When I get mod points, I open the level filter. You make a choice. Want to start a 1? open an account. Want to be a Coward? post and accept starting at 0. That's it. Simple.
When I get mod points, I browse at -1. As the moderator guidelines say (or used to say?) you should be on the lookout for other abusive moderators, and have the chance to repair their harm.
Slashdot isn't going to change anything, because they revel in the muckraking these idiots do. This is the site now; abandon it or get used to it.
They won't get ad revenue if their members don't visit the site. And many of them won't visit the site if there's a sudden unavoidable splash of swastikas or other racial content. These trolls are clever. They want to use Slashdot for their own purposes. Don't let them. Bury them into the basement.
Look Slashdot. I am a firm believer in freedom of expression, even if it's something I don't agree with. In fact, I can tolerate it even if it's toxic.
But when these troll-accounts keep submitting identical ASCII-art hate-speech that needs to be modded down before it disappears from all of our screens (at work or at home) then it's time to take action. I don't want to have swastikas or GNAA pictures for my co-workers to see. Do you really want to become an NSFW site?
These sick people are playing you. They have a right to express themselves, but you, as a non-government entity, are not obliged to hand them a megaphone.
For the love of FSM, do something! Create a -2 or -3 Karma, or blacklist sources or (quasi-identical posts) as spam. Most of us, whatever our position, want to engage in a rational dialogue here. Those who don't should be modded down to a faint whisper, if that.
You can always take the fifth. It's a right, regardless of other process. Pardon invalidates a conviction (it's preemptively in-hand). A pardon does not apply some blanket immutable legal change of status.
No, that's not true. There are some caveats, but generally if the government guarantees that you cannot self-incriminate (either via a pardon or a plea agreement) then you may be compelled to testify.
Help me out here. IANAL, so I don't really know for sure. But she was pardoned. That means she can't take the fifth in any deposition related to her Wikileaks actions, but she is immune. I don't think it would matter if new information came out. So why is she refusing to talk to the Grand Jury?
I think the hardware will be a big reason why Tesla cars get scrapped. What happens 15 years down the road when the motherboard that controls the charging system blows a capacitor and Tesla says they aren't made anymore? Will there be an aftermarket supply of major electronic components for old Teslas?
I don't see why not. Lots of other cars no longer being manufactured have after-market suppliers. For example, decades-old Volvos are still on the road, and IPDUSA supplies parts. I have a 90s-era Saab. New parts are available in most cases. Sometimes I have to get a remanufactured one. Finding mechanics who can service it has never been an issue.
You may have a point about electronics components being harder to supply than other components. But I think all manufacturers will face this issue as the auto industry moves to self-driving cars with lots of electronics. Also, I would think that retro-compatibilty of new parts to older models would not be arduous.
Nope. Ignoring air friction, and assuming you shot straight up, the highest altitude you'd reach would be a little over 10 km before you'd start falling back to earth. (v^2 = 2ah if you want to check the arithmetic.)
Well, they know that. It's the same as when the Republicans put bills on Obama's desk to repeal the ACA. They knew he'd veto it and that they wouldn't be able to override it. It's about signalling to the voters "this is what we'll be able to do if you put us in charge." It's not a new phenomenon.
The Republicans tried to repeal the ACA 54 times when Obama was in office. IIRC, only one of those times did a bill make it out of Congress and to Obama's desk, where he vetoed it. So I think it's "bill" in the singular.
From the article linked above: "If tropical deforestation were a country, according to the World Resources Institute, it would rank third in carbon dioxide-equivalent emissions, behind China and the U.S."
Not sure where the attribution should go to, maybe Mencken. "Freedom of the press only belongs to those who can afford one."
Well said. However, today we have the internet. That levels the playing field quite a bit.
And although it may not exactly apply in this instance, it's always a good idea not to confuse the First Amendment rights with censorship. While Amazon may not be committing a First Amendment offense, it is clearly censorship, for good or evil.
If you were to walk into a Christian bookstore, I doubt you would find any books on Satanism. Is that censorship?
And before someone responds with the inevitable gambit about cakes for gay weddings, I find it distasteful when a baker refuses to make one. However, sexual orientation is not a protected class. Not yet, anyway.
Sadly the only way to stop a cult is to remove all members from existence.
Wow. No more Mr. Nice Guy.
Let's try information and education instead, hm'kay?
Sure, next up I'll try talking some fundamentalist christians out of the existence of god. Surely scientific methods and facts will sway their opinions.
Great. Have at it. Rational persuasion is fair game. But at least you won't be trying to "remove all members from existence" as the OP darkly suggested.
And BTW, many christian denominations (and other religions) have reconciled science with belief.
This is the most compelling argument for the anti-vaxxers I've ever heard, and I've been listening to their crap for years. There's nothing like heavy-handed censorship to make anyone wonder, what truth exactly are they trying to hide?
