only age - how long and how often beliefs have been repeated is what really matters.

    21. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Maybe I should have been clearer, but I'm not an American- I'm Scottish- and I'm not a "supporter" of Hillary Clinton (or the US Democrats) beyond the fact I thought she was the lesser of two evils.

      At the end of the day, I'm not an American, and I understand that their way of thinking is fundamentally different to mine in many respects. (#) So I don't expect them to vote the same way or hold the same values that I do. That doesn't change the legitimacy of what I thought about Trump as a person (and why I said what I said above, particularly since we already had that piece of bullying, hypocritical garbage display a taste of that same behaviour with respect to the construction of- and issues surrounding- his own golf courses in Scotland).

      I don't have time to read your link now, but yes, the Democrats sold out in the past 25 or so years. When Obama was elected and everyone expected him to be the second coming, I didn't- I knew he was a part of the same establishment that was by then already more connected with the banks and corporate interests than its grass roots.

      By the time of the election, it was clear that it was going to be close- anyone paying attention should have known that. I had hoped Trump wouldn't win, but I wasn't remotely surprised when I turned on my TV first thing that morning and "Trump wins US election" was plastered over the screen. (Then again, we already had the Brexit vote which went the same way, so it was like deja-vu all over again).

      (#) Too many people in the UK make the mistake of thinking that because they consume and enjoy American-produced entertainment (and speak the same language) that they "know" America. They don't. Those shows- aside from their being entertainment and not reality!- are disproportionately reflective of the urban, coastal mentality versus the culture in (what you guys call) "flyover country". America is not just New York and Los Angeles. America is not just the "cool" parts, and outside those areas it's more alien than most people recognise.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    22. Re:What. The. Fuck. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      I don't like Trump either- mainly because he's an openly self-serving sociopath, a narcissist to almost certainly pathological degree, a shameless bully with no target too cheap or low if it dares to threaten his dangerously thin skin, and an all-round, outright piece of shit.

      And those are his good qualities.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    23. Re:What. The. Fuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      did have a very significant impact on how people perceived her, though none of those things ever even got as far as a trial, let alone a conviction.

      Part of the problem is that people were saying the same thing about the Email scandal. "This is nothing", "They are lying", "She did nothing wrong". There were constant efforts to deflect or minimize it. But many people could see that yes, it was an issue. Yes, she did make mistakes. And yes, she was probably the one lying.

      So when you start to say the same thing about a bunch of false claims, people are more likely to question whether they are truly false. They say "Wait a minute, you lied to me about that and tried to make me think it was nothing. Why would I believe you on this other stuff?".

      Once you've ruined your reputation regarding corruption and truth bending, you make it harder to deflect the real lies about you.

  4. Lets not worry about this yet by AuMatar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's plenty Trump is actually doing that will have drastic consequences over the next few decades to be concerned about. Lets not start worrying about a power he hasn't abused yet, has made no comments that show he will abuse it, and if abused would be more an annoyance than a crisis. Priorities people.

    --
    I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    1. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Joce640k · · Score: 2

      Yep, this is just a distraction. The magician's assistant. Something people will focus on while he does the switcheroo.

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Verdatum · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's...extremely rational. What are you doing hanging around on modern Slashdot?

    3. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Eristone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He has a low (relatively speaking) id number... they are known to lurk and occassionally make a rational comment to prove that all reasonable discourse isn't dead.

    4. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      AuMatar is right, but it makes sense to see this story on Slashdot, because technology and, well, irony.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    5. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by caferace · · Score: 5, Funny

      This is a low ^^ id number. That is all.

    6. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by mark-t · · Score: 0

      As you said... it is an annoyance, and as such, something that people can justly be annoyed about. Worrying about crises that one cannot do anything about to change or prevent at best only results in lost sleep and at worst renders a person incapable of function in society in a normal capacity.

      It is in fact, far more rational to be bothered by something like this than almost anything else.

    7. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      more an annoyance than a crisis.

      AP news, Feb 3rd, 2017 - Today the President sent a text to all US based cell phones reading "Threat level lowered to blue because I rock". Several hundred car crashes and 25 fatalities were blamed on this text coming with a loud tone that seemed like an emergency causing otherwise cautious drivers to glance at their phones while driving.

    8. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Talderas · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How is it that whenever there is a discussion regarding low UIDs you guys seem to crop up. Is there like a mailing list that people report to that you're all subscribed to for notifications?

      Maybe I just don't pay attention to UID except when UID is mentioned.... nah, that's too plain and boring. I'm going with the conspiracy theory.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    9. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      This is a low ^^ id number. That is all.

      Now I'm getting scared. You might awaken some genuinely low ID number users. I've seen it happen before.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    10. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by GoblinKing · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes. Yes there is ... and obviously you, youngster, are not on it. ;P

    11. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by RobKow · · Score: 2

      That -is- a low id number...

    12. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Calydor · · Score: 1

      Considering that Bill Clinton got impeached for not admitting publicly that he'd been cheating on his wife, that scenario should get Trump removed from office very very quickly.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    13. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Tailhook · · Score: 1

      Yep, this is just a distraction.

      This is "fake" news. Hysterical, baseless New York Magazine garbage.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    14. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Considering that Bill Clinton got impeached for not admitting publicly that he'd been cheating on his wife

      Ah, some good ol' history being revised. This sort of rampant (still!) attempt at myth-making about the Clintons, and the fact that the rest of us see right through it and always have, is a big part of why the Clinton family wasn't just handed back the executive power to which they felt so entitled.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    15. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      Better that his IUD?

    16. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a pussy. Know how I know this? Because Trump grabbed you.

    17. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by aphelion_rock · · Score: 1

      We have such a system in Australia http://www.emergencyalert.gov.... The government and in particular the emergency services uses this to target people in a particular location to warn about impending dangers; Bushfires, floods, Cyclones etc.
      I could just see Mr Trump using this as his own twitter account.

    18. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the bar is set fantastically low. He did tweet grossly unsubstantiated claims about voter fraud the other day.

      The soon to be president did this. Not some pundit. Not some political hack job media outlet. The president (elect). Someone who is supposedly an adult.

      I keep waiting for the public to blink and say. "What the fuck?"

    19. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by BradMajors · · Score: 1

      There's plenty Trump is actually doing that will have drastic consequences over the next few decades to be concerned about.

      Exactly. Trump isn't even the acting president and he has already stopped two companies from shipping jobs out of the country. Expect much more of this during his presidency.

    20. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by JackieBrown · · Score: 2

      Considering that Bill Clinton got impeached for not admitting publicly that he'd been cheating on his wife, that scenario should get Trump removed from office very very quickly.

      That's not why he was impeached. At the very least it is a dishonest oversimplification. He was impeached for perjury.

      He was accused of sexual harassment and assault. In court, he lied about his sexual history to help create a false image of being a "family value's man" with a character incapable of the acts he was accused of doing.

    21. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pffft.

      Mine is so low, I don't even have one.

      That makes it lower than Malda's

    22. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, did you actually just blame Trump for the article fearmongering about him? That's like another level of it, some kind of fearmongerception.

    23. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Funny

      How is it that whenever there is a discussion regarding low UIDs you guys seem to crop up. Is there like a mailing list that people report to that you're all subscribed to for notifications?

      "Mailing list"? "Subscribed"? Ha!

      No, I'm sure these guys predate all that new-fangled nonsense. The 4-digit UID guys have a 1980s-style robocall recorded message that goes out; the system that operates it runs on a beowulf cluster of Commodore 64s.

      The 3-digit UID guys have a network of carrier pigeons that send out "notifications."

    24. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Vairon · · Score: 1

      I wish I hadn't waited to register my account.

    25. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Miser · · Score: 1

      You and me both. This number is the best I can do. :)

    26. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how did that impeachment work out for Bill, he didn't get removed from office.

    27. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Lord+Apathy · · Score: 1

      Rational but I would request that you document what he has done that will have "drastic" consequences of the next few decades. So far he has made a lot of comments and blusters but he hasn't actually done anything.

      So if you're going to say he has, please make sure you can back it up.

      --

      Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification

    28. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by sandmtyh · · Score: 1

      just seeing this made me want to post to check my ID number

    29. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Is that what the kids are calling pigeon shit nowadays?

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    30. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by SlydogSZ · · Score: 0

      You could look at the top right when you log in to slashdot to post.

    31. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      When did he commit perjury? The perjury I saw quoted clearly wasn't perjury. Defending reality isn't partisan. I even went to the alt-right news of the time for clarification, but none listed the cause, just started with the assumption he was guilty.

    32. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      And you don't mind the the calls the president of Argentina and gets permits for his personal businesses pushed through? He hasn't even taken office, and has committed impeachable offenses.

    33. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      I wish I hadn't waited to register my account.

      Mine too! I browsed for a few years anonymously before making an account. I could have gotten a 4 or 5-digit ID. I could have been a contender...

    34. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      He was disbarred for 'misleading the courts'. Which is just BS doublespeak for perjury.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    35. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      How's his law licence doing?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    36. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've heard it's a message that goes to their phones. Some kind of "amber alert" or something.

    37. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Yes, "perjury without having committed perjury". Also explains why none of the sites that hated him would actually lay out the charges and the reasons they thought he was guilty. It was a hate-vote only, not one based on fact.

    38. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets not start worrying about a power he hasn't abused yet, has made no comments that show he will abuse it, and if abused would be more an annoyance than a crisis.

      Sure, of all the powers that the executive branch has adopted in recent decades which seemed like a good idea at the time to those who instituted them, this is almost certainly the least dangerous.

      If you think of some of the others (e.g. the mass surveillance state, the power to extrajudicially execute US citizens abroad, etc), they were supposed to be tempered by good judgement. The ultimate safeguard is that only a person of sound and sober temperament would wield them. Very soon, they will be in the hands of someone who has threatened, in public, to use the power of the state against a political enemy. If you want to get upset about something (a whitehouse.gov petition wouldn't go astray), get upset about that.

    39. Re: Lets not worry about this yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the very least it is a dishonest oversimplification.

      Or it is cutting to the core truth that is behind the mask of obfuscation.

      People know what it was about. Crass partisanship.

      In court, he lied about his sexual history to help create a false image of being a "family value's man" with a character incapable of the acts he was accused of doing.

      And then we learned that his prosecutors in the House committed the same offenses. Let's censure them, why don't we?

      No? Then how about remove their busts?

      Can't do it?

      What about add it to their biographies?

      Huh.

      Guess we just will have to pretend it didn't happen.

      We can just lie to ourselves and tell a story about how they were concerned about the welfare of the country.

    40. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could have had a low ID number but I prefer to be an ancient anonymous coward. And I gotta tell ya, after they sold out, I had even less interest in signing in.

    41. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by NaCh0 · · Score: 1

      A national text goes out.

    42. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, "drastic consequences" like preventing millions more muslims moving to the U.S.A. and thus bringing about the inevitable WAR in which millions will die, that always occurs wherever muslims go. Or are you completely ignorant of the history of Islam? Oh, wait... you are. Idiot.

      So you believe that every white country on Earth has to become a 'diverse' country. Why?

      I'll tell you why - because you're a 'useful idiot', and because the TV tells you what to think.

      If white people are so dreadful, why are millions of non-whites invading our countries every year, in order to GET AWAY FROM THEIR OWN KIND?

      If most white people WANT 'diversity' (as you no doubt believe), why aren't millions of white people moving to non-white countries every year?

      There, that wasn't difficult, was it. I've just proved everything you believe in, is wrong.

    43. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by caferace · · Score: 1

      How is it that whenever there is a discussion regarding low UIDs you guys seem to crop up. Is there like a mailing list that people report to that you're all subscribed to for notifications?

      CmdrTaco calls me. 'sup, Rob?

    44. Re:Lets not worry about this yet by Hack'n'Slash · · Score: 1

      Mailing list? Pfft... We have a private BBS to share tales of the good old days and alert when UID pissing matches have been started.

  5. Ha ha ha by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 4, Funny

    First FEMA tweet

    Rosie O'donnell is a yuge bitch!!!!

    1. Re:Ha ha ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol. I hope he abuses the power just a bit.

    2. Re:Ha ha ha by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

      I've got "Trump sends nation goatse SMS" as the center square on my bingo card.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:Ha ha ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bigly.

    4. Re:Ha ha ha by unixisc · · Score: 0

      First FEMA tweet

      Rosie O'donnell is a yuge bitch!!!!

      "Did you catch Rosie's tongue in Megyn's mouth, while Megyn grabbed her pussy?"

    5. Re:Ha ha ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny.

      But what if it actually happens? How do you respond?

    6. Re:Ha ha ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Reply to all]
      Please remove me from this list.

    7. Re:Ha ha ha by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      I am just as prepared for that as I am prepared for elves to take over our nuclear arsenal.

      What if questions are fun but meaningless and - in this case - are designed to barrage us so we start instinctually taking these hypothetical questions seriously.

  6. Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    And Obama had this power too. Don't remember quite how far back this goes, but pretty sure Bush was able to do it too.
    And EVERY president going back to the start of the Emergency Broadcast System, since 1963, has had the ability to commandeer all airwaves as well. It was accidentally set off once, in 1971.

    Meh.

    Next story.

  7. And this is news because...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is nothing new

    1. Re: And this is news because...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's new that TRUMP will have access

    2. Re: And this is news because...? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      And he will have access to the Nuclear Football with the launch codes too.... So?

      Getting an unnecessary text isn't a huge worry if you ask me, even if it happens at 3AM and a bunch of people are tired the next day..

      NON Story!

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  8. Easily solved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    create a ringtone thats 0.1 seconds of silence & set that as his ringtone.

  9. Oh great by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

    So now I will have to turn my phone off or I'll get texts at 3am every night....

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:Oh great by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      Or... you know.... keep your phone in the other room.

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    2. Re: Oh great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That works great with 24/7 technical support and SLAS.

    3. Re: Oh great by skids · · Score: 1

      Yeah, been there. Still kinda there. Still wondering why managers think it is a good idea to have me half asleep with CLI windows open to mission critical boxes, though I guess in cases where said boxes are actually completely belly up, it might be better than not.

    4. Re:Oh great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what I do. When I'm not on call, my phone charges in the kitchen overnight.

      I don't like keeping any tech in my bedroom. No TV, no cellphone, no tablet, no smartwatch. I have a battery-backup LED clock and a lamp, nothing else.

    5. Re:Oh great by bobbied · · Score: 1

      May I suggest a metal box? Keep your "on call" phone in the box when you don't wish to be bothered, and take it out when you don't mind a call.

      My dad used to keep his "on call" pager in a metal box when he wanted the extra pay but didn't want the aggravation... He could always say "I didn't get the page" and show them the pager as poof.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  10. great to be President by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Holding enormous official powers, he schemed ceaselessly to expand them, because it was expected of him by those who had pushed him into office. He had the cunning of the unintelligent and the frantic energy of the lazy.

    --Atlas Shrugged

    1. Re:great to be President by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Expand his power? The whole idea of his cabinet selections and platform is to reduce government power and therefore his power.

      But, yeah, Trump's EVIL!

  11. Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Dorianny · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Trump will soon have the power and authority to launch a Preemptive Nuclear Strike and you are worried about the misuse of the WEA's Text Messages?!

    1. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hillary was paid to do that, not Trump.

    2. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will you be disappointed if your fever dreams are unfulfilled?

    3. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Well, what the fuck else is anyone supposed to do about it? Serious question. He's elected now, and after the EC vote, it's a done deal. There's no backsies on US presidency elections.... so again... what else is anyone supposed to do?

