_If_ it's OK for the USA to crack down on 'fake news', it's OK for China.
Well, yeah, I guess that would be true. Although I missed the stories about the US government outlawing fake news or otherwise restricting its publication.
I've never avoided the question, you just ignore my answer. You're avoiding me, though:
So, to test my theory: do you know what my answer is and always has been? You're either ignorant or stupid
The answer is apparently both. I wasn't expecting that, I thought you were just ignorant.
I am, and will remain, anonymous because I have always meant this account to be anonymous. I have said things under the cover of anonymity which I did not intend to be traced to me personally, in fact that's probably the biggest benefit of anonymity. I'm not going to throw away that protection just for your little pissing contest. I don't have any other accounts here, this is the account where I have posted 100% of my posts. Many of those included information that I do not want to be traced to me, so therefore you're going to have to keep pissing and acting like you're winning some contest. I CAN prove anything I want to you, but I WON'T prove anything. My anonymity is more valuable to me than any stupid contest with you. And it always will be. But, why stop now APK? Go ahead and continue to prove that you are both ignorant as well as stupid and try to get me to prove who I am again, like I ever will. If I would have engaged with you using a different account than my own, then I would have no problem telling you who I am. I don't want various things that I've said to be identified with me though, so that's not going to happen.
your name on it + SOLELY YOUR WORK too!
Oh, really? You mean you don't want me to list an "achievement" where I suggested a few Win32 API calls to someone else's project, but they ended up rejecting my suggestions? Or if I make some efficiency improvements to someone else's project, which then almost wins an award but doesn't, I shouldn't list that either? Because it's not solely my own work, right?
As for all of your other shit, it's ridiculous that you don't think I earn what I earn. Literally ridiculous, as in worthy of ridicule. You are worthy of ridicule. If I showed you what my house or car looked like, you would probably also not believe they're mine. Face it man, I have an education in computer science and I've used it to bring in a steady 6-figure income with full benefits by my mid 30s. I've been contributing to a 401k since my early 20s, you want to guess where that is now? I wrote the software which literally runs the company that I work for (and that was as an intern for them 14 years ago, but it's still running the company today). After the original programmer left I redesigned and rewrote the core customer-facing application from scratch, by myself, and worked on it by myself for at least 3 or 4 years before I got another programmer to help me (this is a completely separate application from the one running the company; this is the one we sell). At this point, as the CTO, that situation is better but my stamp is still on that application and I still work on it, I just have a team to help me now. And there you are approaching your mid 50s, not believing that anything that I have actually done is possible, crowing about all of these stupid little achievements like suggesting Win32 API calls and earning $100 for a forum post like you're some big shot. It's ridiculous. Worthy of ridicule. You are ridiculous. Stop being ridiculous. It's gotten very old and tiresome. I'm sorry if you're not happy with your life, but that isn't going to change by claiming that all of these little stupid things are somehow major meaningful accomplishments. Focus on doing things that will actually make you happy instead of trying to pull up some bullshit list of stupid crap and act like it's made of gold. Make yourself happy, man. I have, that's why I decided to get a degree in computer science and then program for a living, I knew that would make me happy because of how much I enjoyed it and how much it was worth. You apparently once played lacrosse, which is great and all, but don't sit there and act like I can't have possibly done all of the things that I have in fact done. My anonymity on this site is worth too much for the ridiculous likes of you and your insatiable egotistical greed for self-congratulation.
I'd like to test a theory, I hope you'll indulge me.
Every time I've answered that question, I've answered it exactly the same way.
So, to test my theory: do you know what my answer is and always has been? You're either ignorant or stupid, and I'm betting on one of those. So, what has always been my answer to that question, APK?
many 1,000's use it & even dozens of/.'ers like & use it
Wow. That's impressive. No, seriously, "many 1,000's". It's so impressive that you don't even bother to spell out "thousands". That's serious business. How do you know that's the case, though? Do you track your users, does your software phone home? How do you know that "many 1,000's" use it, exactly? Are you tracking your users? Or are you not tracking them, and you're just pulling that number straight out of your ass? Which one is it? You're tracking your users, aren't you?