The truth that sending your un-vaxxed kid to the same school as mine puts everyone at risk. Herd immunity is effective, but it breaks down if too many individuals are not innoculated. Educate yourself on the debunked claim that vaccinations cause autism, and join the rest of us who want to protect ourselves as well as everyone else.
Looking forward to those liberal book burnings. Maybe we can resuming burning people at the stake.
Yet another person who fails to understand the First Amendment. It protects you and me from the government. It does not protect you and me from each other -- or in this case, Amazon.
As for burning at the stake -- the 17th century called, and they'd like to invite you to a barbecue.
Well, Musk just announced he was closing the showrooms. For financial reasons. We had two stories posted to the Slashdot front page about that.
Then they mysteriously burn down. Which means a showroom that was effectively a write off is now an insurance settlement.
This is obviously great news and not suspicious at all, so Tesla will be able to use the money to save its business and use it to fund more space missions for convertibles.
Any insurance settlement they get will be a drop in the bucket compared to the other business and financial challenges faced by Tesla.
Until I hear about evidence of arson, or widespread destruction of Tesla showrooms in the next few months, I'm going with Hanlon's Razor.
Slashdot Mirror
When I get mod points, I open the level filter. You make a choice. Want to start a 1? open an account. Want to be a Coward? post and accept starting at 0. That's it. Simple.
When I get mod points, I browse at -1. As the moderator guidelines say (or used to say?) you should be on the lookout for other abusive moderators, and have the chance to repair their harm.
There is a lameness filter that stops you from posting racial epithets and all-caps.
Why can't the lameness filter stop people from posting near-identical ASCII art over and over and over again?
Slashdot isn't going to change anything, because they revel in the muckraking these idiots do. This is the site now; abandon it or get used to it.
They won't get ad revenue if their members don't visit the site. And many of them won't visit the site if there's a sudden unavoidable splash of swastikas or other racial content. These trolls are clever. They want to use Slashdot for their own purposes. Don't let them. Bury them into the basement.
Look Slashdot. I am a firm believer in freedom of expression, even if it's something I don't agree with. In fact, I can tolerate it even if it's toxic.
But when these troll-accounts keep submitting identical ASCII-art hate-speech that needs to be modded down before it disappears from all of our screens (at work or at home) then it's time to take action. I don't want to have swastikas or GNAA pictures for my co-workers to see. Do you really want to become an NSFW site?
These sick people are playing you. They have a right to express themselves, but you, as a non-government entity, are not obliged to hand them a megaphone.
For the love of FSM, do something! Create a -2 or -3 Karma, or blacklist sources or (quasi-identical posts) as spam. Most of us, whatever our position, want to engage in a rational dialogue here. Those who don't should be modded down to a faint whisper, if that.
Now that was living! Then 14400! And 19200, which somehow became 56k! 56k modem motherfucka! Living la vida loca!
Luxury! I remember 110 baud (yes, baud) modems that literally used your phone, with the receiver cradled in an acoustic coupler.
Crimminy, these young'uns.
The sentence was commuted, but is that the same as pardoned? I'm unclear as well.
No, it isn't. I messed up. Several posters corrected me.
Pardon invalidates a conviction (it's preemptively in-hand). A pardon does not apply some blanket immutable legal change of status.
Manning didn't get pardoned, her sentence got commuted. So she is still technically considered guilty of her crimes.
You're right. She was not pardoned -- her sentence was commuted. Thanks for the correction.
You can always take the fifth. It's a right, regardless of other process. Pardon invalidates a conviction (it's preemptively in-hand). A pardon does not apply some blanket immutable legal change of status.
No, that's not true. There are some caveats, but generally if the government guarantees that you cannot self-incriminate (either via a pardon or a plea agreement) then you may be compelled to testify.
Help me out here. IANAL, so I don't really know for sure. But she was pardoned. That means she can't take the fifth in any deposition related to her Wikileaks actions, but she is immune. I don't think it would matter if new information came out. So why is she refusing to talk to the Grand Jury?
I think the hardware will be a big reason why Tesla cars get scrapped.
What happens 15 years down the road when the motherboard that controls the charging system blows a capacitor and Tesla says they aren't made anymore?
Will there be an aftermarket supply of major electronic components for old Teslas?
I don't see why not. Lots of other cars no longer being manufactured have after-market suppliers. For example, decades-old Volvos are still on the road, and IPDUSA supplies parts. I have a 90s-era Saab. New parts are available in most cases. Sometimes I have to get a remanufactured one. Finding mechanics who can service it has never been an issue.
You may have a point about electronics components being harder to supply than other components. But I think all manufacturers will face this issue as the auto industry moves to self-driving cars with lots of electronics. Also, I would think that retro-compatibilty of new parts to older models would not be arduous.
Yep - shot into space at 1000 mph.