    4. Re: Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To quote Platoon:

      Keep your dick hard and your powder dry and the world *will* turn.

    5. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump will soon have the power and authority to launch a Preemptive Nuclear Strike and you are worried about the misuse of the WEA's Text Messages?!

      I'm worried he'll use it to wake me up by bragging about his preemptive strike. I'd prefer to die in my sleep, thank you.

    6. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump will soon have the power and authority to launch a Preemptive Nuclear Strike and you are worried about the misuse of the WEA's Text Messages?!

      Unlikely, nuclear war is just plain bad for business in general. Remember, he's a business man first.

    7. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rather silly to worked up about the POTUS ability to order preemptive nuclear strikes. The US had plans to preemptively nuclear strike Russia (then U.S.S.R) since the end of WWII and into the Cold War. AFAIK, no President, or candidate for President, has ever said they would preemptive rule out a preemptive nuclear strike if an eminent threat to the US was determined to be real. Well, technically Trump said he wouldn't order a nuclear first strike in a debate, but then he walked it back a bit by saying, "all options are on the table" - the usual polispeak phrase that means that the US will use any weapon technology (nuclear, biological, chemical) in a first strike if the threat is deemed serious enough.

    8. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Calydor · · Score: 1

      Sure there are.

      To paraphrase Trump himself, maybe the second amendment supporters can do something about it.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    9. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      Trump will soon have the power and authority to launch a Preemptive Nuclear Strike and you are worried about the misuse of the WEA's Text Messages?!

      I wouldn't worry about that, there is no profit in nuclear war so no reason to do it unless absolutely necessary. Great concern trolling though.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    10. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course silly. I don't live in any of the coastal areas of the US so I won't get nuked...but I have a phone!

    11. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      To paraphrase Trump himself, maybe the second amendment supporters can do something about it.

      The second amendment supporters already DID do something about what he was talking about. They and their concern about Hillary Clinton's agenda with regard to the constitution was a huge motivator for that very active, cohesive group of voters. That includes a lot of Democrats who jumped ship of that and similar issues when it came to her platform and her history. That same group would only get together and work against Trump if he completely, 100% backtracked on his list of prospective SCOTUS judges and his specifics on his agenda (with regard to second amendment protections and the prosecution of law breakers). That's unlikely. He's not going to suddenly nominate someone hostile to the constitution.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    12. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      Trump will soon have the power and authority to launch a Preemptive Nuclear Strike and you are worried about the misuse of the WEA's Text Messages?!

      Unlikely, nuclear war is just plain bad for business in general. Remember, he's a business man first.

      From the Ferengi rules of acquisition:

      34 War is good for business.
      35 Peace is good for business.

      As Quark said, it's easy to mix them up.

      Any actual comparisons to Trump and Ferengi are left to the reader.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    13. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by sacrilicious · · Score: 1

      Trump will soon have the power and authority to launch a Preemptive Nuclear Strike and you are worried about the misuse of the WEA's Text Messages?!

      Trump will soon have the power to incarcerate you at a whim, and you are worried that he might try to fuck your wife?!?

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
    14. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make everyone who voted for him regret it. Shove it in their faces 24/7 because "winning" doesn't mean you "showed those liberals". The last thing it means is life returns to normal and everything is fine.

      Actions have consequences, and this is it.

      Have a nice four years. Or don't, if I'm doing my job.

    15. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It takes more than just a single order from the President to launch. There has to be concurrence from the SecDef and the Joint Chiefs. So much like the WEA's, this just partisan fear mongering, nothing to see here folks.

    16. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But he hasn't DONE anything yet. We're not the type that just shoots "because we're afraid". He starts locking up a bunch of folks in FEMA camps, and then you might start seeing something.

    17. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by mark-t · · Score: 1

      And just, pray tell, how do you think that "regretting" anything will somehow make anything better?

    18. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Resist.

      Make it politically possible for others to resist.

      Make it politically impossible for him to win again.

      You know, Republicans managed to completely neuter the relatively harmless Obama within two years of his election, simply by putting up every roadblock they could. I think blocking the political agenda of someone running as a Fascist is considerably more worthy.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    19. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by mark-t · · Score: 1

      How? Serious question. What can the average person do now, but watch and wait?

    20. Re: Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The second amendment supporters already DID do something about what he was talking about. They and their concern about Hillary Clinton's agenda with regard to the constitution was a huge motivator for that very active, cohesive group of voters.

      Not really, no. They still didn't manage to top Bush in 2004 by very much, if that is your idea of huge motivation leading to be very active, that's sad.

      That includes a lot of Democrats who jumped ship of that and similar issues when it came to her platform and her history.

      Again, not really no, the net gain is minimal, if any. All this election resulted in was a demonstration of the effects of the electoral college. And possibly suppresed voter turnout. It is odd how turnout dropped. Perhaps we need an investigation, don't you think?

      I know you want to believe that somehow Trump managed to stimulate a wave of mass support, but the evidence is not supportive of that claim. An outbreak of rainstorms could have turned this election.

      That same group would only get together and work against Trump if he completely, 100% backtracked on his list of prospective SCOTUS judges and his specifics on his agenda (with regard to second amendment protections and the prosecution of law breakers). That's unlikely. He's not going to suddenly nominate someone hostile to the constitution.

      Donald Trump would nominate a person who thought the Dred Scott decision was appropriate in a heartbeat. He's easily likely to nominate someone hostile to the people, whose interests trump the Constitution and provoke a response. From a group that is not yet identified, but Trump is sure to make some provocative action done without thought and expect it to be rubberstamped. If it is, then the people will protest, if it isn't, then he'll likely double down.

      It'll be really fun if the new elections North Carolina result in chaos though.

    21. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Lord+Apathy · · Score: 1

      He will not. Trump can't just roll out of bed and launch nuclear weapons. To do so takes the authorization of at least two, probably more, people. He is the finally link in the chain of nuclear weapons but he can't just say nuke them. You have been watching to many movies.

      --

      Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification

    22. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by mea2214 · · Score: 1

      Now he can send us a WEA telling us to duck and cover after he presses the button.

    23. Re: Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Not really, no. They still didn't manage to top Bush in 2004 by very much, if that is your idea of huge motivation leading to be very active, that's sad.

      What? Exit polling shows a large group of people with the Supreme Court on their minds, and big portion of that - across party lines, voting for Trump - noted Clinton's hostility to the rights protected by the Second Amendment. Just like some people vote on abortion, etc., some people vote on that. And did.

      All this election resulted in was a demonstration of the effects of the electoral college.

      And the reason that WAS the effect of the electoral college was that large numbers of people in the fly-over states voted in opposition to Clinton, even crossing party lines to do so. And many people who normally vote Democrat simply sat it out, from disgust.

      It is odd how turnout dropped. Perhaps we need an investigation, don't you think?

      No, not at all. People couldn't have been clearer as to why they sat it out: total disgust with the DNC and with Hillary Clinton in particular. Women were completely unimpressed with Clinton as a candidate, and the turn-out numbers reflect that. Likewise with the minority voters who, it turns out, only came out previously because they had a kind-of minority person to vote for, previously.

      Donald Trump would nominate a person who thought the Dred Scott decision was appropriate in a heartbeat.

      See? Now you're just lying. No surprise. Nominating someone who actually understands the difference between the court and the legislature is not "hostile to the people," it's simply in keeping with the constitution.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    24. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No he won't, no single person can order a nuclear strike.

    25. Re: Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Not really, no. They still didn't manage to top Bush in 2004 by very much, if that is your idea of huge motivation leading to be very active, that's sad.

      They did enough. Close only matters with horseshoes or hand grenades.

    26. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      You know, Republicans managed to completely neuter the relatively harmless Obama within two years of his election, simply by putting up every roadblock they could. I think blocking the political agenda of someone running as a Fascist is considerably more worthy.

      Democrats don't have the balls for it. They're too conciliatory. They rolled over for Bush, something tells me they're not going to like Trump but they'll "work with him" and his appointees.

    27. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Get ready to shit your pants:

      Barack Obama has the power to do that. Right. Now.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    28. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Not gonna happen.

      Trump has set himself up with the best possible defence strategy:
      Mike Pence next in line.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    29. Re: Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Exit polling shows a large group of people with the Supreme Court on their minds, and big portion of that - across party lines, voting for Trump - noted Clinton's hostility to the rights protected by the Second Amendment. Just like some people vote on abortion, etc., some people vote on that. And did.

      Oh sure, those people exist, but they've always been doing that (well, for the past few decades of elections anyway), however you claimed huge motivation. That should mean more voters. Yet turnout was effectively down, as I said, Trump just barely cleared Bush in 2004. Nowhere near Obama in 2008, and still lower than 2012. That is contrary to a upwelling of support.

      Look at exit polls if you want, actual polls make your claim to be a sad one. Sad. Like winning the Daytona 500 after running at the back of the pack, but because you had to pit at the end of the last caution, and right at the edge of the fuel window, you were the last one out and they red-flagged it for rain. Maybe you get the trophy, but you aren't making a convincing show of it.

      I know, I know, Trump has a problem with reality recognition, but you don't have to fall for it yourself.

      You can look at it truthfully. The maps are out there. Look for all the purple.

      And the reason that WAS the effect of the electoral college was that large numbers of people in the fly-over states voted in opposition to Clinton, even crossing party lines to do so.

      Again no, check out the vote totals. Compare them to prior elections, examine the population estimates and your story really isn't adding up. Check out the margins. All it would take is a single rainstorm to flip multiple states.

      Now Ross Perot, he got large numbers. He moved the needle. Obama got real turnout. Reagan made things happen. Teddy Roosevelt managed it in 1912. Lincoln had a tide of support. Trump? For several states, you can move single counties around and it's another story in this election. And I don't mean just the ones more populous than most states, I mean ones that are only big compared to say, Wisconsin's number of voters.

      All we learned is another lesson in why the Electoral College is a problem. Not to mention the misapportionment in the House. Of course, a more radical solution lie the 38-state plan would totally change things, but that won't happen any time soon.

      And many people who normally vote Democrat simply sat it out, from disgust.

      No, not at all. People couldn't have been clearer as to why they sat it out: total disgust with the DNC and with Hillary Clinton in particular. Women were completely unimpressed with Clinton as a candidate, and the turn-out numbers reflect that. Likewise with the minority voters who, it turns out, only came out previously because they had a kind-of minority person to vote for, previously.

      Your understanding of their reasons is speculative. Yes, that is what you want to believe, but you don't know it. But even if we ignore that, thrn you still have the problem that you are making further claims yourself about Trump's voters. All those remarks of yours about a huge level of motivation, should lead you to ask why you don't have their massive surge of votes in the tallies. If you actually believed it.

      Margins of less than 20,000 in two states in the Midwest, and still below the peak. And Pennsylvania is less than 100,000. And below peak. Where are your voters? At the least, you will want to re-examine your own claims. If you're honest and thoughtful.

      Or just believe it because you want to do so. Or say it when you don't, but that won't make the numbers change, just like screaming about three million phantom illegal voters won't make them exist. If you thought that was a real problem, you know you'd have to investigate it.

      Sure, I know you've gotten the idea that you can just say things because you feel they are true, without watching

    30. Re: Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really, no. They still didn't manage to top Bush in 2004 by very much, if that is your idea of huge motivation leading to be very active, that's sad.

      They did enough. Close only matters with horseshoes or hand grenades.

      Not enough to convince me that they were motivated to be very active. Which was the claim being made, you may have failed to notice, it wasn't about elections, it was about people.

      However, you are mistkaen, as close does matter in elections, that does set the standard for recounts, and some places, an actual majority is required.

      If there were run-offs, about a dozen states would need to do it on that standard.

      Like I said, a rainstorm could shift it. If you speak about this election, be honest, it is close, a squeaker at best.

    31. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I'm more worried about Trump having texting ability than I am about him having nukes. I'll explain.

      I'm not at all afraid of Trump having nukes, because I live in one of the 20 largest US cities. If Trump launched a nuke, there's a 100% chance that I would be incinerated by a retaliatory nuke within 30 minutes. I have no reason to fear it, because I would be hit directly and wouldn't feel a thing; I'd just be here one second and gone the next. Poof. Gone.

      In other words: the only Americans that have reason to fear Trump launching nukes are the ones who don't live in one of the ~100 largest US metro areas, because they're the ones that would have to live with the fallout (pun intended).

    32. Re:Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You know, Republicans managed to completely neuter the relatively harmless Obama within two years of his election, simply by putting up every roadblock they could. I think blocking the political agenda of someone running as a Fascist is considerably more worthy.

      So, who's controlling congress?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  12. But I'm on the do not call tweet list... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Instead of reading a summary of Mr. Trump's 3AM tweets in The Wall Street Journal each morning, I'll be force to read each one as they come in real time.

  13. Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by bradley13 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why is this news? Obama has the power now. I trust Obama, as a professional Chicago-machine politician, even less than Trump.

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by mlw4428 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Obama doesn't tend to go onto Twitter at 3AM and start whining and getting into arguments. If you don't see how Obama acts like an adult and Trump a petulant teenager, you're beyond all hope.

    2. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Verdatum · · Score: 2

      God, you sound just like my jerk-DAD. I should be able to listen to my music at whatever volume I want, jeez.

    3. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, you're whining like a teenager yourself. Clean up your own backyard first.

    4. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Why is this news?

      Because Trump is announcing his cabinet so the distract-o-matic needs to work overtime.

    5. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Freischutz · · Score: 2

      Um, you're whining like a teenager yourself. Clean up your own backyard first.

      Donald? Is that you?

    6. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Rob+Y. · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, I assume you don't trust Trump to tell the truth - since it must be obvious even to you that he lies more or less constantly. So you trust him to be 'different', I suppose - with some kind of faith that 'different' in his case will turn out to be better. All very optimistic of you.

      But have you considered that, for example, there was nothing stopping Trump from developing (or adopting) a coherent plan for, say, 'repealing and replacing Obamacare' sometime in the past 6 years. To me, the fact that he hasn't done so, and campaigned (and won) on a promise of 'something better', implies that he didn't have something better to offer - or he'd have offered it. There's no need to play political chess in pursuit of a popular policy, so let's assume his eventual 'something better' won't be better for enough voters for him to have presented it to them...

      Yes, Obama is a politician - and a bit of a disappointment at that. 'Chicago-machine', I guess, carries a lot of specific negative meanings to you, but I'll assume it's is essentially code for 'Democrat' or 'urban' or something. But as far as 'trust' is concerned, Obama governed pretty much like he said he would - way to the right of where people (and the Nobel committee) 'hoped' he would, based, I guess, on their projections of what the first black President would do. But he was pretty trustworthy in the sense that he didn't misrepresent his policies much. Trump, on the other hand is claiming he's going to restore middle-class factory jobs by, what? Cutting taxes, mainly. Well, if you haven't figured out that 'tax cuts for the rich pay for themselves and help the middle class' is a lie by now, you're just not paying attention - or you've chosen sides and don't care about the truth.

      Well, we're all about to see your assumptions and your faith tested. And I predict a continued rise in income inequality, with some various uglinesses on the side. If that happens, what will your reaction be?

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    7. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      God, you sound just like my jerk-DAD. I should be able to listen to my music at whatever volume I want, jeez.

      Fine, son. But if you want to do that at 3 am, then kindly move out and get your own place.

      Your mom and I want to sleep now.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    8. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump or a campaign staffer? Do you really think a 70 year old man that was working from 8AM to 10PM sends tweets out at 1AM, 3AM, 5AM, and gets up at 7AM to head back to work?