In the meantime, "many 1,000,000's" use my software to actually help them do their jobs instead of manage a single text file on their computer. But, hey man, I don't want you to feel insecure or anything, so good job on getting that $100 8 years ago.
since you're ALLEGEDLY still working you CAN'T be doing all that well being a wageslave (I'm not & haven't had to be one in a decade++).
I'll tell you what, APK. Since I'm 37 and have been making a 6 figure salary for years, let's check back in 15 years when I'll be as old as you are now, and let's compare bank accounts and personal achievements. Stay tuned for whether or not I decide to pull out an 8 year old $100 award and wave that around like it's a big deal.
As to your 'skills'? LOL - your crusade to stop me posting didn't even work out too well, now did it?
Are you trying to equate programming ability with stopping your spam? I never tried to get you to stop posting. Only to get you to stop spamming. I note that now you link to search engine results pages for a search of your software. You've changed your behavior and it's been considerably less annoying over the past several months. I'll call that a win.
My guess, that IF you're a 'coder', you're just another 'webdouche'
Who cares about your guesses? You guess everything under the sun, and the vast majority of things are wrong. You've proven that over and over. Your word is not worth any more than your text file management utility. You work so hard to try and call me a blowhard, why do you think that is, Prof. Freud? You're the one trying so hard to prove various assertions, make yourself seem superior, and make baseless guesses without the first shred of evidence. You do that because of how insecure you are about yourself. It's sad. It's pathetic. So are you. Have a great rest of the year.
Why so angry, APK? Are you still butthurt from last August when I tore apart all of your worthless "achievements"?
coming in days later thinking I wouldn't catch your LYING bitch ass?
You self-important twat, I was out of town for the holidays and believe it or not, I don't spent my off time thinking about you.
But look at you, you sure found my message and showed up to shit all over the site again, didn't you? You're still stalking everyone like some weird pervy creeper old guy hanging around a high school trying to talk to the girls. Sorry you've got nothing better to do than try to wave around your micro-peen and assert your imagined dominance, but you don't need to be angry at me about it. That's a "you" issue, not a "me" issue. It's not my problem that I state matter-of-fact things which happen every day and you think they're so unbelievable. Nothing I'm saying is even remotely unbelievable, and it's sad that you think it is. You're a sad, angry guy APK.
You seriously think that $100/hr isn't realistic for custom development? That's sad, APK. If you call up my company and ask for custom development quotes or mods for our application, you're going to get quoted at over $100/hr. There's some overhead for testing and project management, but that's my time you're paying for. The fact that you seem to think that's unrealistic is a sad statement about you. Even when I was working for myself I would quote projects at $100/hr. It's really not that big of a deal, but I guess that's why you're reaching back to $100 forum payments in 2008 to scrape the barrel for your own achievements.
And, what's with you and the phrase "in computing"? Why do you always say that? Are you trying to suggest that if I'm writing software to actually help people do their job, instead of little cheesy text-file management utilities that a first-year CS student would be happy with in order to help people use a computer, then somehow my contribution is less than yours? Otherwise, why do you always qualify your lame statements of perceived superiority with "in computing"? I help people do their jobs, man. I'm not here to help you manage a text file or defrag a hard drive like it's 1998, I'm actually helping people make their own money. Weird that I get paid a lot to do that, isn't it?
Why? I've answered that question every single time you've asked it, so why would it make a difference if I answered it yet again? You're still going to ignore it.
& you're still either unemployed OR a wageslave making peanuts
Yeah, you know so much about me, don't you? Keep making claims that you can't back up, because it really makes it seem like you know what you're talking about. I earn a 6 figure salary with benefits, I don't need to talk about being paid $100 for a forum post like it's some major achievement in my life. $100 won't even buy an hour of work from me.
I've also got commercially sold code to my credit
Oh wooooooow. What an achievement, APK. My software is going into nearly 100 departments in a state (every department), but man you've got "commercially sold code"? That's so much better than having every single employee of the state using my software. That's the latest news, stay tuned over the next several months to hear about other major contracts if you'd like to. They happen often, I don't have to go back to 2008 in order to find something to be proud of.
