You mean like negotiating an historic agreement to denuclearize North Korea?
His summit with North Korea did not lead to Kim agreeing to anything he hadn't already agreed to. In fact what he signed did not concede anything at all, and recognized Kim as the leader of North Korea.
Posting some of the highest job growth numbers the nation has ever seen?
The change in job growth between 2016, 2017, and 2018 is not statistically significant. That gives no reason to expect that this would not have happened had anyone else been president.
Record stock market highs?
You're ignoring the record stock market falls in with those "record" highs.
Why would Trump want to distract the media?
To try to distract us from his repeated use of the constitution as toilet paper, of course.
But go ahead, try and name what illegal things you think Trump is doing.
If you can't google the growing list of laws Trump has broken, I'm not going to waste my time doing it for you.
despite an investigation that's nearing two years, the FBI is still unable to name a single illegal thing it thinks Trump or anyone in the Trump campaign has done.
You have several things wrong with that statement.
For one, this is not an FBI investigation, it is a DoJ investigation. That is an important distinction as it changes - amongst other things - the jurisdiction of the investigation.
Two, there have been numerous charges - and several guilty pleas - already brought against the Trump campaign.
Three, a two year investigation is actually quite quick considering the magnitude we are dealing with. The investigation into Bill Clinton's affair with Lewinski took much longer and lead to zero criminal convictions. The Trump investigation already has people behind bars or awaiting sentencing, and others awaiting criminal trials.
Four, Trump is still yet to be interviewed or served with a subpoena. The notion that he won't is at best pure speculation. Considering how much his attorneys are trying to argue that he is above the law is strong support that they are aware he has indeed broken the law.
The Trump administration wants you to see this, so that you will come away thinking Comey did a shitty job of prosecuting a terrible crime in the spirit of covering his own ass. Naturally conservative echo chambers like slashdot are happily sharing this breaking news with all of us because it's good for the Administration. Once sufficient doubt is sewn regarding the Clinton email matter, it can be opened up again and used as another giant distraction so we don't notice what other atrociously illegal things the Trump administration is doing this week.
Yes, without a doubt. Look at how often front page articles are praising conservatives and/or demonizing non-conservatives. You can find several in any given week. Try to find an article that does the opposite of that; you might come across one in a month. Then go look at the comments here, see which political positions get moderated up and which ones get moderated down. Which ones get a large number of people jumping in stating their agreement with and which ones get a large number of people shouting at them telling them they are stupid for having such opinions.
I seem to see conservatives here constantly complaining about the liberal bias of this place.
Conservatives do that pretty well everywhere. They have all the power in the federal government, and who gets the fault for anything that doesn't work? The liberals - even though they have very nearly zero power currently. The next time a democrat senator threatens to filibuster anything we're going to see the GOP go nuclear.
supporters could project their wildest hopes unto him, like Barack Obama in 2008 but actually good at golf.
Other than to troll the non-conservative minority here on slashdot, was there a purpose to that statement? I'm surprised it wasn't followed up with a line praising Trump by comparing him to Mario or Kirby.
They have the license, if they chose to make it happen I would consider giving them money. Otherwise I'll just keep running it on my Wii in emulation (on a ROM that copied from a physical copy that I do own, of course). I don't give a damn about Halo 23, I just want all the Battletoads games that they have selfishly deprived us of for so many years.
In a staggeringly more sane political climate we once heard someone who wanted to be president lament over not being able to open the windows on aircraft. If we take windows away from him entirely he might not fly at all.
An hour still would have been defined as 1/24th of the day. The hours themselves would have just been shorter when compared to phenomena that were not intrinsically tied to the rotation of the earth. Think of how sundials work and how they influenced the idea of an hour; the shadow on the sundial wouldn't just magically skip over several hours each day.
There are some famous cases of people making shit up on their employment applications, but it seems to be exceedingly rare. How many people here know firsthand of a case of someone getting a job - or even an interview - when they applied with credentials they did not actually have?