      In the words of our Umpalumpa elect: "Sad!"

    9. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Calydor · · Score: 1

      Maybe he sends them each time he gets up at night to go to the bathroom, and the annoyance at waking up all the time because of a weak bladder is what spills onto Twitter?

      Holy, that actually makes sense.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    10. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      'Chicago-machine', I guess, carries a lot of specific negative meanings to you, but I'll assume it's is essentially code for 'Democrat' or 'urban' or something.

      It's essentially code for "corrupt as hell".

    11. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by T.E.D. · · Score: 2

      . 'Chicago-machine', I guess, carries a lot of specific negative meanings to you, but I'll assume it's is essentially code for 'Democrat' or 'urban' or something.

      It must be. If you know anything about Chicago politics, you'd know that the only contested race Obama ever ran in Chicago he lost to a longtime local politician due largely to being portrayed as an outsider. Lost it badly. Didn't even get 30%. His Senate race after that, his main claim to fame during the primary was an endorsement from a politician from rural southern Illinois (whose father happened to be beloved bowtied former Senator Paul Simon), and the general he largely won by default.

      He's no more a product of any "Chicago Machine" (whatever that is) than Mitt Romney.

    12. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Well, I assume you don't trust Trump to tell the truth - since it must be obvious even to you that he lies more or less constantly. "

      Trump is not a liar, though. He's a something else entirely. Something worse. He just doesn't care whether what he's saying is true or false. He makes it up as he goes along. He doesn't care how it bears on reality or law as long as people listen and go along with it.

      Loyalty is the one thing that counts, though I think you're right that there's also the plan to cut taxes for the rich as much as possible and claim (erroneously, based on decades of past experiment) it will benefit people at the other end of the system when it someday, real soon now, manages to trickle down to them.

    13. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by perlface · · Score: 2

      Sheesh. Talk about #fakenews

      Obama ran unopposed for State Senator campaign in 1996 because the machine disqualified his primary opponents. The Chicago Board of Elections (e.g., the machine) ruled that 62% of the signatures that his opponents submitted with their nominating petitions were invalid.

      http://stoneformayor.com/obama...

    14. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think instead when he refers to Chicago-machine he is referring to the illustrious corruption history Illinois and Chicago specifically, has. Just a quick google job turned up this headline: "Blagojevich Joins 4 Former Illinois Govs Behind Bars - ABC News" from 2012.

    15. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Rob+Y. · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Except that Obama is perhaps the least corrupt individual to hold the Presidency since Jimmy Carter. Sure, he's a politician, and somewhat beholden to his donors - but in the scope of things, he's run a pretty clean administration. So in that light, using "Chicago-machine" to impugn him as corrupt? Why? Because he happened to come from Chicago? That won't fly. So I'm sticking with "Democrat" or 'Urban" or (dare I say it) "Black".

      And I'm not one of those Democrats who's willing to chalk Trump's success up to racism. He certainly had the support of just about every racist you can find, but that doesn't make all of his swing supporters racists any more than Obama's coming from Chicago makes him corrupt. What it does make them is less uncomfortable associating themselves with racists and a politician (and party) who courted the racist vote than they are frightened and angry in general about the state their lives and the ability of the government to do anything that might make it better. I doubt they expect Trump to make it better either - they just want him to blow a few things up. Judging by his cabinet picks, they're likely to be disappointed even on that count. Maybe he'll keep them on board with a steady diet of tweeted conspiracy theories and personal insults...

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    16. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by HornWumpus · · Score: 0

      Trump's success was in part due to black racism. They didn't come out and vote for a corrupt white woman like they did for a corrupt black man.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    17. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I did. Why is it that every time I insult Trump, the assumption is that I support Clinton?

    18. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Yes. There are multiple confirmations that Trump does many of the "insane" tweets personally. He does them at 3 a.m. because otherwise, someone is there to stop him. He works 8 a.m. to 9 a.m., naps, then works 9 p.m. to 10 p.m., and claims "work" between then, when the interns are actually sending the tweets. Sometimes he has a public appearance in the day, but much less than any other candidate.

      His entire life is a PR lie.

    19. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by lgw · · Score: 1

      Except that Obama is perhaps the least corrupt individual to hold the Presidency since Jimmy Carter.

      You meant most corrupt, right? The bank bailouts were the largest transfer of money from the treasury to donors in the history of America. (Sure, Bush started the ball rolling, but the payout while he was in office was small in comparison.)

      He certainly had the support of just about every racist you can find,

      Oh, the BLM crowd voted for him, did they?

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    20. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Rakarra · · Score: 2

      But have you considered that, for example, there was nothing stopping Trump from developing (or adopting) a coherent plan for, say, 'repealing and replacing Obamacare' sometime in the past 6 years. To me, the fact that he hasn't done so, and campaigned (and won) on a promise of 'something better', implies that he didn't have something better to offer - or he'd have offered it.

      I'm not so sure about that anymore. I believe our election system rewards vague generalities and punishes specifics. People with a record to examine are now at a disadvantage compared to people who don't. If you make public a plan, you are only providing campaign fodder for the people disadvantaged by that plan. You're certainly not going to win among the people who would also have supported you with more vague promises.

      Trump succeeded with basically "I'm going to do it all, and it's going to be great. It'll be a beautiful thing." He probably learned a lot of lessons from Herman Cain and his stupid "9-9-9" plan. Cain shouldn't have made that public.

      Whether a politician has a good plan or not is hard to discern, these days articulating positions just lowers a politician's chances. "It's difficult and messy," is not the story people want to hear, "We're awesome and we're going to win" is much more comforting.

    21. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Loyalty is the one thing that counts,

      I'm not sure even that counts.
      Chris Christie was loyal to Trump and did a lot of work for him; he was kicked out of the transition team and his future is uncertain.
      Rudy Giuliani was amazingly loyal to Trump, appearing on every news show and defending him in the months leading to the election. Now the job he was assumed to take may be given to Mitt Romney (that would, at least, be the smart choice).

    22. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      But he was pretty trustworthy in the sense that he didn't misrepresent his policies much.

      His two biggest promises were close gitmo and run the most transparent administration of all time. He didn't have the balls to issue pardons to people we won't charge with a crime (which he can do by wiggling a pen over a sheet of paper) and he presided over literally the most opaque presidential administration in history. So no. Obama is as big a liar as the average politician, and you are engaging in revisionist history.

      Granted, Trump is an even bigger liar, but Trump's shit behavior is not a free pass for Obama. Trump does not reflect on how good a person Obama is in any way. Trump doesn't make Obama look better, Obama makes Trump look worse.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    23. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Xest · · Score: 2

      "Well, we're all about to see your assumptions and your faith tested. And I predict a continued rise in income inequality, with some various uglinesses on the side. If that happens, what will your reaction be?"

      To double down and vote for him again in 2020, because next time it will be different!

    24. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      If you're not with us, then you're the enemy! [/sith]

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    25. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He certainly had the support of just about every racist you can find

      Don't forget the misogynists and xenophobes.

    26. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Except that Obama is perhaps the least corrupt individual to hold the Presidency since Jimmy Carter. Sure, he's a politician, and somewhat beholden to his donors - but in the scope of things, he's run a pretty clean administration. So in that light, using "Chicago-machine" to impugn him as corrupt? Why? Because he happened to come from Chicago? That won't fly. So I'm sticking with "Democrat" or 'Urban" or (dare I say it) "Black".

      And I'm not one of those Democrats who's willing to chalk Trump's success up to racism. He certainly had the support of just about every racist you can find, but that doesn't make all of his swing supporters racists dany more than Obama's coming from Chicago makes him corrupt. What it does make them is less uncomfortable associating themselves with racists and a politician (and party) who courted the racist vote than they are frightened and angry in general about the state their lives and the ability of the government to do anything that might make it better. I doubt they expect Trump to make it better either - they just want him to blow a few things up. Judging by his cabinet picks, they're likely to be disappointed even on that count. Maybe he'll keep them on board with a steady diet of tweeted conspiracy theories and personal insults...

      Opposition to Obama doesn't prove one racist. However, as with any behavior, if you have an obviously transparently bogus excuse such as "Because he's a socialist!", that puts you under some suspicion.
      After all, there are people out there who are still insisting that Obama was born in Kenya, and/or is a Muslim, and still get upset when you suggest that their opposition is racially motivated.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    27. Re:Why is this news? Obama has the power now... by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      I know a wee bit about the process myself, and some of the info there looked kinda dubious, so I went out to look at the home page for that website....

      ...uh...Oh wow. This guy ... erm...

      So do you have a source for any of this information that isn't from a website full of one-sided (and sometimes ridiculous) attacks against Democratic politicians?

  14. Give it a break slashdot by jmichaelg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hate pointless fear mongering articles. Best example of fake news there is right here on slashdot.

    Trump isn't likely to abuse the alert system but leave it to slashdot to make an issue of it.

      Trump won. Get over it already.

    1. Re: Give it a break slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, this garbage is hardly news.

    2. Re:Give it a break slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It will likely take decades to get over this "win".

    3. Re:Give it a break slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least it's tech news. Maybe this bullshit story will cause some congress critters to pass a law saying it's illegal to use the emergency alert systems for non-emergency alerts out of more baseless fear over Trump. Then we can stop getting all those fake kidnapping alerts.

    4. Re:Give it a break slashdot by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Best example of fake news there is right here on slashdot.

      I know this is an international site, but the meaning of "fake" is pretty much understood universally. So why do you not understand it?
      A distraction? Yes
      A sensationalistic piece of garbage? Yes.
      Fake? Well the only thing here that is fake is your post claiming that this article is.

      Trump isn't likely to abuse the alert system but leave it to slashdot to make an issue of it.

      Actually you'll find most people here don't seem to give a shit.

      Trump won. Get over it already

      Given the announcements this week, it will be at least 3 years plus however long it takes for America to undo the ensuing damage of his legacy before people will "get over it".

    5. Re:Give it a break slashdot by swb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fear mongering is a gift to the fake news industry. Because it's speculation based on fact, it's technically not false. But it's also usually about three decimal places past the zombie apocalypse in probability.

      As long as a segment of Democratic base continues to indulge in extreme paranoia, the news industry across all strata will continue pumping out stories to indulge this paranoia.

      I predict next we'll hear that Mike Pence will be personally performing abortions on pregnant transgender people because the bible says it's ok.

    6. Re:Give it a break slashdot by avandesande · · Score: 1

      We don't have nearly enough Trump news on slashdot now as it is. Why the discouraging tone?

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    7. Re:Give it a break slashdot by lophophore · · Score: 1

      Slashdot is going to join boingboing on the list of "websites I used to look at."

      --
      there are 3 kinds of people:
      * those who can count
      * those who can't
    8. Re:Give it a break slashdot by trg83 · · Score: 1

      Fake kidnapping alerts? You do realize that the non-custodial parent in these cases is sometimes actually a criminal who DOES murder their child? I hope you never reproduce, but if you do, you are going to be in for a harsh awakening when you actually discover what it means to care for and worry for another person.

    9. Re:Give it a break slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump won ...

      ... by gaming the system. Trump lost the popular vote by 2 million ballots and won the Electoral College by a landslide. There is no 'getting over' that just 'fixing it' and the fight starts now. The sooner we fix it so that nobody can get into the white house by gaming a hopelessly broken electoral system the better off the United States will be..

    10. Re:Give it a break slashdot by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      you are going to be in for a harsh awakening when you actually discover what it means to care for and worry for another person.

      You can care for and worry for another person and still realize that a 3AM alert about something happening 300 miles away from your bedroom, to someone you don't know, is useless. You can also realize that constant alerts that are useless only serve to desensitize everyone to alerts that are not useless. The fact that the majority of Ambers are parental custody squabbles means that people learn to assume that they all are, or seek ways of turning them off.

      Considering that when I get up five hours later and actually go outside the house, the chances of me seeing the abductor driving the same road I'm on, and my remembering the details so I can even tell it is him, are so vanishingly small that if you think it would ever happen you probably also buy lottery tickets. You have a much better chance of winning the mega jackpot than me seeing your child's abductor -- even assuming it was a real abduction to start with.

      Why do you think everyone just clicks through EULAs or "I'm going to install Windows 10 now unless you tell me not to" popups? It's because there are so many popups for every little thing that everyone is desensitized to them.

      If we're going to justify Amber alerts, then why don't we also have Kidney Alerts when someone with a failing pair of kidneys needs a donor and is on death's doorstep, asking everyone within a 300 mile radius to donate? The chances of finding a donor to save that one life are infinitely better than finding the abductor.

    11. Re: Give it a break slashdot by trg83 · · Score: 1

      I took issue with them being called FAKE. You can say they are an inconvenience to you or personally not useful to you, but it is extremely objectionable to call them FAKE. As a parent, I don't mind the inconvenience. I traverse multiple major highways on my daily commute and I always keep my eyes open for the reported people and vehicles. Amber Alerts have saved lives, and at no cost to anyone other than a slight inconvenience.

    12. Re: Give it a break slashdot by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      and at no cost to anyone other than a slight inconvenience.

      An increasing number of alerts times the millions of people that can be inconvenienced for no possible gain. Factoring in the percentages that the alert is based on a custody squabble makes the return on investment even smaller.

      For example, alerting the entire state of Oregon for an abduction that takes place in Idaho is just ridiculous. That's the last alert I saw -- a Boise child. You cannot possibly think that anyone more than 20 miles from Boise will have any chance at all of seeing the perp. But this justifies disturbing everyone in a 300 mile radius because "it's just a slight inconvenience". Well, can I point out the fact that the phone in my pocket vibrating when I get a text message is "just a slight inconvenience" but some people here think I should be thrown out of the theater when it happens while they're trying to munch their popcorn and slurp their pop and discuss the plot with their neighbor while watching the movie.

      If you want to spend your time scanning every license plate you see, that's fine. If you want to feed your fears off the number of Ambers you see, that's fine, too. I'm sorry you fear so much for the abduction of your children, but the likelyhood of it happening is very small. The reason it seems to be on the increase is because of the increase in Amber alerts keeping your fears alive.

      Keeping Amber Alerts enabled on my phone on the off chance I'll see a true abductor would be like keeping "Butterfly Flapped Its Wings In Africa" alerts enabled on the off chance that it will help me avoid hurricanes. Butterfly Alerts should be mandatory using your argument since the chance of one saving my life is much greater than my chance of finding your child's abductor. And it is only a "slight inconvenience" to keep getting the Butterfly alerts, right?

    13. Re: Give it a break slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck off.

    14. Re: Give it a break slashdot by lgw · · Score: 1

      Your custody battle remains not my problem, sorry.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    15. Re: Give it a break slashdot by trg83 · · Score: 1

      Do you know how much red tape is involved in removing custody rights? If you have lost custody of your children, you are a worthless pile of shit and legally no different than a complete stranger abducting a child. No custody means NO RIGHTS TO THE CHILD! When did Slashdot get taken over by aasholes? These are the people who should appreciate a technical solution to a problem, but instead you all just want to say there is no problem? Rot in hell.

    16. Re: Give it a break slashdot by lgw · · Score: 1

      It might be a problem, but it's not my problem, and I don't need a text message about it.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    17. Re: Give it a break slashdot by triffid_98 · · Score: 1

      ...but it is extremely objectionable to call them FAKE

      These (in almost all cases) aren't strangers abducting people's kids, they're parents that were estranged by the court, in some cases quite unjustly. However you want to label it that is a very real thing.