Clue: I don't have to work for ANYONE anymore
And you've decided to take all of this financial freedom and free time, and use it to spam Slashdot? That's as high as you aim? C'mon man, I'm sure you can find something better to do with your millions than professionally annoy people.
How do you know what he does all day? I missed the part of the movie where the filmmaker described the guy's routine every day. Maybe he has the phone off while he's working. Maybe he helps his friends. Maybe he meets women and tries to get them to give him money.
Where is his income from?
He stayed in at least one homeless shelter and doesn't have enough money for a bus. He probably doesn't have a huge amount of income, or maybe he just sends what he does make to family somewhere else.
Then the phone is sold off every two weeks
Where are you getting this "every two weeks" from? Did you miss the part of the movie where the filmmaker thinks he has a certain picture of the guy and then shows up and actually sees him and realizes that the guy isn't what he had in mind? But here you are, thinking you know all about the guy. Do you detect the irony at all?
That's just it, there's so much smog generating so much lift that the planes physically can't land. Even if they stop the engines it just sits there hovering.
This is just the one of a long sequence of clearly illegal actions.
That's a fairly one-sided view. The tribunal did decide that their territorial claims in the Spratleys and other islands were invalid, but what's the rest of the long chain of clearly illegal actions?
I for one could be convinced to side with the Chinese navy on this one. a drone, unannounced, shows up in my countries waters without a known broadcast beacon and seemingly oblivious to attempts to make contact with it. I dont know if ifs monitoring salinity, or floating its way to a shipping yard with a half-ton of explosives. it is my prerogative to seize the drone and report to my superiors the incident.
Are you stoned? Not that there's anything wrong with that, but are you?
Try this one: 100 miles northwest of Subic Bay in the Philippines, a Chinese naval ship is shadowing an American ship crewed by civilians. The Chinese see a drone come to the surface and see the American ship heading to pick it up. The Chinese drop a small boat into the water and use it to outrun the American ship to the drone, which they pick up and bring back to their ship despite the repeated calls over the radio from the American ship that what they're doing is illegal. The Chinese acknowledge receiving the transmissions but don't respond.
In your scenario, where some random drone shows up off your coast, yeah I wouldn't have a problem with them taking it. But, in the real world in which we actually live, when we're cruising 100 miles off the coast of the Philippines and they jump in the water to race us to our drone and take it before we get there, that's pretty much theft. In fact I believe that it is literally piracy.
All we have to do is tell Russia that China stole our remote-controlled boat. Putin will be like "well obviously you need to start a trade war and re-position your global manufacturing industries". Putin understands that remote-controlled boats are serious business.
Absolutely agree. China stole our remote-controlled boat. The least we should do is cut off trade between the two largest economies in the world. Remote-controlled boats are serious business.
I agree. Everyone knows that there is no such thing as free content on the internet. Wikimedia needs to stop with this charade, add advertisements, and block people using ad-blockers like any other respectable site. That is the only way that so-called "free" websites can exist on the internet.
The unedited version of that is a bizarre exchange in itself. It's almost like Obama and that lady understand that they're talking about a particular thing (citizens who have family members here illegally, maybe?) but don't really clarify what that is. Also, I would have liked for him to stop her when she says "and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country" and point out that that's not what citizen means. Citizen is a legal distinction, not a state of being. Canada contributes to this country. Canada is not an American citizen and can't vote.
They showed a quick screenshot of the site where the other lady found the story though, which is here. It specifies what they edited out, which does seem a little deceptive but, again, it was like they were talking about one thing when people watching (including me) were hearing something else. I agree with Cavuto, when talking about illegal immigrants and voting it should be made obvious that they can't vote. Maybe they covered that earlier in the interview, I don't know. I'm not sure how someone here illegally would even vote though, when I go in I show my ID and they look at their list to make sure I'm at the right place. You can't just walk in and cast a ballot. I guess if someone is bound and determined to vote or appear to be a citizen then they can get fake identification, social security, etc, and that kind of thing is fairly difficult to stop if someone is really determined. I don't think that people can casually just go and vote if they decide they want to though.