This sounds more like another excuse for HR people to not do their actual jobs. If we want to move towards intelligent systems for job screening - and what we currently have even at very high tech employers is most certainly not an example of intelligent systems - that's great but this in't a step in that direction as best I can tell.
I recently received a print catalog from B&H Photo at home (not entirely sure why they sent it to me). I was thumbing through it one night and was looking through the different cameras and accessories and started looking at the manufacturers. Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Sony, Polaroid, etc... but where was Kodak? I looked on wikipedia and found out that apparently they exited the consumer photography realm completely several years back.
From my corner of the world, Kodak used to the the brand for consumer photography. We paid a premium to get Kodak film (which we used only for specific purposes) rather than the cheaper AGFA or even store brands. Now they're all but extinct.
I recall back in the 80s when nearly every car had a cassette deck in it, we seemed to find wasted tape scattered all over the place. I never figured out what led to the high mortality rate of the tapes themselves but you would see hundreds of feet of tape blowing the wind, tangling up around road signs, hanging from trees, etc all over the place. Love it or hate it, but cassettes were the only technology that could lead to that mess.
That would have put the electric vs ICE vehicle debate to bed for good. Although then my car would be investigated by both IEA and IAEA, but that's a minor inconvenience.
How much space do YOU need vs how much space do I need
For a lot of people there is a huge chasm between how much space they need and how much space they want. Do you really need a yard that is an acre or more? Do you really need a three car garage? Do you really need a finished full basement? Do you really need three bathrooms? You can claim some or all of those are needed for your lifestyle because you enjoy X, Y, Z hobbies, but that doesn't mean you would shrivel up and die if you didn't have them. If you compare a house that a typical American has convinced themselves makes sense for them to what they could actually get by on for a rental (apartment / bungalow / condo / townhome / whatever) you'll see there is a huge gap there. Many homeowners will tell you they have rooms in their houses that they don't even enter more than once a week (if even that) - yet they are paying to heat, cool, and maintain them.
If they didn't have those expenses they could save vastly more money than they could hope to make in selling the house.
If you watch the CNN interview of the kid who lost the lawsuit you'll find he eventually declares himself "a conservative" (when the interviewer pointed out that he is - and behaves like - a millennial. He doesn't seem to have any job qualifications, is self-absorbed, and has a fair bit of anger at the world. That sounds a lot like several people from the Trump Administration. He said his plan for success can't be executed "tomorrow" (for whatever that means to him), maybe he's waiting for a job offer from the white house?
What you're missing in that equation is that people are buying houses because they are told it's good for them to do so. They buy more space then they need, they fill that space up with crap, and spend a crapton of money maintaining that space. They could instead rent the amount of space that they actually need and save a lot of money in the process (and have a lot more available time to do things that are actually rewarding to boot). Renting an entire house is almost as illogical as buying one; the only advantage is that you are not dependent on the market to walk away from it.
However conditions for younger adults are much harder today then the past generations in terms of home ownership.
Home ownership has been overpromoted for decades in this country, and the reality of it is finally sinking in (not necessarily for this kid, but for our country in general). We have multiple cable networks that are still effectively acting as marketing outfits for realtors, hyping home ownership as an investment 24x7.
What is finally happening though, now that we again have a reasonably normal real estate market, is that people are finding they are not actually making money on their homes. You spend $20k on a kitchen renovation and then 10 years later you sell your house for $5k more than you paid; losing $15k in the process. On top of that you were paying homeowner's insurance the entire time, paying interest on your mortgage, paying to keep up your lawn, driveway, roof, exterior, interior, etc. People are waking up to the fact that houses are in fact really terrible investments. If you want to save money you're better off renting and putting the difference into even a CD (if you are risk-averse) or a balanced stock market account (if you are more risk-tolerant). But we've been told for so long that a house is a great investment, and a lot of people are stuck with that mindset because it was repeated as gospel.