    18. Re:Give it a break slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "fake" was a correct word choice, yet poor because I didn't explain it. My apologies. Amber alerts (couldn't remember the term) can be turned off, so "annoying" or "unless" were bad options. I meant alerts triggered for when its clear who the kidnapper is and that they don't intend to harm the kid. There is no immediate danger to the kid. I thought I remember reading an article about an alert that went out after the people had already been found, but that could just be my brain seeing what it wants to remember.

      As far as reproducing, you don't have to worry about that. I have enough genetic-related health issues that I wouldn't want to pass them on. Some of us do care about the human gene pool. If you can't reproduce naturally I'd consider it near child abuse to reproduce artificially as the kid will likely have similar issues.

    19. Re:Give it a break slashdot by trg83 · · Score: 1

      Understood. Sorry for the berating. I unfortunately gave you the reaction I would have liked to have given a co-worker who recently yelled at those of us who had not disabled their Amber Alerts when they all simultaneously went off during the work day. I have personally witnessed, but fortunately not been subject to, the failures of our domestic litigation system and my misplaced anger truly comes from a place of compassion and hurt for the kids :( I was harsh and unfair to pick on you. I offer my sincere apologies.

    20. Re:Give it a break slashdot by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Yeah, in about 1 in 100,000 kidnapping cases. Essentially zero, other than every time it happens, it gets TV play for months, making people think that it's multiple regular events.

    21. Re:Give it a break slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing you said seems untrue, sincere apologies weren't needed. I value hearing from another viewpoint.

  15. grow up please. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Trump may be all kinds of things unsavory, but this kind of "news" says more about the people reporting it than about Trump.

  16. Who built it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Alt title: Democrats Terrified of Trump Controlling their Surveillance State.

  17. Are you serious? by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

    This counts as a pressing concern? That Trump has the power to send spam?

    Never mind that he has stoking the worst bigotry and racial violence in North America in recent history. Never mind that he now has access to nookoolar weapons. Never mind that he's going to gut environmental regulations and oversight over the entire energy sector.

    No! He can send us a text message! Everybody panic!

    Is there an emoji for eyeroll?

    1. Re:Are you serious? by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Simply put, the severity of the other things that you mentioned is so vast that it is simply beyond the capacity for most people to reasonably worry about them and still function in society. Text message spam, therefore, is more likely to be taken as a serious concern by people than environmental disaster or even nuclear war.

    2. Re:Are you serious? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      stoking the worst bigotry and racial violence in North America in recent history

      Out of curiosity, what do you think you're actually achieving by making stuff like that up? Really. I'm curious. I mean, YOU know you're lying, and WE know you're lying, so ... who is it, specifically, that you think you're scoring points with? Truly. I've been really wondering what people repeating that meme think they're actually achieving. It's strange behavior, and I'm hoping you can shed some light on it.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:Are you serious? by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

      No, apparently I *don't* know that I'm lying, because from everything I've been reading, and in videos, etc, it's the truth.

      His entire campaign rode on, and encouraged, rampant xenophobia. Mexicans. Muslims. Blacks. Basically anyone that isn't white and Christians are becoming more and more scared for their lives.

      Unless your only sources of news are Fox and Brietbart, there is no way you could miss the escalating fear out there.

    4. Re:Are you serious? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      because from everything I've been reading

      Try reading something other than HuffPo, perhaps.

      As for the rest of your strange confusion about the difference between people's race and what they actually DO, well, maybe you can grow up and get over that juvenile perspective. The only reason people are "scared for their lives" is because lying propagandists are telling them to be, because those same liars will do ANYTHING to distract from why they lost the election.

      Unless your only sources of news are Fox and Brietbart, there is no way you could miss the escalating fear out there.

      Unless you choose some sources of news other than NBC, the NYT, and other liberal outlets, there is no way you'll figure out that it's the failed Democrat party and their lefty cheerleaders who are deliberately stoking that delusion ... even as organizations like the DNC were caught boasting about paying people to go to Trump events and start trouble. Even as lefty media outlets carefully ignore events where people with Trump stickers on their car or who - even as kids in school - voiced opposition to Clinton, are beat up, having their property vandalized, and worse. I know - it's no fun when it's anti-Trump people who are doing the beating, the burning, and other violent acts. Takes all the fun out of your narrative.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    5. Re:Are you serious? by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      This counts as a pressing concern? That Trump has the power to send spam?

      Never mind that he has stoking the worst bigotry and racial violence in North America in recent history. Never mind that he now has access to nookoolar weapons. Never mind that he's going to gut environmental regulations and oversight over the entire energy sector.

      No! He can send us a text message! Everybody panic!

      Is there an emoji for eyeroll?

      The mirror image of his interview on 60 Minutes: "Mr. Trump, how does it feel to be the President-elect?" "Hey, I have a million more followers on Twitter!" with no trace of irony or sarcasm.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    6. Re:Are you serious? by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Simply put, the severity of the other things that you mentioned is so vast that it is simply beyond the capacity for most people to reasonably worry about them and still function in society. Text message spam, therefore, is more likely to be taken as a serious concern by people than environmental disaster or even nuclear war.

      Android offers an option where you won't be included in case of nuclear war.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    7. Re:Are you serious? by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

      Well since we're resorting to ad hominem attacks, I'm going to accuse you of being a cliche conservative who has just as much a myopic view as the people you denegrate.

      Newsflash for you... o/~I'm not even American.o/~ I follow a *variety* of news sources, particularly ones from Europe, where the news is a hell of a lot less partisian than the shit that gets served in the US.

      And I know all about the bullshit with the Democratic party. Both with the DNC as well as the protestors. It's down right embarassing and shameful. But unlike you typical Americans who are unable to think about anything without resorting to a black/white, either/or you-bad/me-good mindset, everyone else in the world are looking upon you as the laughing stocks that you are.

      What the rest of the world sees is that the Democrats are now hopelessly corrupt, but the Republicans are not only just as corrupt, but openly xenophobic and brazenly anti-intellectual as well. The only reason Democrats are even considered an option is because the Republicans are flat out worse. And Trump managed to tap perfectly into that I'm-ignorant-and-proud-of-it base with his word salad speeches.

      You think we need "leftist sources" spreading supposed "lies" to stoke fears?

      How god damn fucking stupid do you have to be to ignore the fact that Trump himself repeatedly said things like wanting to build a wall to block Mexico? Or wanting to deport all the Muslims? Or the fact that he pointedly did *not* denounce the support from a variety of white supremacist terrorist groups? Or wanting to instigate trade wars with China that are all but guaranteed to slam the US into a depression? Or the countless other things he said for the express purpose of riling up ignorant masses?

      Or maybe we should talk about the cabinet Trump is assembling, full of extreme right-wing people who personify the worst that the right has to offer? Like a rabidly anti-gay VP? Or the "we should abolish public education" Betsy Devos for the Education Secretary?

      There is real, honest to god fear out there, and it's a direct result of the hateful things that YOUR beloved party is saying and doing.

  18. You can turn this off by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1, Informative

    Emergency alerts can already be turned off on your phone. I don't need to be getting woken up at 3AM for flash flood warnings in a different watershed or missing children in a vehicle on a major interstate hours' drive away from my out-of-the-way little hometown, so I have them off already. If that means I don't get stupid fucking Trump tweets either, great.

    --
    -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
    "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    1. Re:You can turn this off by Dorianny · · Score: 2

      Emergency alerts can already be turned off on your phone. I don't need to be getting woken up at 3AM for flash flood warnings in a different watershed or missing children in a vehicle on a major interstate hours' drive away from my out-of-the-way little hometown, so I have them off already. If that means I don't get stupid fucking Trump tweets either, great.

      Providers are not required to participate in (CMAS) but if they do they are not allowed to offer the option to disable Presidential alerts. So sorry, If President Trump wants to let you know "Sorry losers and haters, but my I.Q. is one of the highest -and you all know it! Please don't feel so stupid or insecure,it's not your fault", he can most certainly wake you up with a 2am CMAS

    2. Re:You can turn this off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Providers may not be allowed to offer an opt out, but my cell phone, however, does.

    3. Re:You can turn this off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually you can't turn of presidential alerts on most phones.

    4. Re:You can turn this off by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Actually you can't turn of presidential alerts on most phones.

      Nice lead-in! I can't turn off just presidential alerts, but I can turn off all alerts, and that's exactly what happens the first time I get a totally irrelevant presidential alert, just like when I got my first loud as fuck AMBER alert and it was for some girl who had already been found.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:You can turn this off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So sorry, If President Trump wants to let you know "Sorry losers and haters, but my I.Q. is one of the highest -and you all know it! Please don't feel so stupid or insecure,it's not your fault", he can most certainly wake you up with a 2am CMAS

      No he can't, because my IQ is higher than his and my firmware won't allow any alerts through because that "feature" has been removed.

    6. Re:You can turn this off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can turn it off on any phone that can be rooted, which is most of them. Stop spreading false information.

    7. Re:You can turn this off by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 2

      he can most certainly wake you up with a 2am CMAS

      Why would I leave my phone close enough to wake me when I go to sleep?

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  19. In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Water is wet. Coverage at 5 and 11.

    The FUD being spread is unreal.

  20. Wont Affect Me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't have cell phone, so I can't get these messages.

    Try again.

    1. Re:Wont Affect Me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have cell phone, so I can't get these messages.

      Try again.

      Don't worry - he'll beep you.

  21. Sorta like Twitter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And when breathless reporters then embed his Tweets to summon a fresh gale of outrage.

  22. How is this news, or even interesting? by MullerMn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What the fuck is this? Seriously? What. The. Fuck. Taco must be turning in his grave/money pit at what the various owners of Slashdot have done to it since he sold it on.

    1. Re:How is this news, or even interesting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he's just sleeping on a pile of money and doesn't care.

    2. Re:How is this news, or even interesting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Fuck The Police"

      This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).". This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).".This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).". This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).".This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).". This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).".This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).". This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).".This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).". This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).".This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).". This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).".

      [MC Ren as Court Officer]
      Right about now, N.W.A. court is in full effect
      Judge Dre presiding
      In the case of N.W.A. vs. the Police Department;
      prosecuting attorney's are: MC Ren, Ice Cube,
      and Eazy-motherfucking-E

      [Dr. Dre as The Judge]
      Order, order, order
      Ice Cube, take the motherfucking stand
      Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth
      and nothing but the truth so help your black ass?

      [Ice Cube as Witness]
      You god damn right!

      [Dr. Dre]
      Well won't you tell everybody what the fuck you gotta say?

      [Ice Cube]
      Fuck the police coming straight from the underground
      A young nigga got it bad cause I'm brown
      And not the other color so police think
      they have the authority to kill a minority
      Fuck that shit, cause I ain't the one
      for a punk motherfucker with a badge and a gun
      to be beating on, and thrown in jail
      We can go toe to toe in the middle of a cell
      Fucking with me cause I'm a teenager
      with a little bit of gold and a pager
      Searching my car, looking for the product
      Thinking every nigga is selling narcotics
      You'd rather see, me in the pen
      than me and Lorenzo rolling in a Benz-o
      Beat a police out of shape
      and when I'm finished, bring the yellow tape
      To tape off the scene of the slaughter
      Still getting swoll off bread and water
      I don't know if they fags or what
      Search a nigga down, and grabbing his nuts
      And on the other hand, without a gun they can't get none
      But don't let it be a black and a white one
      Cause they'll slam ya down to the street top
      Black police showing out for the white cop
      Ice Cube will swarm
      on ANY motherfucker in a blue uniform
      Just cause I'm from, the CPT
      Punk police are afraid of me!
      HUH, a young nigga on the warpath
      And when I'm finished, it's gonna be a bloodbath
      of cops, dying in L.A.
      Yo Dre, I got something to say

      This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).". This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).".This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).". This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).".This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).". This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).".This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).". This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).".This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).". This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).".This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 29.6).". This bullshit to defeat "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 2

  23. Executive Order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems like an EO means the President can do whatever the fuck he wants with WEAs and for that matter, FEMA.

    The vast majority of government agencies are going to be Trump's bitch for the next 4 years. And there is nothing that can be done about it.

    Thanks rural alt-right rednecks!

    1. Re:Executive Order by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      The vast majority of government agencies are going to be Trump's bitch for the next 4 years. And there is nothing that can be done about it.

      I work in government IT. As far as many of my coworkers are concern, Donald Trump is no different than any other person in the White House when it comes to day-to-day operations. Just business as usual. The Republican track record to close the Department of Commerce, Department of Education, and Department of Oops is pretty dismal.

    2. Re:Executive Order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is because everyone in Government IT are morons. Most are ex-military who couldn't get a job anywhere else so go begging at the taxpayer trough for jobs.

    3. Re:Executive Order by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      That is because everyone in Government IT are morons. Most are ex-military who couldn't get a job anywhere else so go begging at the taxpayer trough for jobs.

      I spent 20 years in the private sector and 2+ years in the public sector. The people I work with in government IT are the most professional IT people in the business. I'm proud to serve with them.

    4. Re:Executive Order by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Seconded. I've applied for government jobs two times. Both times, I was not considered for the position because a Veteran claimed to be qualified. The government does not evaluate applicants based on quality, but hires veterans (as a form of welfare) above all others.

    5. Re:Executive Order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well someone has to hire vets, they have no skills that are useful outside of war.
      Maybe civilians should stop trying to get jobs in government and leave it up to the vets?

    6. Re:Executive Order by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      So the government exists to provide jobs to vets? The government exists to do nothing but be welfare. Seems they should try to be more productive.

      And when the government does as you say, and hires an unqualified applicant because of demographics, they will perform more poorly than the private sector. Which is one of the prime complaints against them.

    7. Re:Executive Order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The government's job is not to be productive, it's not a business here to make profit. The government's job is to serve the people. We pay taxes so that our communities are served. Even if those of us paying more taxes aren't getting a direct benefit from those services.

  24. How about... by The-Ixian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As the old adage goes: "Let's cross that bridge when we come to it"

    Can we stop complaining about things that may possibly is some crazy parallel universe happen?

    I didn't vote for the guy but can we at least wait until he is in office and doing stuff before we jump off the deep end?

    --
    My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    1. Re:How about... by geekmux · · Score: 1

      As the old adage goes: "Let's cross that bridge when we come to it"

      Can we stop complaining about things that may possibly is some crazy parallel universe happen?

      I didn't vote for the guy but can we at least wait until he is in office and doing stuff before we jump off the deep end?

      As you call to simply dismiss this on grounds of never-gonna-happen, look around and get your bearings.

      Trump just got elected President.

      Even those in the parallel universe didn't see that crazy shit coming.

    2. Re:How about... by Soccerguy1832 · · Score: 1

      As you simply dismiss that on the grounds of but-I-dont-like-it, look around and get your bearings...

    3. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the old adage goes: "Let's cross that bridge when we come to it"

      Can we stop complaining about things that may possibly is some crazy parallel universe happen?

      I didn't vote for the guy but can we at least wait until he is in office and doing stuff before we jump off the deep end?

      He's been doing plenty his entire life to warrant grave doubts about his character, and that was before getting elected on promises to do even worse things.

      Wake up.

    4. Re:How about... by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Plenty of people saw it coming, the Dilbert guy called it the minute he was announcing his candidacy. The La times poll did call it consistently several months before the vote. Plenty of people on Fox "warned" us after the primaries (even though they kind of went along with the mainstream after Meghan Kelly and several establishment republicans jumped camp).