Interested in your thoughts on this.
We do need to strengthen the entire process. I find it hard to believe that the government wouldn't know who its citizens are, at some level in some department. Even if that's just the social security administration, or State, or somewhere. One of the agencies has to be able to tell, and it seems like another symptom of the problem of disparate governments or agencies not sharing data with each other. I'm trying to get a green card for my wife, and the applications (e.g. I-130, I-864, etc) do ask to make sure I'm a citizen and list the various ways to prove that (birth certificate, etc). I think that these symptoms are sort of a casualty of the state/federal divide, the case for stronger states rights sometimes has side effects of putting up walls between the state and federal governments so that a state, for example, can't determine if someone is a citizen by looking them up. I think that should change, I think that even a police officer who pulls someone over should be able to look them up in a federal database and get basic personal information like their name, date of birth, and status in the US. They should be able to tell that I'm a citizen and my wife is here on an H1-B without us needing to prove it. Likewise, they should be able to tell when someone isn't on that list, and that should be used in the voting process.
We've tried to do similar things to liberals. It just has never worked, it never takes off. You'll get debunked within the first two comments and then the whole thing just kind of fizzles out.... Everything about [a story about an FBI agent investigating Clinton's emails involved in a murder-suicide] was fictional. The town, the people, the sheriff, the FBI guy. Then, we had our social media guys kind of go out and do a little dropping it throughout Trump groups and Trump forums and boy it spread like wildfire.
The story he was referring to was posted on a site called denverguardian.com which had the local weather for Denver on the front page, but the fake article was literally the only article on the entire site. The 1.6 million visitors didn't even bother to click around the site to see who they are getting their information from, but they will believe it and then go out and share it. That's what you did when you linked to a story on The Washington Times that was making vague suggestions that California is or will be registering illegal immigrants to vote (even though they chose their language carefully to avoid making that specific claim, when you read it and post references to it you fill in the blanks for them and just say it's happening). And, like he said, it's not a new phenomenon. Glenn Beck was fully aware that conservatives would eat up stories and pay him if he cried on air or got out his chalk board to try and draw lines between things that have no connection. He didn't earn tens of millions of dollars because no one believed him. They just never did their own research, which is something I see more and more of from people who call themselves conservatives.
If you really want to continue such a discussion, I'd like to hear you acknowledge that non-citizens clearly do vote in elections.
Well, then allow me to copy and paste:
I have no doubt that the voter rolls of every single state have people on them who shouldn't be there
I guess I'll continue that quote since it's on topic:
but to suggest that California has somehow institutionalized this is ridiculous. And then trying to claim that no one is investigating because it doesn't matter because California always goes Democrat is also ridiculous.
If YOU want to continue the discussion, I'd like you to admit that, according to every study that has ever been done on the subject, voter fraud is a statistically insignificant issue. Once you admit that, then there's really not much else to talk about. Yeah, it would be fantastic if voter rolls in every state were 100% correct and accurate, but the fact is that voter fraud is not an issue with any sort of measurable impact on the outcome of federal elections, and if any state started registering illegal immigrants to vote en masse you would see an investigation in no time. People would be tripping over each other for the chance to lead the investigation and get their own name out there. The reason why there is no investigation in California is because what you suggested is happening is not. It's not happening. That is not the way things work in California or any other state.
I already know the number is greater than zero, and provided the citations.
Oh, you did? Were those the citations from Illinois and Ohio, which are not California, or are you talking about the one from California from 1997, which has nothing to do with laws passed in 2015? Which one of those citations proves your claim that illegal immigrants are being automatically registered to vote in California due to two completely separate laws that were passed in 2015? You're claiming that "this is how" the California system works now, that illegal immigrants are registered to vote, and that "nothing is stopping them" from actually voting. I have no doubt that the voter rolls of every single state have people on them who shouldn't be there, but to suggest that California has somehow institutionalized this is ridiculous. And then trying to claim that no one is investigating because it doesn't matter because California always goes Democrat is also ridiculous.
I was never a Trump supporter, but his election has provided one benefit for me: seeing the rage and sadness of people like you.