Even people who are currently retiring and selling homes they lived in for 30+ years (having therefore paid off their mortgages years ago) are finding they aren't getting back as much as they had imagined. They bought for $40k, sold for $220k, which sounds great. Except they actually paid closer to $90k with interest over those 30 years. And they spent at least another $20k over those years on homeowner's insurance. They spent thousands on roofing and carpet, and lawn maintenance. They did their kitchen, bathroom, etc. The actual return looked like $180k but really was much closer to $30k once all this is deducted, which is a pretty lousy ROI for 30+ years.
The pesticide industry will do just fine even with weed killing robots being deployed. There are plenty of other chemicals to make and plenty of other facets of agribusiness they can profit from. Even if sales of roundup permanently went to zero this afternoon the company that makes it would be just fine.
They have the same mindset, though I'm not sure I would say they are cut from the same cloth. To the best of my knowledge Adams did not start off with a golden spoon, he had to work to get Dilbert in front of people who thought it was funny enough to go into newspapers.
Adams' transformation in the past couple years reminds me a lot of the transformation we saw from Dennis Miller after 9/11. Miller used to be an equal-opportunity comic who insulted everyone. Then after 9/11 he attacked only democrats and praised republicans at every opportunity. Years ago his show was canceled and all he has now is a column in Breitbart. Adams is following the same path as Dilbert get noticeably more partisan and noticeably less funny with each passing month. I expect my local paper will soon move it from the Sunday comics section to the Sunday op-ed section as it is generally more political now than Doonesbury.
While I do not really disagree with your assessment of Adams' character, he has made some very accurate predictions, from the moment that Trump declared he was running.
He's no better than anyone else who claims to be predicting the future; many of his predictions are on par in terms of precision with those of a late-night TV psychic. The way he made his predictions about the North Korea summit he couldn't lose: if it had gone through as originally scheduled he would have bragged about predicting Trump to be so unconventional in meeting with Kim. Now it is canceled and he is bragging about predicting Trump to be so unconventional in (apparently) going for new terms.
He has also made several wild claims that he has refused to substantiate at all; in his blog closer to the 2016 election he claimed that someone from the Clinton campaign threatened to kill him and then never said another word about this supposed death threat.
It seems like he's run out of jokes for Dilbert (which is often stuffed with poorly veiled references to how much Adams loves Trump) and he's just trying to earn himself a spot as a correspondent on Fox News.
Had the meeting gone as scheduled, he would have said it was brilliant and just as Trump had planned. Adams worships the ground that Trump walks upon and has convinced himself that all democrats are demon scum. Trump is incapable of doing any wrong in Adams' eyes.
Coincidentally, remember when Dilbert was last funny? It was a fair bit before the 2016 elections. Now it's just Mallard Fillmore in an office; often forgetting the punch lines as well.
My phone has sent me Amber alerts for kids missing from states that are many hundreds of miles away from where I am. I feel bad for kids missing in Florida, but if I'm in MN at the time there isn't much I can do for them.
One thing I encountered when I was on the job market in recent years was that the same job opening would be re-posted a few months later from the same company, and for a job that almost certainly would have only hired one person. This tells me that most likely they either didn't find someone who fit the job, or they offered the position to someone and were turned down. Yet over the course of that happening no human made any attempt to contact me or gave any indication that they had seen my application. I really doubt that my application was so unusual that I was the only one who met the requirements and was auto-trashed by the algorithm.
In other words, their algorithm is wasting their time as much as it may be saving it.
I found before that glassdoor was occasionally a good source for jobs that were open, and often a good source for jobs that were no longer open. The problem that it won't solve - that no other website I'm aware of is doing anything to solve - is that of getting applications read by actual human beings. Employers more often than not have a blind loyalty to using algorithms (that more often than not are employed by HR people who don't understand them) to quickly filter out applications. The result of this is that many qualified job seekers never get a chance to talk to anyone.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean like negotiating an historic agreement to denuclearize North Korea?
His summit with North Korea did not lead to Kim agreeing to anything he hadn't already agreed to. In fact what he signed did not concede anything at all, and recognized Kim as the leader of North Korea.