      The media and establishment politicians don't like they have no more control over the political process in the country, that's why we see this backlash. It would be worse if Gary or Jill got elected but if it weren't for Trump, I would bet they'd have a running chance against a Clinton and a Bush.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    5. Re:How about... by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      And don't forget Michael Moore, and roughly 47% of the voting public. The polls were pretty close leading up to the election. It is strange that so many were apparently that surprised.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  25. Make mass texts great again! by Idisagree · · Score: 1

    We are going to bring texts back!

      We have some of the smartest texts, it's going to be YUGE!

  26. THIS IS GONNA BE AWESOME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....grabs popcorn....

  27. Hillary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if an article would have come out saying "Hillary would..." if she won? Or is it only news because of the identity of the winner and apolitical bias?

    1. Re:Hillary? by SecurityGuy · · Score: 1

      In a word, yes. If Hillary so much as coughed, there were news stories about it.

      So yeah, when it dawns on someone that the guy who has become known for sending bursts of 3am messages is going to have the ability to send texts to everybody in the country, it gets talked about. In a country where there's probably just as much news coverage of what the Kardashians had for dinner yesterday, that's not really a surprise.

  28. Reply all by NeutralSolution · · Score: 1

    I'm all for this "feature" if it comes with a "Reply All" button.

    --
    Neutral.. to matters that do not directly concern me ;-)
    1. Re:Reply all by bobbied · · Score: 1

      I'm all for this "feature" if it comes with a "Reply All" button.

      It does, but you have to be president to push it..

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  29. That's Huuuggggeee! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's a Huuuggggeee capability, right there!

  30. Suddenly worried by roninmagus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All of a sudden, the left and the media are afraid of the powers that have been given to the president...

    1. Re:Suddenly worried by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Are we really though?

      The POTUS doesn't have any real power. Obama proved that, right? Wasn't he supposed to have taken everyone's guns away? Why didn't that happen?

    2. Re:Suddenly worried by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Memba when the Obama administration came up with the Disposition Matrix? Now Trump.

    3. Re:Suddenly worried by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

      It's not the powers we're afraid of... it's the temperament and questionable integrity of the man who will have access to them.

    4. Re:Suddenly worried by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That happened with the right last time around when Obama won, but did they learn anything?

    5. Re:Suddenly worried by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Well now hang on.... Nobody who knew anything ever said he would actually DO the gun grab on his own, only that he would support policies, laws and judges that would make it possible. This he HAS done. Luckily he only had a congress willing to support his efforts completely for 2 years and has opposed his policies, laws and judicial appointments more and more with each election since. Had congress not thrown a road block or two in his path on this, he would have been a lot more successful achieving his objectives.

      As it stands, he was reduced to the limited power of his "Pin and Phone" which is bad enough, although without lasting affect because all that can be undone by the next president before they get ready for bed on their first day. However the lasting affects of his judicial appointments will not go away and this WILL impact gun rights to some degree for a generation. He may not have succeeded in his goals completely, but he has succeeded in pushing us towards that objective to some degree.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    6. Re:Suddenly worried by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that should be the test for any grant of power. How would you feel about it, if the "other side" is in control?

  31. A Truely non-issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Trump hysteria is getting a bit out of hand.

  32. Slashdot forgets by slapout · · Score: 1

    I seemed to recall reading on Slashdot a few years ago about how the Obama admin was putting this into place

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
    1. Re:Slashdot forgets by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      Exactly, this was the primary reason I started flashing my phone with alternate Android builds, I was so pissed off that the Feds were forcing phone makers to include their stupid alert program.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  33. Re:Yes? So? by Thelasko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Correct. This is a totally sensationalist story.

    --
    One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
  34. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean, really? Is this what slashdot has become? I used to like comming to this site to get my tech news. This is just fucking stupid. I'm done.

    1. Re: Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Furthermore, if I wanted this sort of crap, I would go to reddit.

  35. This is Slashdot, not a trash bin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, I don't like Trump either, but this is just a random Facebook rant post that somehow made it to Facebook. Has Trump given any indication that he wants to do this? Has there been any serious abuse of this in the past? Is it the end of the world if he does? Couldn't he just order the phone companies to send out text messages?

    What else might Trump do?? He could order the wireless providers to set his picture as the default background. He could order the navy to arrange the boats to spell out his name on Google Maps. He could order NASA to fly to the moon and rearrange the dirt to resemble his face as seen from Earth. This isn't news and it's not even interesting.

    This isn't even click bait. This is a random speculation, and a counter, wrapped into one. It's a mental patient babbling to himself.

    Stop it. Get some help.

  36. Re:Yes? So? by DickBreath · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yeah, yeah, right. Presidents have been able to do this for a long time. No big deal.

    Why this is news is because in the past, presidents were sane.

    (Idea: incoming administration should modernize nuclear launch system for the 21st century so it is possible to give launch orders via Twitter.)

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  37. FTW! Mode this up Shockwave Rider by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brunner ref for you kidz

  38. root hack reflash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Disable all texts. I hate texts any way, block them all!

  39. Hack to block WEA messages... by TWX · · Score: 1

    ...in 5... 4... 3...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:Hack to block WEA messages... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.engadget.com/2013/07/28/iphone-101-living-dangerously-government-alerts/

  40. Unblockable.... how cute... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    I can absolutely block them, some of us are not sheeple that refuse to learn how to master technology.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  41. Democrats are the enemy by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I hate pointless fear mongering articles. Best example of fake news there is right here on slashdot.

    Trump isn't likely to abuse the alert system but leave it to slashdot to make an issue of it.

      Trump won. Get over it already.

    I'm so weary of all this one-sided bickering and sniping over Trump that I've decided that Democrats should be considered enemy combatants.

    To be more clear, I now consider Democrats to be the equivalent of the "other side" in a war - they will still oppose every and any thing your side does, they can lose a battle and still wage war, incessant and total non-compliance, they will fight to the last man, and any victory - even pyrrhic - is still a victory. Any means are justified in the pursuit of their ends.

    All the things an unruly child does, but forever.

    In my mind the Democrats are *permanently* a party of dishonour, disgrace, and corruption. A group that simply gets no "benefit of the doubt" or "concessions of fairness" or anything like that. They are children, now and forever. We should treat them as such.

    I was thinking through the recent news (last night) that Trump got Carrier to keep 1000 jobs in the US, and how I couldn't see a way to frame that in a bad light. Lo and behold! Recent comments on Slashdot manage to paint this as a bad thing. They even pulled out the Hitler comparison for good measure.

    The Democrats are defeated. Leaderless and feckless, the only thing they can do is complain.

    No plan, no leadership, and rife with corruption.

    It's hard to see why anyone would be a part of that crowd.

    1. Re:Democrats are the enemy by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I've decided that Democrats should be considered enemy combatants.

      And what exactly are you gonna do about that, you fuckwit?

      If you come, you better come heavy. Because Democrats have been dealing with poncy little whigs like you since Andrew Jackson.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Democrats are the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You misspelled Republican

    3. Re:Democrats are the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just remember when you've got them on their knees begging for their lives and the lives of their family -- NO MERCY. Kill them all - their wives and their children, burn down their homes and the shops that they work in. They're not Americans, hell they're not even HUMAN. Keep the furnaces running 24 hours a day until they're all gone.

      Hyperbole much? That's the road that your little tantrum goes down. I sadly look forward to reading about your incarceration with Mr. Roof.

      WE ARE COUNTRYMEN - NEVER FORGET THAT - OUR ENEMIES WON'T

    4. Re:Democrats are the enemy by Mab_Mass · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To be more clear, I now consider Democrats to be the equivalent of the "other side" in a war - they will still oppose every and any thing your side does, they can lose a battle and still wage war, incessant and total non-compliance, they will fight to the last man, and any victory - even pyrrhic - is still a victory. Any means are justified in the pursuit of their ends.

      So... in other words, the Democrats are now going to do what the Republicans have been doing for the past 8 years.

    5. Re:Democrats are the enemy by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      What rock have you been living under? Some Republicans have been bickering and sniping over the past 8 years just as much as some Democrats are doing now. In fact, some of those bickering and sniping Republicans were in the House and Senate, where they promised to block every single piece of legislation coming from the White House on general principle. Remember that?

      After this election, there's plenty of blame to go around. Don't be fooled into thinking it all falls on the shoulders of your "enemy". Republicans have eagerly tossed fuel on the fire of divisiveness. Republicans have decided to let themselves be represented by one of the worst Presidential candidates I've ever seen. That he still managed to win the election is pure dumb luck (and a just-as-appalling candidate on the other side), and no thanks to any Republican merit.

      It's time for the US to stop bickering and start trying to pull out of the nosedive they're in.

    6. Re:Democrats are the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet another "Patriot" declares other American citizens enemy combatants.

      News at 11.

    7. Re:Democrats are the enemy by ScentCone · · Score: 2

      And what exactly are you gonna do about that, you fuckwit?

      Thank you for reinforcing his point so well.

      If you come, you better come heavy.

      The country did, including lots of Democrats thoroughly tired of the DNC's BS and the Dem power structure's utter contempt for the people it wants to rule. You know, in the voting booth. That's why the Democrats have lost the better part of a thousand legislative seats, governorships, both houses of congress, the executive branch, and shortly the prospect of a majority in the Supreme Court. Because they, as a party, talk and act just like you.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    8. Re:Democrats are the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, because Andrew Jackson founded the Democratic party.

    9. Re:Democrats are the enemy by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      The country did, including lots of Democrats thoroughly tired of the DNC's BS and the Dem power structure's utter contempt for the people it wants to rule.

      Except more voters chose the Democrat. Other than that, you've got a point.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    10. Re:Democrats are the enemy by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      I've decided that Democrats should be considered enemy combatants.

      And what exactly are you gonna do about that, you fuckwit?

      If you come, you better come heavy. Because Democrats have been dealing with poncy little whigs like you since Andrew Jackson.

      psst... Just so you know Andrew Jackson was a Democrat (and is even considered by some the founder of the party) and a pretty horrible person oh and one of the worst presidents ever. "Trail of Tears" that was his doing. Yeah it was the Dems that presided over that little genocide, and flaunted an order by The Supreme Court to do it too.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    11. Re:Democrats are the enemy by ScentCone · · Score: 2

      Except more voters chose the Democrat.

      Yeah. In practical terms... in California. This is news how, exactly? The Democrats campaigned for electoral votes, and so did their opponents. They took California for granted as they always do, because Californians - in enough numbers - are loyal servants to people like the Clintons. They were a given, and they were taken as such. That has nothing to do with the ongoing sweeping pummeling that the Democrat party has been feeling for years now, and which came home to roost especially this time around. Reflexively blue places went red. More Latinos, Muslims, and blacks voted against the Democrats this time around than last time around.

      Consider California to be your measure of how "the voters" think if you want, please. PLEASE do that. Encourage more maneuvers like we just saw (Pelosi, once again in charge of the Democrat party's fortunes in the congress - fantastic! what a gift for the Republicans!), because that's going to mean even more of those up for grabs Senate seats abandoned by the Dems in just under two years. The "coming heavy" thing has already happened, and will continue to. Your assurance that the Democrats are somehow ready for that has already been proven false, in dramatic fashion.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    12. Re: Democrats are the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reflexively blue places went red. More Latinos, Muslims, and blacks voted against the Democrats this time around than last time around.

      Nope, that's just what you want to believe. Do the math. Compare this year's turnout to 2012, 2008, 2004, even 2000.

      Do some overlays, with more than just the misleading red/blue binary option. See what really did and what really didn't change.

      Because you know what? There's more people, but fewer voters than 2008 and not that much more than 2012.

      Which is also why your assumptions about crossover appeal are wrong. People stayed home. Thats what you should realize.

      Or go on believing the narrative you've been spoonfed without questioning it. That'll show everyone the truth about...you.

      Which was never a secret, but you didn't have to open your mouth and confirm it.

    13. Re:Democrats are the enemy by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      psst... Just so you know Andrew Jackson was a Democrat (and is even considered by some the founder of the party) and a pretty horrible person oh and one of the worst presidents ever. "Trail of Tears" that was his doing.

      The Trail of Tears happened because the SJW Cherokees were trying to block the 19th century equivalent of the Dakota Pipeline.

      Are you standing with the anti-#DAPL protestors? Speak up.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    14. Re: Democrats are the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      psst... Just so you know Andrew Jackson was a Democrat (and is even considered by some the founder of the party) and a pretty horrible person oh and one of the worst presidents ever.

      Man, you mist have been hanging out with Henry Clay again. Jackson actually tends to make the top ten.

      "Trail of Tears" that was his doing. Yeah it was the Dems that presided over that little genocide, and flaunted an order by The Supreme Court to do it too.

      Activist judges you mean! But actually, no, Jackson was concerned with dealing with the State of Georgia, as well as South Carolina (still seerthing over tariffs), so chose the pragmatic route over conflict.

      Besides, American History has plenty of abuses of native tribes, you could attack Lincoln, Grant, Harrison, and more. I don't see you trying to fix it.

    15. Re:Democrats are the enemy by greythax · · Score: 1

      Looks like Slashdot has forgotten how to use the 'Flamebait' mod option.

    16. Re:Democrats are the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be more clear, I now consider Democrats to be the equivalent of the "other side" in a war - they will still oppose every and any thing your side does, they can lose a battle and still wage war, incessant and total non-compliance, they will fight to the last man, and any victory - even pyrrhic - is still a victory. Any means are justified in the pursuit of their ends.

      All the things an unruly child does, but forever.

      In my mind the Democrats are *permanently* a party of dishonour, disgrace, and corruption. A group that simply gets no "benefit of the doubt" or "concessions of fairness" or anything like that. They are children, now and forever. We should treat them as such.

      LOL. We realized all of this about the right shortly after the rise of the Tea Party. Good for you for finally catching on! I mean, we wish it hadn't taken you the better part of two decades, but at least it shows that maybe the right can learn things after all! Eventually...

      Now can we split the country already? You all can have your third world abattoir and the rest of us can go on to live in an actual civilization.

    17. Re:Democrats are the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but they lost the Supreme Court (potentially, assuming they don't filibuster for 4yrs like the Republicans threatened), because a certain right-wing party refused to listen to any nominations for the better part of a year.

      But then I don't expect facts to matter much in this discussion.

    18. Re:Democrats are the enemy by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      To be more clear, I now consider Democrats to be the equivalent of the "other side" in a war - they will still oppose every and any thing your side does, they can lose a battle and still wage war, incessant and total non-compliance, they will fight to the last man, and any victory - even pyrrhic - is still a victory. Any means are justified in the pursuit of their ends.

      That would be nice. It's the treatment Obama got from the Republicans, but I expect the Democrats are pussies who will put up token resistance and just complain and mutter while they fail to do anything substantial in opposing Trump's policies.

    19. Re:Democrats are the enemy by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      They took California for granted as they always do, because Californians - in enough numbers - are loyal servants to people like the Clintons. They were a given, and they were taken as such.

      What that means is that more Democrats in traditionally strong-Democratic states voted in greater numbers for a third party candidate. They knew their state was going Democratic, so when the vote "didn't matter", they voted for non-Hillary instead.

      Pelosi, once again in charge of the Democrat party's fortunes in the congress - fantastic! what a gift for the Republicans

      The real win here is that Harry Reid is gone. Thank God for that.

    20. Re:Democrats are the enemy by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      I was thinking through the recent news (last night) that Trump got Carrier to keep 1000 jobs in the US, and how I couldn't see a way to frame that in a bad light. Lo and behold! Recent comments on Slashdot manage to paint this as a bad thing.

      Slashdot is hardly the only place where you'll hear a negative opinion of the Carrier deal. Several news outlets are also taking a more skeptical view.