You consider that a benefit, huh? I've got some news for you, and it's not even fake: fake news, like the stuff you're spreading, is a major reason why Trump is in office. Another major reason is because he ran against the only person who could possibly lose to him, the Democrats handed the election to him. And they didn't even need any illegally-registered voters to do it. You don't have to explicitly support him, all you have to do is spread fake anti-liberal news to get your conservative buddies all riled up. It just so happens that the people who are pissed off by your fake news see Trump as their only option. So, in a way, you do support him. Trump is out there claiming that millions of illegal immigrants voted in the election, and here you are with your stories describing how California makes that happen.
It's easy to bring up this straw man to knock down, isn't it? Something that I never claimed was true.
Oh c'mon, you need to own your arguments if you're going to make them. Don't back away now, either admit you were wrong or stand up for your opinion.
Is that proof that there were "millions" of illegal votes? No, of course not. But there is no way to prove otherwise.
There's no way to prove that millions of illegal immigrants are not voting! You sure as hell said that. You're trying to step as close to the line as you possibly can, and I think that you avoid crossing it because you know that claim is full of shit.
You also said this:
That doesn't mean they are legally allowed to vote, but they are registered, and there is nothing stopping them from voting.
Only the first part of that sentence is true, the rest, which you state as verifiable fact, is bullshit.
Then you quote this genius as some sort of "proof" or "evidence" that you aren't making this up:
will effectively change the form of governance in California from a Republic whose elected officials are determined by United States citizens and will guarantee that noncitizens will participate in all California elections going forward
That's not evidence of anything, that's some frightened idiot's opinion of what "might" happen in the scary new world.
But you don't get to try to change the story to accuse other people of using straw man arguments. The story, which you are pushing around as true, is "millions of illegal immigrants are voting in California". That is the headline. That is the story you are pushing. You don't get to sit there and say "well, maybe it's less a million, who knows, we can't verify!" because that undermines your entire argument. If you can't verify then you don't even know whether the number is greater than zero! But those details don't matter to you, so you don't get to draw the line about where the number is and then accuse people of using a straw man if they cross that line. Own the story that you're pushing, or admit it's bullshit. Don't sit there and push this crap and then say "well only 6 illegal immigrants actually voted, but this is the way California is now". No, it's not.
But hey, I toss out a bunch of facts about the California political system to show how ridiculous your rebuttal is, you just shout "straw man!" and ignore everything else. I suppose I'll take that as an implicit acknowledgment that you can't counter any of the facts I'm bringing up, and I'm not going to let you change the subject either.
Your argument is obviously flawed, it is not based on reality, and if it were even remotely true then Republicans in California would be having an absolute field day with it and the balance of power in California would shift. But none of that is happening, because it's a completely bullshit story. A bullshit story which you still believe, by the way. That does not inspire rage or spittle or anything else which you like to imagine your opponents as being like (we've discussed that about you before), what it does inspire is a little bit of pity for you, and sadness that there are so many people like you who are so gullible. Trump is your president, you're going to have to own everything he does. People like you are the reason he's there. Whatever happens, it's because of people like you who believe in lies and then turn around and try to spread them yourself. It's actually rather deplorable, but it doesn't inspire rage in me. Only sadness.
Nobody cares. California only votes Democrat, so no one is going to put resources into investigating
Oh. The land of Reagan doesn't care about corrupt Democrats. Got it.
Here's a fun fact for you: California has gone for Democratic presidential candidates 18 times, and for Republican candidates 23 times. From 1952 through 1988 it went Republican for every election except the one in 1964.
They have had 38 governors. 15 of them have been Democrats, 22 Republicans. One of those Democrats was the second governor in American history to get recalled by voters, maybe you remember that, and he was replaced with a Republican (perhaps you've heard of him). Here's how libby California voted in that election. Republican candidates got over 62% of the vote on about 61% voter turnout.
But, yeah, Republicans totally don't care about those 55 electoral votes, or taking control back from the Democrats, right? They know about a major federal voting fraud offense apparently perpetrated by Democrats or liberals or whatever, but they don't care enough to act on it. Makes total sense. They know that Americans in general don't care at all about voter fraud, in fact it wasn't even mentioned during this entire election cycle. Riiiiiight.