Posting some of the highest job growth numbers the nation has ever seen?
The change in job growth between 2016, 2017, and 2018 is not statistically significant. That gives no reason to expect that this would not have happened had anyone else been president.
Record stock market highs?
You're ignoring the record stock market falls in with those "record" highs.
Why would Trump want to distract the media?
To try to distract us from his repeated use of the constitution as toilet paper, of course.
But go ahead, try and name what illegal things you think Trump is doing.
If you can't google the growing list of laws Trump has broken, I'm not going to waste my time doing it for you.
despite an investigation that's nearing two years, the FBI is still unable to name a single illegal thing it thinks Trump or anyone in the Trump campaign has done.
You have several things wrong with that statement.
For one, this is not an FBI investigation, it is a DoJ investigation. That is an important distinction as it changes - amongst other things - the jurisdiction of the investigation.
Two, there have been numerous charges - and several guilty pleas - already brought against the Trump campaign.
Three, a two year investigation is actually quite quick considering the magnitude we are dealing with. The investigation into Bill Clinton's affair with Lewinski took much longer and lead to zero criminal convictions. The Trump investigation already has people behind bars or awaiting sentencing, and others awaiting criminal trials.
Four, Trump is still yet to be interviewed or served with a subpoena. The notion that he won't is at best pure speculation. Considering how much his attorneys are trying to argue that he is above the law is strong support that they are aware he has indeed broken the law.
The Trump administration wants you to see this, so that you will come away thinking Comey did a shitty job of prosecuting a terrible crime in the spirit of covering his own ass. Naturally conservative echo chambers like slashdot are happily sharing this breaking news with all of us because it's good for the Administration. Once sufficient doubt is sewn regarding the Clinton email matter, it can be opened up again and used as another giant distraction so we don't notice what other atrociously illegal things the Trump administration is doing this week.
Are non-conservatives a minority here?
Yes, without a doubt. Look at how often front page articles are praising conservatives and/or demonizing non-conservatives. You can find several in any given week. Try to find an article that does the opposite of that; you might come across one in a month. Then go look at the comments here, see which political positions get moderated up and which ones get moderated down. Which ones get a large number of people jumping in stating their agreement with and which ones get a large number of people shouting at them telling them they are stupid for having such opinions.
I seem to see conservatives here constantly complaining about the liberal bias of this place.
Conservatives do that pretty well everywhere. They have all the power in the federal government, and who gets the fault for anything that doesn't work? The liberals - even though they have very nearly zero power currently. The next time a democrat senator threatens to filibuster anything we're going to see the GOP go nuclear.
supporters could project their wildest hopes unto him, like Barack Obama in 2008 but actually good at golf.
Other than to troll the non-conservative minority here on slashdot, was there a purpose to that statement? I'm surprised it wasn't followed up with a line praising Trump by comparing him to Mario or Kirby.
Battletoads.
They have the license, if they chose to make it happen I would consider giving them money. Otherwise I'll just keep running it on my Wii in emulation (on a ROM that copied from a physical copy that I do own, of course). I don't give a damn about Halo 23, I just want all the Battletoads games that they have selfishly deprived us of for so many years.
In a staggeringly more sane political climate we once heard someone who wanted to be president lament over not being able to open the windows on aircraft. If we take windows away from him entirely he might not fly at all.
An hour still would have been defined as 1/24th of the day. The hours themselves would have just been shorter when compared to phenomena that were not intrinsically tied to the rotation of the earth. Think of how sundials work and how they influenced the idea of an hour; the shadow on the sundial wouldn't just magically skip over several hours each day.
There are some famous cases of people making shit up on their employment applications, but it seems to be exceedingly rare. How many people here know firsthand of a case of someone getting a job - or even an interview - when they applied with credentials they did not actually have?
This sounds more like another excuse for HR people to not do their actual jobs. If we want to move towards intelligent systems for job screening - and what we currently have even at very high tech employers is most certainly not an example of intelligent systems - that's great but this in't a step in that direction as best I can tell.