      In the end, viewing any deal as objectively good or bad may be overly simplistic. In the case of this one, it seems like it's good for the people who won't be losing their jobs. It also seems good for other companies who now have a precedent for extracting concessions from our government in exchange for abandoning plans to offshore jobs, as well as those employees who won't be losing their jobs as a result. It seems less good (or even bad) for taxpayers who aren't invested in or employed by these companies, as they'll be effectively subsidizing these jobs to some extent, and it's not clear that the cost of this subsidy is greater than the general economic benefit gained by having a marginally stronger labor market in the manufacturing sector.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    21. Re:Democrats are the enemy by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      To be more clear, I now consider Democrats to be the equivalent of the "other side" in a war

      Now? Your kind has literally been making war on my kind since time was time. Keep it up and you're going to find out that you're not the only ones who know how to do it.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    22. Re:Democrats are the enemy by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Yeah. In practical terms... in California.

      You mean, the state for people who still have dreams? The state that people move to when they can afford it because the other states are full of fascist dickheads who want to tell them what is and is not okay to do in their personal lives? Well, that's not true. Some of them move to New York. But they all head towards the coasts if they have two dollars to rub together, because that's where culture is born, and the middle of the country is where it goes to die.

      If people are moving away from states, if other states are gaining population faster, that should shift the balance of power. Obviously those states are doing something right, and they should have a chance to direct policy for everyone else so that they can enjoy the same kind of prosperity.

      If you hate California so much, you should at least be willing to pay your fair share, and stop stealing from us.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    23. Re:Democrats are the enemy by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      You could replace 'Democrats' with 'Republicans' and be just as accurate.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    24. Re:Democrats are the enemy by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      fascist dickheads who want to tell them what is and is not okay to do

      You just described the very essence of Californian political culture, and increasingly NY, as well.

      And who says I hate California? I'm just pointing out that the people in that state got their wish at the polls, and all of their electoral votes went to the candidate that best exemplifies the condescending elitism, corruption, and contempt for the middle class that you seem to treasure. So what's not to like, right?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    25. Re:Democrats are the enemy by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      I hate pointless fear mongering articles. Best example of fake news there is right here on slashdot.

      Trump isn't likely to abuse the alert system but leave it to slashdot to make an issue of it.

      Trump won. Get over it already.

      I'm so weary of all this one-sided bickering and sniping over Trump that I've decided that Democrats should be considered enemy combatants.

      To be more clear, I now consider Democrats to be the equivalent of the "other side" in a war - they will still oppose every and any thing your side does, they can lose a battle and still wage war, incessant and total non-compliance, they will fight to the last man, and any victory - even pyrrhic - is still a victory. Any means are justified in the pursuit of their ends.

      All the things an unruly child does, but forever.

      In my mind the Democrats are *permanently* a party of dishonour, disgrace, and corruption. A group that simply gets no "benefit of the doubt" or "concessions of fairness" or anything like that. They are children, now and forever. We should treat them as such.

      I was thinking through the recent news (last night) that Trump got Carrier to keep 1000 jobs in the US, and how I couldn't see a way to frame that in a bad light. Lo and behold! Recent comments on Slashdot manage to paint this as a bad thing. They even pulled out the Hitler comparison for good measure.

      The Democrats are defeated. Leaderless and feckless, the only thing they can do is complain.

      No plan, no leadership, and rife with corruption.

      It's hard to see why anyone would be a part of that crowd.

      "No plan, no leadership, and rife with corruption." Thank God that's all behind us, eh?

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    26. Re:Democrats are the enemy by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      To be more clear, I now consider Democrats to be the equivalent of the "other side" in a war - they will still oppose every and any thing your side does, they can lose a battle and still wage war, incessant and total non-compliance, they will fight to the last man, and any victory - even pyrrhic - is still a victory. Any means are justified in the pursuit of their ends.

      So... in other words, the Democrats are now going to do what the Republicans have been doing for the past 8 years.

      The difference being that the Republicans announced explicitly that was their plan, stuck to it for 8 years, and are proud of it; whereas the Republicans are not accusing the Democrats of that being their plan a priori, and that's enough to find them guilty, proactively.
      See also: "Hillary is going to take away our guns!", the proud follow up to "Obama is going to take away our guns!", "Bill Clinton is going to take away our guns!", etc. etc.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    27. Re:Democrats are the enemy by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You just described the very essence of Californian political culture, and increasingly NY, as well.

      California is better at doing the will of its population than most states.

      I'm just pointing out that the people in that state got their wish at the polls, and all of their electoral votes went to the candidate that best exemplifies the condescending elitism, corruption, and contempt for the middle class that you seem to treasure.

      Sigh. How can you keep saying that while Trump keeps proving that he's only draining the swamp because everyone he wants to hire is at the bottom? I have no love for Clinton, this is not about that. This is about wake the fuck up.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    28. Re:Democrats are the enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, I feel exactly the same way as Republicans, who, incidentally, nominated and elected a man who said he would not respect the outcome of the democratic process if he didn't win.

    29. Re:Democrats are the enemy by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I now consider Democrats to be the equivalent of the "other side" in a war - they will still oppose every and any thing your side does, they can lose a battle and still wage war, incessant and total non-compliance, they will fight to the last man, and any victory - even pyrrhic - is still a victory. Any means are justified in the pursuit of their ends.

      Sounds like the last 8 years of Republicans. Fighting everything done, without trying to do anything constructive themselves.

      I was thinking through the recent news (last night) that Trump got Carrier to keep 1000 jobs in the US, and how I couldn't see a way to frame that in a bad light.

      You see nothing wrong with millions in corporate welfare while refusing to feed or educate children in need? I guess that's the issue. Why do you support corporate welfare, while opposing child welfare?

      And no, I'm not a Democrat. So save that vilification for someone else.

    30. Re:Democrats are the enemy by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      How can you keep saying that while Trump keeps proving that he's only draining the swamp because everyone he wants to hire is at the bottom?

      People keep repeating this meme, but always carefully avoid mentioning which "bottom," for example, is occupied by, say, Gen. Mattis. Or former Sec. Chao, or Gov. Haley. Be specific. In which way are these people the "bottom" of something? They're all going to agree to never lobby for foreign entities, and go half a decade after they leave office before they can do that work domestically. Which awfulness do they represent, to you?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    31. Re:Democrats are the enemy by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      They're all going to agree to never lobby for foreign entities, and go half a decade after they leave office before they can do that work domestically.

      Guess what? Those agreements are unconstitutional and won't stand. That's like a Californian signing a non-compete agreement. Okay! Sure!

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  42. Nah. Won't happen. by DoctorNathaniel · · Score: 1

    Trump is, if nothing else, extremely adept at self-promotion, and so he wouldn't use this unless he felt it would be hugely popular.

    Remember: Trump is a narcissist. Every one of his actions is motivated in convincing himself that he is powerful and loved.

    1. Re:Nah. Won't happen. by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

      You forgot demagogue. But if you really want to look at the definition, would this not apply to practically all politicians seeking or currently holding office. All pretty much pander to the masses through lying, deceit, subterfuge, fear mongering, etc....

    2. Re:Nah. Won't happen. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Trump is, if nothing else, extremely adept at self-promotion, and so he wouldn't use this unless he felt it would be hugely popular.

      Remember: Trump is a narcissist. Every one of his actions is motivated in convincing himself that he is powerful and loved.

      You do realize that you have ascribed to Trump the normal characteristics and actions of your average politician right? Including Hillary....

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    3. Re:Nah. Won't happen. by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Trump is, if nothing else, extremely adept at self-promotion, and so he wouldn't use this unless he felt it would be hugely popular.

      Remember: Trump is a narcissist. Every one of his actions is motivated in convincing himself that he is powerful and loved.

      He can't even suffer not winning the POPULAR vote. "It was those illegal dead aliens voting! Millions of them!" Apparently, in Trumpworld, at least half the illegal aliens in the USA went down to the polls to vote this year.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  43. sudo? by morphotomy · · Score: 1

    My phone is rooted. Good luck with that.

  44. Re:You can turn this off Not the presidential ones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not the presidential ones
    all the others yes.

  45. Unblockable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm pretty sure this is false. You can easily block them.

  46. Re:Yes? So? by thegarbz · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    But you don't understand. This is Trump we're talking about.

    Actually that's a good point. We're talking about Trump. We're defending him. We're brushing this off as a non issue. And yet the real news of the past few days is what what kind of psychopathic fuckwits he's appointing to positions of power potentially setting America back to the early 1900s.

  47. FOSS to the rescue! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Cyanogenmod is FOSS.

    1. Re:FOSS to the rescue! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As is AOSP and all ROMs based on it.

      The title of the article indicates that the author is a clueless noob. My phone doesn't even have the ability to receive such alerts because I stripped that shit completely out.

      "Unblockable", lol. What a fucking joke.

    2. Re: FOSS to the rescue! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hopefully your friends will call you at 3am when an F5 tornado is headed your way...

    3. Re: FOSS to the rescue! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure they would, *if* we had tornadoes here.

      Contrary to what you seem to believe, not everyone in the world lives in your little town.

  48. How quickly will I be seeing these? by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure if Trump's small hands will allow him to type more efficiently, making fewer mistakes, or will require him to use two hands because he likely got a ginormous screen phone and can't reach both sides of the keyboard.

  49. Re:Yes? So? by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 0

    And Obama had this power too. Don't remember quite how far back this goes, but pretty sure Bush was able to do it too.
    And EVERY president going back to the start of the Emergency Broadcast System, since 1963, has had the ability to commandeer all airwaves as well. It was accidentally set off once, in 1971.

    Stop pointing out the facts, you're foiling the F.U.D. apparatchiks!

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
  50. Re:Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the reasons I very rarely visit this site any more.. .

  51. What is this paranoid blatant anti-trump bullshit? by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    What is this leftie blatant fearmongering bullshit? This mechanism is for emrgency alerts and was actually put in place by Obama, so yes any President can use it, including both Obama and Trump. Trump won, get over it and move on

  52. Yep, slashdot is in decline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, in the last two months, I've been seeing nontechnical, Trump 'news' here. The president shouldn't pay much attention to technology, or science. I'm ok with a tech idiot president. His job is to deal with humans, be it the nation of Japan, to crazy guys in Afghanistan. Maybe he'll send money. Maybe he'll send Americans to murder some of those people. Maybe he'll give speeches on diversity, and say the people in Afghanistan have to embrace the crazies. Congress can deal with tech.

    I guess I'll have to go back to looking at that soylent place again.

  53. Yellow journalism? by galabar · · Score: 1

    Yellow journalism?

  54. Wikipedia was briefly accurate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now you all know why Wikipedia listed Hillary Supporters as the leading salt producers in the world.

    This is almost as bad as the comment trying to argue that Trump tweeting at 3 AM amounted to the "permanent warfare" of fascist regimes.

  55. Trump or the Presidential position? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't see why sensationalizing Trump in this header is important since Obama has the same "power".

  56. Re:Yes? So? by rholtzjr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Agreed, when I first read the article I asked myself "And?". Why is this even showing up on a tech forum?

    Time to move on to technical discussions and move away from the politics that have been a major distraction this past year.

  57. TagAdd:ClickBait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ha ha

  58. Most amusing wording by mi · · Score: 0, Redundant

    It sure is nice to see authority mocked again — after eight years of any such mocking being racist.

    And we just escaped it becoming sexist for another eight years...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Most amusing wording by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You sure do like to repeat yourself, don't you.

    2. Re:Most amusing wording by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      It sure is nice to see authority mocked again — after eight years of any such mocking being racist.

      And we just escaped it becoming sexist for another eight years...

      No, it's still the same. Trump will be putting women and minorities in his cabinet, so mocking the administration is still going to be racist and sexist, don't worry.

      Hah! Whew. That was funny. The media's standards on this, and hand-wringing-PC-SJW-liberal take on what's offensive or not is already so hysterically flipped around that they're getting mad at themselves. It's fantastic to watch.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:Most amusing wording by mi · · Score: 1

      First of all, thank you for following me closely and paying attention.

      As to your question, some points do bear repeating, yes. I don't think, you should be doing a lot of talking — you've been telling us, we are "racists" repeatedly for 8 years...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  59. Re: Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well played sir

  60. Not all articles are supposed to be "serious news" by skids · · Score: 1

    This one is obviously for the lark. Have a sense of humor.

  61. Ummmm by JWW · · Score: 1

    Ridiculous overreactions much??

  62. Re: Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You got me.

  63. Android can block it; don't know about iOS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Android can block this, and I'm pretty sure iOS has a similar feature.

    It's buried under a couple layers of menus within "Settings" but it's definitely there. I wish I could post a screen capture. It's where you can block emergency warnings, tornado warnings, Amber alerts, etc.

    But, hey, don't let facts get in the way of /.'s left wing brainwashing propaganda machine!!!

    1. Re:Android can block it; don't know about iOS. by Straif · · Score: 1

      General alerts up to emergency level can be blocked but Presidential WEAs are not considered normal alerts and can only be blocked if you actually root the phone and dig a little deeper into the OS.

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
  64. Re:Yes? So? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why is this even showing up on a tech forum?

    Because Donald Trump is technically a sociopath?

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  65. Re:Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The difference is none of the other Presidents are known to go on twitter rants at 3 am.

  66. 2006 by Tangential · · Score: 1

    So Bush and Obama had this 'scary' power as well....

    --
    Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
  67. What could possibly go wrong by Sla$hPot · · Score: 0

    Seriously?

  68. Jumping the Shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm done with Slashdot. This isn't news. This isn't Technology. This isn't interesting.

    I don't know who the new batch of editors are, but they suck. Like a hole in a spaceship.

    I am tired of reading stuff I've already seen and trendy crap from hipster websites from 'authors' (to use the term extremely loosely) who need to get a real job.

  69. Re:Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And Obama had this power too.

    Yes. Obama also has the power to indulge in incoherent rage-Tweeting. However, what Obama does not have is Trump's flaming dumpster full of personality disorders.

    This is news not because this capability is new, but because Donald 'effing Trump may be using it to "shake things up".

  70. First SMS by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

    WRONG!!!

  71. Libtards should immediately adopt a therapy puppy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This smartphone messaging news item has nothing to do with Trump but loser libtards can't stop crying. What a bunch of mindless and gutless pussies you people are. I hope Trump continues to tweet up a storm in order to drive you jackasses insane.

  72. Slashdot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    News for liberals. Stuff that matters to people who think Hillary should be President.

  73. Just STOP! by bob4u2c · · Score: 1

    This isn't something that Trump championed through, this was an existing idea that finally received approval.

    The real headline should be:
    "Office of the President now able to send unblockable mass text message to all Americans".

    I don't like the guy just as much as the next person (and I don't like Hillary either), but slashdot needs to stop throwing his name out there for a reaction.

    1. Re:Just STOP! by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      This isn't something that Trump championed through, this was an existing idea that finally received approval.

      If by "finally" you mean a decade ago (2006), yes. It's been in my phones for a long time.

      The real headline should be: "Office of the President has been able to send unblockable mass text message to all Americans".

      FTFY.

      but slashdot needs to stop throwing his name out there for a reaction.

      It's not just /.. It's a media frenzy. The media knows that frenzy and fear sells papers and gathers eyeballs, so they do it.

  74. Give it a break YOURSELF by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

    I didn't see this article as fear-mongering. Abuse of the WEA for political purposes could result in it being ignored in a real crisis. As much as I distrust Trump, I think he knows this.