Nope. Ignoring air friction, and assuming you shot straight up, the highest altitude you'd reach would be a little over 10 km before you'd start falling back to earth. (v^2 = 2ah if you want to check the arithmetic.)
You are confusing content providers with service providers. Intentionally, I suspect.
Well, they know that. It's the same as when the Republicans put bills on Obama's desk to repeal the ACA. They knew he'd veto it and that they wouldn't be able to override it. It's about signalling to the voters "this is what we'll be able to do if you put us in charge." It's not a new phenomenon.
The Republicans tried to repeal the ACA 54 times when Obama was in office. IIRC, only one of those times did a bill make it out of Congress and to Obama's desk, where he vetoed it. So I think it's "bill" in the singular.
And can we ship APK to PutiNet?
How about Cyberia? [badum-*tish*]
Existing CO2 can be removed from the atmosphere pretty quickly by photosynthesis.
Yes, and the primary CO2 sinks (aka trees) get paid in sunshine and water, and don't make any noise. There's just one problem: we're killing them faster than they can grow back.
From the article linked above: "If tropical deforestation were a country, according to the World Resources Institute, it would rank third in carbon dioxide-equivalent emissions, behind China and the U.S."
Not sure where the attribution should go to, maybe Mencken. "Freedom of the press only belongs to those who can afford one."
Well said. However, today we have the internet. That levels the playing field quite a bit.
And although it may not exactly apply in this instance, it's always a good idea not to confuse the First Amendment rights with censorship. While Amazon may not be committing a First Amendment offense, it is clearly censorship, for good or evil.
If you were to walk into a Christian bookstore, I doubt you would find any books on Satanism. Is that censorship?
And before someone responds with the inevitable gambit about cakes for gay weddings, I find it distasteful when a baker refuses to make one. However, sexual orientation is not a protected class. Not yet, anyway.
Then your community needs to act, not the federal government because my community isn't (as) stupid.
Translation: I've got mine, so piss off, Feds.
That works great, until someone from "my" community shows up in "yours" with measles. What then?
Yet another person who fails to understand the First Amendment.
The poster you replied to didn't mention the 1st Amendment.
Fair point. But (s)he did mention "Freedom! Oh no" in the subject, implying it was an attack on the First Amendment.
Just because corporate thought control is legal, that doesn't mean it is a good idea.
I'm with you there. But I don't think that a company choosing which books to sell or not sell constitutes "thought control."
Sadly the only way to stop a cult is to remove all members from existence.
Wow. No more Mr. Nice Guy.
Let's try information and education instead, hm'kay?
Sure, next up I'll try talking some fundamentalist christians out of the existence of god. Surely scientific methods and facts will sway their opinions.
Great. Have at it. Rational persuasion is fair game. But at least you won't be trying to "remove all members from existence" as the OP darkly suggested.
And BTW, many christian denominations (and other religions) have reconciled science with belief.
This is the most compelling argument for the anti-vaxxers I've ever heard, and I've been listening to their crap for years. There's nothing like heavy-handed censorship to make anyone wonder, what truth exactly are they trying to hide?
The truth that sending your un-vaxxed kid to the same school as mine puts everyone at risk. Herd immunity is effective, but it breaks down if too many individuals are not innoculated. Educate yourself on the debunked claim that vaccinations cause autism, and join the rest of us who want to protect ourselves as well as everyone else.
Sadly the only way to stop a cult is to remove all members from existence.
Wow. No more Mr. Nice Guy.
Let's try information and education instead, hm'kay?
Looking forward to those liberal book burnings. Maybe we can resuming burning people at the stake.
Yet another person who fails to understand the First Amendment. It protects you and me from the government. It does not protect you and me from each other -- or in this case, Amazon.
As for burning at the stake -- the 17th century called, and they'd like to invite you to a barbecue.
You didn't even read the summary, did you:
Not a showroom. A workshop.
This. The Slashdot headline says "Showroom" but you (rightly) point out that it's actually a service centre.
Well, wait a minute. TFA says that a showroom was damaged, but that the fire didn't start there. So apparently there was a showroom on the site.
Per TFS, the fire service says "The cause of the fire is under investigation but was not caused by Tesla cars, chargers or batteries,"
You didn't even read the summary, did you:
Not a showroom. A workshop.
This. The Slashdot headline says "Showroom" but you (rightly) point out that it's actually a service centre.
Well, Musk just announced he was closing the showrooms. For financial reasons. We had two stories posted to the Slashdot front page about that.
Then they mysteriously burn down. Which means a showroom that was effectively a write off is now an insurance settlement.
This is obviously great news and not suspicious at all, so Tesla will be able to use the money to save its business and use it to fund more space missions for convertibles.
Any insurance settlement they get will be a drop in the bucket compared to the other business and financial challenges faced by Tesla.
Until I hear about evidence of arson, or widespread destruction of Tesla showrooms in the next few months, I'm going with Hanlon's Razor.