I recently received a print catalog from B&H Photo at home (not entirely sure why they sent it to me). I was thumbing through it one night and was looking through the different cameras and accessories and started looking at the manufacturers. Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Sony, Polaroid, etc ... but where was Kodak? I looked on wikipedia and found out that apparently they exited the consumer photography realm completely several years back.
From my corner of the world, Kodak used to the the brand for consumer photography. We paid a premium to get Kodak film (which we used only for specific purposes) rather than the cheaper AGFA or even store brands. Now they're all but extinct.
I recall back in the 80s when nearly every car had a cassette deck in it, we seemed to find wasted tape scattered all over the place. I never figured out what led to the high mortality rate of the tapes themselves but you would see hundreds of feet of tape blowing the wind, tangling up around road signs, hanging from trees, etc all over the place. Love it or hate it, but cassettes were the only technology that could lead to that mess.
That would have put the electric vs ICE vehicle debate to bed for good. Although then my car would be investigated by both IEA and IAEA, but that's a minor inconvenience.
How much space do YOU need vs how much space do I need
For a lot of people there is a huge chasm between how much space they need and how much space they want . Do you really need a yard that is an acre or more? Do you really need a three car garage? Do you really need a finished full basement? Do you really need three bathrooms? You can claim some or all of those are needed for your lifestyle because you enjoy X, Y, Z hobbies, but that doesn't mean you would shrivel up and die if you didn't have them. If you compare a house that a typical American has convinced themselves makes sense for them to what they could actually get by on for a rental (apartment / bungalow / condo / townhome / whatever) you'll see there is a huge gap there. Many homeowners will tell you they have rooms in their houses that they don't even enter more than once a week (if even that) - yet they are paying to heat, cool, and maintain them.
If they didn't have those expenses they could save vastly more money than they could hope to make in selling the house.
If you watch the CNN interview of the kid who lost the lawsuit you'll find he eventually declares himself "a conservative" (when the interviewer pointed out that he is - and behaves like - a millennial. He doesn't seem to have any job qualifications, is self-absorbed, and has a fair bit of anger at the world. That sounds a lot like several people from the Trump Administration. He said his plan for success can't be executed "tomorrow" (for whatever that means to him), maybe he's waiting for a job offer from the white house?
What you're missing in that equation is that people are buying houses because they are told it's good for them to do so. They buy more space then they need, they fill that space up with crap, and spend a crapton of money maintaining that space. They could instead rent the amount of space that they actually need and save a lot of money in the process (and have a lot more available time to do things that are actually rewarding to boot). Renting an entire house is almost as illogical as buying one; the only advantage is that you are not dependent on the market to walk away from it.
However conditions for younger adults are much harder today then the past generations in terms of home ownership.
Home ownership has been overpromoted for decades in this country, and the reality of it is finally sinking in (not necessarily for this kid, but for our country in general). We have multiple cable networks that are still effectively acting as marketing outfits for realtors, hyping home ownership as an investment 24x7.
What is finally happening though, now that we again have a reasonably normal real estate market, is that people are finding they are not actually making money on their homes. You spend $20k on a kitchen renovation and then 10 years later you sell your house for $5k more than you paid; losing $15k in the process. On top of that you were paying homeowner's insurance the entire time, paying interest on your mortgage, paying to keep up your lawn, driveway, roof, exterior, interior, etc. People are waking up to the fact that houses are in fact really terrible investments. If you want to save money you're better off renting and putting the difference into even a CD (if you are risk-averse) or a balanced stock market account (if you are more risk-tolerant). But we've been told for so long that a house is a great investment, and a lot of people are stuck with that mindset because it was repeated as gospel.
Even people who are currently retiring and selling homes they lived in for 30+ years (having therefore paid off their mortgages years ago) are finding they aren't getting back as much as they had imagined. They bought for $40k, sold for $220k, which sounds great. Except they actually paid closer to $90k with interest over those 30 years. And they spent at least another $20k over those years on homeowner's insurance. They spent thousands on roofing and carpet, and lawn maintenance. They did their kitchen, bathroom, etc. The actual return looked like $180k but really was much closer to $30k once all this is deducted, which is a pretty lousy ROI for 30+ years.