    What makes this news is not that it's fear-mongering, but that it's ironic.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  75. Okay snowflakes, deep breath by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "President-elect Donald Trump will have access to a system which can send unblockable texts to every phone in the United States once he becomes the president. From a report on NYMag:"

    Which Obama has now.

    He'll also have access to the nuclear launch codes, the US Military, the FBI, CIA, the IRS, the entire executive branch.

    Are you guys even for real with your breathy vapourous crying jags? No offense.

  76. Re:Yes? So? by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

    So are 1 out of 5 CEOs of all major corporations (Google, FB, Amazon, MS, Apple, Alphabet) take your pick which one.

  77. Re:Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess people can imagine getting a text that Obama created ISIS or some other ludicrous horseshit and they don't like it.

  78. [phone root]Let's worry more about this right now. by rectalfeeding · · Score: 1

    There's plenty Trump is actually doing that will have drastic consequences over the next few decades to be concerned about. Lets not start worrying about a power he hasn't abused yet, has made no comments that show he will abuse it, and if abused would be more an annoyance than a crisis. Priorities people.

    Part of good priority utilization is in taking care of low hanging fruit when optimal. Hashtag (mobile phone) root matters (more than the general reaction of the public in recent history has suggested). If this story directed at this audience could better achieve the critical mass of getting the vast minority of mobile phone users having root, versus the vast minority, then I would consider that something of a possibly forgivable quasi-Trumpian troll.

  79. Oh please, Please, PLEASE let him abuse this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At this point we're all just hoping he screws up (on things that don't start a nuclear war) that even the alt-right will want to throw him out in 2020, right?

  80. Golf Resorts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It wouldn't be too bad though if he sent out text alerts for discount bargains on membership to his golf courses or hotel booking discounts. Those sort of texts would be useful to some people.

  81. What a stupid story by wardrich86 · · Score: 2

    1. Any person acting as president would have access to the same thing, so why is this worth a story?
    2. Just because Trump has access to it doesn't mean he's going to abuse it.
    3. Obviously there are fucking checks and balances in place... so again, this story is a non-story
    4. Guess what - Trump also has access to 911! :O

    Why the fuck are people so pissy about Trump? They fucking voted him in! If everybody is so serious about Clinton 4 prez, where were they on voting night? I assume the Clinton circlejerk ran a bit late.

    1. Re:What a stupid story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These people are paid to like Clinton and write these stories. That is hwy they are so loud... it is their JOB to bash Trump.

    2. Re:What a stupid story by mark-t · · Score: 1

      There are also people who realize, without being paid a penny, that Trump is actually just a bratty child in a man's body, and have dubious concerns that he is capable of performing his duties in a competent and responsible manner, wherein he will put the needs of the American people ahead of his own desires for personal recognition and gain.

  82. Re:Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You oughta move to Mexico, amigo.

  83. Re:Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Donald Trump is a narcissist.
    Hilary Clinton is technically a sociopath.
    FTFY

  84. 1984 or Max Headroom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Required viewing? Not sure if 1984 or Max Headroom applies. Given the originator I'm inclined to go with M M M Max

  85. No need for Twitter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can get your daily text with the Presidential comment of the day. If only Chairman Mao had this kind of power!

  86. 3AM Tweets and PERMANENT WARFARE by Xenographic · · Score: 1

    You don't understand! 3AM tweets are a sign of fascism. It's all spelled out right here under the "permanent warfare" section!

    One day you're Tweeting at 3AM, and BAM! The next thing you know, you're ignoring the Treaty of Versailles, then invading Poland.

    Don't say that nobody warned you!

    1. Re:3AM Tweets and PERMANENT WARFARE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Archduke? Is that you?

  87. We Will Know Where All the Pussy Is by BrendaEM · · Score: 1

    Trump texting us is gonna get old real fast.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
  88. Wet Dream... by ELCouz · · Score: 1

    Trump Will Get Power To Send Unblockable Mass Text Messages To All Americans..

    Any advertiser / spam company wet dream!

  89. IF Mr. Trump does the following? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: I'll NEVER block his messages after he kills the Federal Reserve & declares war on them + fires the corrupt congressmen (& we all KNOW there ARE those).

    * :)

    You'll never see ME block your messages Mr. Trump, especially if you do those 2 things above & PARK Hillary, Soros, Podesta, & Weiner away for "pizzagate" !

    (From what I have read on it, especially from InfoWars? Especially their payments to COMET Ping Pong?? They are sicko moloch worshippers who apparently rape & murder kids as well as sodomize them along w/ their 'high priestess' the 'artist' named Marina Abramovic (talk Aleister Crowley reincarnated!)).

    No, not all the DIRTY MEDIA as you call them (& they are, best big money can threaten, fire or buy (see Glenn Beck regarding "Darth SOROS") can convince me otherwise... & I am FAR from alone!

    APK

    P.S.=> The "NWO" needs to have its lights put the F out so we can restore the USA economy & those 1st 2 items above w/ a few more things can do it... apk

  90. Re:Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And Obama had this power too. Don't remember quite how far back this goes, but pretty sure Bush was able to do it too.
    And EVERY president going back to the start of the Emergency Broadcast System, since 1963, has had the ability to commandeer all airwaves as well. It was accidentally set off once, in 1971.

    Meh.

    Next story.

    Uh, every president before Trump wasn't rather addicted to social media, as his beaten and battered Twatter account obscenely reflects against your call to quell the masses...

  91. Re:Yes? So? by MightyYar · · Score: 1

    So next time someone proposes a new power for the President, ask yourself, "Would I be comfortable with Donald Trump having this power?"

    We reap what we sow.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  92. Twitter has 140 characters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Now I've the useless pathetic SMS has downgraded me to 90? SAD."

  93. Re:Yes? So? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    So are 1 out of 5 CEOs of all major corporations

    CEOs don't carry launch codes for nuclear missiles.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  94. Re:Yes? So? by Dogtanian · · Score: 0

    Why this is news is because in the past, presidents were sane.

    The reason this is a non-story is because if the president-elect really *is* a dangerously thin-skinned sociopathic narcissist unsuited for the job of leading a country armed to the teeth with nukes and the purported free world- which he certainly is- then a few shitty unwanted SMS messages at two in the morning are the least you (or anyone else) has to worry about.

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  95. Re:Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's obnoxious and thin skinned, but not a sociopath. I don't see any evidence to conclude that at all.

  96. Re:Yes? So? by publiclurker · · Score: 1

    And how many of them were spoiled little narcissists that spew our ranting tweets as odd hours in the morning. Just because a grownup has the ability to do something does not mean that you should entrust that ability to a child.

  97. And what else? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't believe for a second that mere text is gonna be the only thing we have forced into there...

    Not that it won't get nasty when some spam agency manages to get their hands on that trick too....

  98. Re:Yes? So? by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Informative

    Because Donald Trump is technically a sociopath?

    Then you must be REALLY relieved that the Clintons didn't get the executive power they were hungry to regain.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  99. Nuke the fuckers from orbit (or an xterm) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, been there. Still kinda there. Still wondering why managers think it is a good idea to have me half asleep with CLI windows open to mission critical boxes, though I guess in cases where said boxes are actually completely belly up, it might be better than not.

    rm -rf /*

    and back to sleep. Let those fuckers figure it out themselves, after I've had a bit of kip.

    On a serious note, I would not accept employment at a job with that kind of requirement. It's one thing to be on call, it's another to get spammed with bullshit all night and not get a decent night's sleep.

  100. Trump Derangement Syndrom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I did not vote for Trump and will never, EVER support him, but this has to be one of the stupidest headlines ever to have made it on the front page of sd.

  101. East coast paranoia factor nine by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Is this an actual claim that Trump will use the cellular reverse emergency alert system for political spam?

    Will he be calling them Orange Alerts?

  102. Re:Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    PopeShillzo, they still paying per post or do you get a check at the end of the month now like salary?

  103. Re:Yes? So? by Freischutz · · Score: 1

    And Obama had this power too. Don't remember quite how far back this goes, but pretty sure Bush was able to do it too. And EVERY president going back to the start of the Emergency Broadcast System, since 1963, has had the ability to commandeer all airwaves as well. It was accidentally set off once, in 1971.

    Meh.

    Next story.

    But Trump is the first one who'll use this to market christmas ornaments.

  104. Re:Yes? So? by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

    You are correct they do not, they just try and buy the presidency.

  105. we already have this system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how is this not the same as the Emergency Alert System (EAS)?

  106. Re:Yes? So? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    PopeShillzo, they still paying per post or do you get a check at the end of the month now like salary?

    Direct deposit.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  107. Re:Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's because the current fear-mongering isn't working well enough. The sun has been routinely coming up in the morning. Stocks are doing well. I was able to get my morning Starbucks without incident. Outside of the "safe spaces", life is generally going on as normal. So a new "boogey-man" needs to be invented to re-fan the flames of fear.

  108. Trump can make a deal with phone companies by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

    300 million Americans at ~5 cents per text message = $15 million per incident. He can have the phone companies give him a kickback.

    1. Re:Trump can make a deal with phone companies by Obfuscant · · Score: 1
      It isn't a text message. It's an alert. Different process.

      And if you're still paying a nickel per text message you need to join us in the 21st century.

  109. Re:Yes? So? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

    It might actually help in the long run. I mean, if he spends all his time sending stupid attacks on Brazillian supermodels at 3am using the National Emergency Alert System, rather than, say, playing with the Nuclear football, or dreaming up ways to deport suspected sympathizers of flag burners, we might be a little safer.

    Come to think of it, all those rumors about Twitter banning him? Maybe, for the safety of our nation, we need to let him continue with the distraction.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  110. There are no limitations on this, actually by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    The limitations on what such text messages say don't apply to the acting President. They only apply to appointed staff, not to him.

    Yes, it's a nightmare.

    No, it won't get better.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  111. Looking forward to getting Trump-ettes by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

    I'm looking forward to it. I'd like to see trump sending at least a dozen non-blockable texts per day to every cell phone in America, sold in America or owned by an American. He certainly understands the power of being able to control the media, and by "control" I mean "Hey! Look at me! Look at me! I'll have more bs for you ignorant toads later! In the meantime, here's a pic of my woo-woo!".

    I can't imagine how popular he'll be after a week of this.

    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  112. Re:Yes? So? by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

    I don't think you realize how launching nukes actually works. He can't do this on his own. He doesn't have a red button on his desk.

    At least one other person needs to approve the order and then needs to convince people actually in the position to launch the nukes to do it.

  113. Re:What is this paranoid blatant anti-trump bullsh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is clickbait... pure and simple. no one cares.

  114. Got Root? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    If anyone is interested, it is apparently quite simple to block presidential alerts on a rooted android phone. I never looked it up before because why would I care... before

    My phone is rooted but I'm not blocking them... yet

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  115. Re: Impeach Trump NOW ( Score: +1, True ) by Jesus+H+Rolle · · Score: 1
    plunderbund

    Nice.

  116. The Trump-Hate is strong with this reporter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's quite obvious the reporter for NY Mag is a Trump-Hater.

    As the reporter eventually points out, the messages are going to be coming from FEMA during some regional emergency event, NOT Trump sending out Tweets.

    Shame on you, supposedly-impartial-reporter.

  117. Think of the compression. by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 1

    With Trump's limited vocabulary, how many bits do we need to represent every word to make a nice compact dictionary? 8? 9? Fewer?

  118. Re:You're cute by Mab_Mass · · Score: 2

    I don't recall the Republicans calling half the nation "deplorable", or rioting when Obama was elected. Or rioting when [Bill] Clinton was elected.

    What about when Romney insulted 47% of the US?

    What about the protests and threats of lynching for Obama's election?

    You must have a bad memory.

    But please... hold your breath until you're blue in the face.

    I'll see your non-sequitur and raise you standing on one leg until you fall over. You're so cute when you do that.

  119. So glad you let me know! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a stupid fucking article. Boogey man bullshit... I find myself wondering why I visit Slashdot more and more lately.

  120. Sensationalistic drivel!! by challman1 · · Score: 1

    Bush and Obama have both had this "power". You're probably leaving out those details and using Trump's name because you didn't vote for him and you're trying to stir up controversy. Quit being a liberal snow flake!!

  121. Re:Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't you know, they are racist. That is why they crashed the Canadian immigration site. Not the Mexican immigration site.

  122. Typical Inflammatory Title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course he does, hes the damned president and they all get this.. You may disagree with him but hes not the anti-christ... Get a grip people.

  123. Re:Yes? So? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    At least one other person needs to approve the order and then needs to convince people actually in the position to launch the nukes to do it.

    I'll bet Melania would comply.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  124. Duh by XSportSeeker · · Score: 0, Troll

    DURR HURR TRUMP WILL HAVE ACCESS TO AN EMERGENCY MESSAGING SYSTEM THAT ANY PRESIDENT BEFORE AND AFTER HIM SHOULD ALSO HAVE DURR HURR

    Yeah, that's how idiotic this post sounded.
    What's the next headline? This just in, Trump will have a spot in the oval office? OMG, he might start a fire there and shit on the floor! OMG!
    He'll mind blowingly have secret service access? OMG! He might use them to kill all democrats! He'll definitely tell them to rape your daughters late at night!
    They let him speak with Obama, and other high political figures! Do you think he told them I peed my blankies when I was a kid?

    You guys elected him. Now, shut the fuck up about it. Give if a fucking rest. When and if he starts implementing bad policies in office, THEN you start complaining.
    Sound like a bunch of retards that can only overreact to crap that doesn't matter... you deserve Trump. That's what this is.

  125. First Text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump will forever gain my respect if his first text is "Grab America by the Pussy!".

  126. Re:Yes? So? by Lord+Apathy · · Score: 1

    Thank you for recognizing that fact too. People seem to be fixed on the ideal that Trump can just roll out of bed and nuke the planet. Actually, pulling this off is much more complex than people think it is.

    --

    Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification

  127. How this works in reality by reybo · · Score: 1

    They screw this up every time because any system that relies on humans, eventually screws up. Or screws up from the git-go like our local fire company's land line telephone alert system. I learned they had one when my wife got a call in her hospital room at 10 pm with a recorded message saying be on the lookout for a lost child last seen 10 miles from town. Morons get positions of authority and decision-making across the board. That one had to publicly apologize and got demoted. Yes, I expect a call from the White House advertising the newest vintage from the Trump Winery. By coincidence it's located near where that child was last seen.

  128. What I want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is how they will differentiate between americans and non-americans?

  129. Peter Thiel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trumps cabinet is so anti gay, that shit ain't ever gonna happen. Let alone his supporters... who are probably all closeted gays.

    Though, thankfully, just this once I'm okay with it... because Peter thiel is a piece of crap.

  130. OK, so "tiny hands" is approved sexism? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, so "tiny hands" is approved sexism?

    Like prison rape is funny?

    Like women excluded from Selective Service is equal before the law?

    Just trying to keep up.

    Hypocrite.

    1. Re:OK, so "tiny hands" is approved sexism? by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Like prison rape is funny? [etc] Hypocrite.

      "Lol wut"? I honestly can't even figure out what words you're trying to put in my mouth here.

      Are you attacking me for (supposedly) thinking like a lot of Americans that the idea of some teenage kid in prison for smoking a joint getting raped by another prisoner is funny? I don't.

      Or are you attacking me for not thinking someone's eighteen-year-old son getting sodomised is funny, when mocking Trump's "small hands" is?

      We might never know. Nor care.

      OK, so "tiny hands" is approved sexism?

      The "tiny hands" thing isn't even funny in itself, and no-one really gives a toss- nor takes seriously- the implied connection between Trump's (alleged) small hand size and his dick. (Spoiler; yep, that's what it was about!)

      I think what pretty much everyone involved in that joke (which apparently goes back to the 80s) finds funny is that the puffed-up, egotistical Trump is also so thin-skinned and insecure as to be unable to resist having to respond to it, even though it's obviously a wind-up.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  131. Wait, this man will have the launch codes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and you're worried about text messaging?

  132. Re:Yes? So? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

    Because Donald Trump is technically a sociopath?

    Then you must be REALLY relieved that the Clintons didn't get the executive power they were hungry to regain.

    Why does hate for a political party need to be a partisan issue?

  133. Slashdot = Shitdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump retroactively did this!

  134. New Tradition? by EvilSS · · Score: 1

    Are we going to go through this every time the party in the White House changes? When this was first put in place conservatives were bitching that Obama was going to use it as a political platform. Now liberals are taking their turn. This isn't twitter, it's part of a larger national alert system that has, in long history never, once, been activated at the national level by a president. Activating this would also activate all of the other components of the alert system as well. No one is going to use it for BS political messaging.

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  135. Trump on message? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sucks. Still, better than giving a Neolith sand.niggar that power.

  136. Shcoking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How shocking! The President will have the authority to use the tools assigned to the President! News at 11!

  137. Has this even been used once? by sims+2 · · Score: 1

    Since the implementation of the new system has there been a single presidential alert?

    It's the only type of alert I'm not allowed to disable but I've never gotten one.

    --
    Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    1. Re:Has this even been used once? by TheSync · · Score: 1

      Not only has the cellular text technology not been used, but no president has ever used the current Emergency Action Notification (EAN) of the EAS system or its technical predecessors (going back to 1951 with CONRAD).

      Then again, we have never had global thermonuclear war...

  138. "Good evening, London" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "That's the emergency channel!"

  139. Re:Yes? So? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    What? My point is that he's complaining about Trump, who he calls a sociopath. The point is that the Clintons are the very definition of such, only worse - there's two of them, and they have a demonstrated history enriching themselves and otherwise abusing the power of public office.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  140. If the system is so easily abused... by maharvey · · Score: 1

    ...you shouldn't have built it in the first place.

    I know, preaching to the choir. If only I could send Amber Alerts to the idiots who are apparently in control.

  141. Trump hotel 25% discount book now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interesting potential

  142. Good thing he's not a sex pest... by BurnTim · · Score: 1

    'You up?'

  143. Re:Impeach Trump NOW ( Score: +1, True ) by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    (Score: +1, True ) (Score:0)

    Oh well. Nice try.

    He promised he'd never spread loquacious views

    Those definitely don't sound like words Trump would use.

  144. Re: prez/amber alerts, simple solution: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Run an older phone/android version. Anything less than 4.2 or 4.3 didn't have these features and thus the messages don't show up.

    As an added bonus most of those phones were easier to jailbreak so you can actually control most of the hardware, even if the baseband processor and trustzone kernels are still locked up. :)

  145. Sell outs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did /. get bought out by NBC or something? The mass text issue is nothing new. Bush could have used it. Obama could have used it. Hey! Your biass is showing.

  146. Re:Yes? So? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    Because Donald Trump is technically a sociopath?

    Then you must be REALLY relieved that the Clintons didn't get the executive power they were hungry to regain.

    Yeah, militarily, 1993 - 2000 REALLY sucked.

  147. Must be some recourse by Locke2005 · · Score: 2

    Either give me the ability to BLOCK the messages, or give me the ability to RESPOND to the messages and tell the sender what an asshole he is!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  148. Re:Yes? So? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    So next time someone proposes a new power for the President, ask yourself, "Would I be comfortable with Donald Trump having this power?"

    That's why I got a "very bad feeling" three years ago when Senate Democrats used "The Nuclear Option" to lower the bar to breaking a filibuster on the Senate floor. Sure, they wanted to make it easier to get bills for Obama to sign, but I knew it would eventually come back to bite them.

  149. Re:Yes? So? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    Doesn't matter. Any sane person wouldn't have voted for either. Unfortunately, that means 50% of the US isn't sane (and the other 50% is mostly apathetic).

  150. Re:Yes? So? by bobbied · · Score: 1

    No, the other option we had slept though the 3AM phone call and 4 people including a US ambassador died because nobody got sent help...

    For the sake of our diplomats I think I'll take a chance with Trump sending me a 3AM text myself, at least he's up and paying attention to something, even if the twitter wars at 3 AM were about as important as his last hang nail...

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  151. Re:Yes? So? by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

    They just have the ability to destroy economies of countries when they get as big as they are right now.

  152. Xposed by batistuta · · Score: 1

    it will not take too long until someone writes an Xposed module for filtering this type of messages.

  153. Whats wrong with local emergency warnings? Fire? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not a big government type, but this is an idea I floated not too long ago. Seems to me it would be nice to know if a fire is coming your way while your sitting there watching netflix with your ringer off. Flashing blue light.. hmm wonder what that could be.

  154. Re:Yes? So? by DigitalSorceress · · Score: 1

    I think the issue is that he's so out of control that his own campaign had to lock him out of his Twitter account..

    Basically, yeah Obama has had the power and hasn't used it, but the thought is that Trump will not be able to resist the temptation to be able to directly message every cell user with unblockable text...

    Also, I've already seen several excellent posts helping people block unwanted Amber alerts and some folks offering advice on rooting phones to allow that to be shut off.

    I'm willing to take a wait and see attitude, but if he sends one of those texts and it's not because the Great Meteor we've all been hoping for is on its way, I'll consider rooting my phone if there's a way to block the Presidential Alerts.

    He gets ONE chance on that.

    --

    The Digital Sorceress
  155. Re:Yes? So? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    Doesn't matter. Any sane person wouldn't have voted for either. Unfortunately, that means 50% of the US isn't sane (and the other 50% is mostly apathetic).

    One of the two of them was going to win. They're both annoying, though Clinton is far more sinister. Regardless, whoever one was going to shape the Supreme Court for decades after their turn as POTUS is long gone. Clinton said she'd be choosing activists to "reinterpret" the Constitution so she could get things done that she couldn't get through a congress that didn't agree with her agenda. Trump said he'd pick from a list of SCOTUS candidates that he published well in advance, most of whom are textbook constructionists disinclined to allow the court to be treated like a way to circumvent the legislature. That shit matters. Any "sane person" would choose the lesser of two short-term evils in happy exchange for not screwing the court up by turning it into a newly empowered lefty activist legislative branch.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  156. 2006 Approved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do ya honestly think it was going to only be used by Democratic presidents? Good grief it was approved in 2006. I'm certain it will be used for legitimate purposes for the most part. I'm getting weather related alerts already.

    Take a deep breath and lay off the medications. Just a hype piece. The NSA is already collecting data far worse than the remote possibility Trump is going to text something silly.

  157. a sad day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're fucked.

  158. Isn't there an app for that? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    There should be. I mean, the signal should be unique enough that it's easy to block..

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  159. Re:Yes? So? by MightyYar · · Score: 1

    I believe it was to confirm some of his cabinet, and yes, I'm betting Democrats wish they had that power now as the Trump cabinet picks come rolling in.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  160. Really? by JJayMcDaniel · · Score: 1

    I think that someone has lost his/her mind. This is even to stupid for a tabloid. The emergency broadcast system is just that and has nothing to do with Trump.

  161. Trump Alert by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Buy my new juicy steak,Trump steak. Believe me, this is the best steak you will ever eat. It's huge."

  162. Better get ready for Fashion Alerts! by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

    Then we better schould get ready to receive more "Fashion Alerts"

    --
    bickerdyke
  163. Re:Yes? So? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    Trump said he'd pick from a list of SCOTUS candidates that he published well in advance,

    Ah, so you are a fucking idiot. He hasn't even taken office, and he's broken nearly every promise made. Want to wager that his first nomination won't be from his list?

  164. Re:Yes? So? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Doesn't matter. Any sane person wouldn't have voted for either. Unfortunately, that means 50% of the US isn't sane (and the other 50% is mostly apathetic).

    Uh, no. You need to check out percentage of voter turnout sometime, me laddo. The story is very, very different from what you think it is. More than 50% of the voting public stayed home. They did precisely what you said they should do.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  165. Liberal Idiots! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump will continue to use Twitter so he can talk to folks like Tim Kane who blamed the Radical M--lim attack on gun control when it was carried out with a vehicle and a knife. Just like ISIS/ISIL instructed the sleeper cells to do a month ago. This is news for nerd, so do your homework nerds, know what a threat is that isn't coming over the wire.

  166. how HYPERHACKTIVE1@GMAIL.COM helped save me from by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HYPERHACKTIVE1@gmail.com is a professional hacker that specializes in exposing cheating spouse,and every other hacking related issues. he helps catch cheating spouse by hacking their communications like call, Facebook, text, emails, Skype and many more. i have used this service before and he did a very good job, he gave me every proof i needed to know that my fiancee was cheating. You can contact him on his email HYPERHACKTIVE1@gmail.com to help you catch your cheating spouse, or for any other hacking related problems, he will definitely help you, he has helped a lot of people, contact him and figure out your relationship status. i wish you the best too

  167. Re:Yes? So? by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

    How can he break any promises, he hasn't even taken office yet. He has merely SAID he is going to break promises. I guess he's backed himself into a corner with that. Pretty clever, now he can swear he kept his promises and just ignore the other set on contradictory promises.

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  168. Re:You're cute by Xest · · Score: 1

    "I don't recall the Republicans..."

    Well you wouldn't, that is unfortunately one of the side effects you'll suffer living your life as a partisan wingnut.

    The question is why are you telling us again? We already know - your repeated posts giving evidence to the fact aren't exactly subtle.

  169. Re:You're cute by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

    It is easy to confuse 'did not get as much media coverage' with 'did not happen'.

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  170. Thanks, Obama! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks, Obama!

  171. DND by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Learn to love your Do Not Disturb function on your phone. Mine's set to kick in every night for messages, notifications and texts though I do allow alarms for waking up for work and calls in case of emergency but as of yet no disturbances with DND mode on while I sleep

  172. So says yet another liberal rag by PontifexMaximus · · Score: 1

    Yeah, okay, people. We get it. You liberal goons hate anything and everything about conservatives and Trump. You haven't learned your lesson, yet have you?

    Want to know WHY you lost the election? Because Americans are sick and bloody tired of the constant fear-mongering, name calling and attempted character assassinations. We're tired of being told only you liberals know what's best for us. We're tired of the liberal hypocrisy. (Trump supporters will protest and not accept the election results!!!!!) We're tired of being labeled with some sort of -ism just because we disagree with you (sexist if you don't vote for Hillary, racist if you disagree with Obama, ad infinitum). We're tired of watching you bankrupt cities like Detroit, Baltimore, Atlanta (and the state of California) while blaming the the failure of your 'progressive' causes on the conservatives.

    Hell, we're tired of you blaming ANYTHING and ANYONE for your failures. Sexism stopped Hillary from being elected. America is full of racists. Blah, blah, blah.

    The bottom line is, liberals, your ideology is nothing but hypocrisy. Your ideology is built on false premises. If your ideology was so good, why do you insist on resorting to nothing short of domestic terrorism to get your way? Why do you riot, and protest and threaten when things don't go your way? No ideology is perfect, but yours is the most self-righteous, pseudo-religious claptrap this side of Scientology. It engenders the same fanaticistic psychology you get from Radical Islam (and Radical Christianity for that matter).

    And yet you just don't get it. You continue doing the same things over and over again and expecting a different result. Then placing blame everywhere but where it belongs.

    I've said for a long time that Liberalism is a mental illness. And you've continued to strengthen my theory by how you act.

    --
    Pax Vobiscum
  173. Re:you're still doing it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ketchup had to be graded as a food for DoE and USDA purposes. It's not a meat, it's not a starch, so it's a vegetable.

    Ronnie personally had nothing to do with it.

    Just as 0 had nothing personally to do with recent failures of the VA.

    Stop ascribing everything to a president or administration, and not the bureaucracy that is behind it.

  174. Re:You're cute by gzuckier · · Score: 1

    I recall the Republicans rioting before Bush was elected. Which helped get him elected. And flying the rioters in on planes supplied by corporate donors. And paying the rioters for their time. And pretending that it wasn't a partisan effort, it was the Good People of Florida spontaneously rising up.
    https://www.consortiumnews.com/2002/080502a.html
    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/2000/11/sweeney_and_the_siege_of_miami.html
    http://www.nytimes.com/2000/11...
    http://www.poetrywar.com/Music...
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2008/11/20/a-gop-dirty-trickster-has-second-thoughts.html
    http://stonezone.com/article.php?id=28
    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/2242...
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
    http://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/23/us/counting-vote-miami-dade-county-wild-day-miami-with-end-recounting-democrats.html

    --
    Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  175. I see nothing wrong here. Yes, that was sarcasm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So...the man who can't restrain himself from posting constant hectoring tweets online to harass and goad everyone who ever dares to cross him is going to be given the ability to send them directly to our phones unless we root them. Okay.

    I see either a sudden upsurge in the number of people who root their phones, or a sudden massive crackdown on rooting exploits.

  176. Don't give him a head start by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait and see can turn in to complacency. The Cabinet picks alone are enough to set one's hair on fire.
    Prepare for the worst and expect the best.

  177. Again, don't let him get a head start by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    trump has shown who he is, and who is is not. Believe it. If anything, this speculation is getting ahead of itself because the whole emolument thing will probably knock him out of the box on Day One.

  178. won't be able to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump will have privatized the bridge, so bring a sh*tload of dimes!

  179. More alarmist nonsense by Shalhav · · Score: 0

    Yes, I know the sky is falling, everyone will move to Canada, World War 3, genocide, sexual slavery, and all evil will come about.
    Nothing hysterical going on here, eh?

  180. AH! He will have adult supervision.... by Stubbyfingers · · Score: 1

    I had this image of getting 3AM drunk texts from POTUS.

  181. Re:Yes? So? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    More than 50% of the voting public stayed home.

    That's what I said. Read the numbers. It rounds to: 50% voter turnout, 24%Hillary 23% Trump 3% other.

    Also note, not voting for Hillary *or* Trump is an option without staying home. If Jill had gotten 10% of the vote, and Gary 15% of the vote, and 38% Hillary and 37% Donald, the discussion now would be vastly different. Even more so if the 3rd parties managed to get enough states to "block" an outright majority.

    3rd party votes aren't wasted. Voting D or R is a wasted vote.

  182. Twitter allows 180 characters by pabloesgalhardo · · Score: 1

    But he already has twitter with 16 million followers!

  183. The load on America's great SMS system... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...is gonna be YUUUUUUUUGE.

  184. Re:Yes? So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not a sensationalist story, it's a somewhat funny "did you know" story.

  185. Gas the yids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (((Jeff Zucker))) (head of CNN): jew
    Zuckerberg (facebook): jew
    Janet Yellen (Federal Reserve): jew
    New York Times: almost all jew
    Supreme Court: 3 of the 9 (currently 8 while awaiting replacement for recently deceased justice Scalia) - jew
    Ben Bernanke (Federal Reserve): jew
    Alan Greenspan (Federal Reserve): jew

  186. Why did YOU allow Obama to have this power??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why did YOU allow Obama to have this power if you didn't want people like Trump to have it as well. That's why giving ANY president extraordinary powers is NEVER wise and should be avoided no matter how "good" your president/party/side is!! Honestly how short-sighted are people? Pretty damn myopic!