The pesticide industry will do just fine even with weed killing robots being deployed. There are plenty of other chemicals to make and plenty of other facets of agribusiness they can profit from. Even if sales of roundup permanently went to zero this afternoon the company that makes it would be just fine.
So him and Trump are cut from the same cloth.
They have the same mindset, though I'm not sure I would say they are cut from the same cloth. To the best of my knowledge Adams did not start off with a golden spoon, he had to work to get Dilbert in front of people who thought it was funny enough to go into newspapers.
Adams' transformation in the past couple years reminds me a lot of the transformation we saw from Dennis Miller after 9/11. Miller used to be an equal-opportunity comic who insulted everyone. Then after 9/11 he attacked only democrats and praised republicans at every opportunity. Years ago his show was canceled and all he has now is a column in Breitbart. Adams is following the same path as Dilbert get noticeably more partisan and noticeably less funny with each passing month. I expect my local paper will soon move it from the Sunday comics section to the Sunday op-ed section as it is generally more political now than Doonesbury.
While I do not really disagree with your assessment of Adams' character, he has made some very accurate predictions, from the moment that Trump declared he was running.
He's no better than anyone else who claims to be predicting the future; many of his predictions are on par in terms of precision with those of a late-night TV psychic. The way he made his predictions about the North Korea summit he couldn't lose: if it had gone through as originally scheduled he would have bragged about predicting Trump to be so unconventional in meeting with Kim. Now it is canceled and he is bragging about predicting Trump to be so unconventional in (apparently) going for new terms.
He has also made several wild claims that he has refused to substantiate at all; in his blog closer to the 2016 election he claimed that someone from the Clinton campaign threatened to kill him and then never said another word about this supposed death threat.
It seems like he's run out of jokes for Dilbert (which is often stuffed with poorly veiled references to how much Adams loves Trump) and he's just trying to earn himself a spot as a correspondent on Fox News.
winning
Had the meeting gone as scheduled, he would have said it was brilliant and just as Trump had planned. Adams worships the ground that Trump walks upon and has convinced himself that all democrats are demon scum. Trump is incapable of doing any wrong in Adams' eyes.
Coincidentally, remember when Dilbert was last funny? It was a fair bit before the 2016 elections. Now it's just Mallard Fillmore in an office; often forgetting the punch lines as well.
My phone has sent me Amber alerts for kids missing from states that are many hundreds of miles away from where I am. I feel bad for kids missing in Florida, but if I'm in MN at the time there isn't much I can do for them.
They shouldn't be sending such large checks through USPS, they should FedEx them.
Wouldn't they UPS them?
UPS doesn't have time to wait for those slowpokes. They really should turn to DHL.
I'm really curious as to how he managed that, even if the checks were mailed to his house.
I'm actually more surprised that $58,000 worth of checks were sent to UPS at all. Who pays UPS with a check - especially one sent to the HQ?
One thing I encountered when I was on the job market in recent years was that the same job opening would be re-posted a few months later from the same company, and for a job that almost certainly would have only hired one person. This tells me that most likely they either didn't find someone who fit the job, or they offered the position to someone and were turned down. Yet over the course of that happening no human made any attempt to contact me or gave any indication that they had seen my application. I really doubt that my application was so unusual that I was the only one who met the requirements and was auto-trashed by the algorithm.
In other words, their algorithm is wasting their time as much as it may be saving it.
I found before that glassdoor was occasionally a good source for jobs that were open, and often a good source for jobs that were no longer open. The problem that it won't solve - that no other website I'm aware of is doing anything to solve - is that of getting applications read by actual human beings. Employers more often than not have a blind loyalty to using algorithms (that more often than not are employed by HR people who don't understand them) to quickly filter out applications. The result of this is that many qualified job seekers never get a chance to talk to anyone.