But, hey, "millions of illegal immigrants voting in California" hits several buttons. It hits your "illegal immigrants are scary" button, the "liberals are evil" button, all kinds of good stuff there. That's why you believe it, even though it is completely false and there is not a single shred of evidence that it exists.
As usual for Snopes, they are not answering the question, they have created a straw man instead.
Hey Kettle, you're so damn black!
Yo dawg, I heard you like logical fallacies. Check this one out: California has one law which allows eligible voters to automatically be registered to vote when they get a driver license, and there's another law that allows undocumented immigrants to receive a special kind of driver license. Therefore, millions of undocumented immigrants are now registered to vote! Totally ignore the fact that they are not eligible voters and just believe the stupid conclusion!
That's entirely the responsibility of the counties. Like Los Angeles County. Which apparently requires proof of citizenship for a marriage license, but only an "affirmation" for voter registration. [ca.gov]
I appreciate the fact that you're finally linking to official sources, but don't think that I don't know what you're doing. You put "affirmation" in quotes, but that word doesn't even appear on the page that you linked to (nor is the word "affirm"). But what it DOES describe is the process of submitting an application for voter registration. So, what exactly do you think happens with those applications? It describes a review process, do you think someone just looks at the application and sees the checkbox marked "yes i am eligible lol" and says "well, that's all I need, approved!" Is that how you think it works? It is, isn't it? That fits your view about what people in California are like, doesn't it?
Let me ask again - can you find a single instance of an illegal immigrant actually voting in California? And, no, don't try to spin that around and act like it's my responsibility. You're the one making the ridiculous claims, the burden of proof sits squarely with you.
Lastly, where is the investigation in California? You have all of those people from groups like "Californians for Fair Voting" (or some name which implies that other people are in opposition to something basic like fair voting) quoted by fantastic reputable news outlets like The Washington Times, so where is their push for an investigation? What about all of the Republicans and conservatives in California, are they all just high as shit from Trump getting elected and haven't bothered to turn their attention to this obvious major problem yet?
You still think it's true though, don't you? I know, you do, you don't have to answer that.
You can abandon your argument if you want to, but it doesn't change the fact that you're spreading false information with no basis in reality. Do not be part of the problem. Demand proof of claims that seem ridiculous, not year-old stories on sites trying to bait you in to loading them. People used to make fun of people who believed the tabloid stories about Bat Boy and aliens, this is the exact same thing but reaches a much larger audience and for some reason people will believe it if it's posted online. That does not make it true. There are not children being sold for sex out of some pizza restaurant in D.C., and California is not registering millions of illegal immigrants and letting them vote. These are ridiculous claims on the face, and it's trivial to look into them and figure out that there is no basis to the claims. Some fear-mongering article about what "might" happen and trying to connect dots that are far apart does not make it any more believable, regardless of how much it matches your own world views about what you think other people that you disagree with politically are like.
Here's a pretty obvious question you should ask people who make that claim about California: if Republicans in California want to re-take control of things like the governorship, legislature, etc, and they have reason to believe that federal laws are being violated on a massive scale, then where is the investigation? Are the Republicans in California just asleep? Does it pass the smell test? It looks like shit, and it smells like shit, what do you think it is? Do you really want to go around trying to spread it everywhere you can?
Don't be one of those people.
Or, if you still think that millions of illegal immigrants in California are casting votes in federal elections, then grab your assault rifle and head out to "self-investigate". Whatever makes the most sense to you, I guess.
Slashdot Mirror
_If_ it's OK for the USA to crack down on 'fake news', it's OK for China.
Well, yeah, I guess that would be true. Although I missed the stories about the US government outlawing fake news or otherwise restricting its publication.
China literally requires government employees to be present in your physical location so they can monitor everything you do and say.
That just shows how backwards China is. Here in the US the government virtualized and automated that task long ago.
I've never avoided the question, you just ignore my answer. You're avoiding me, though:
So, to test my theory: do you know what my answer is and always has been? You're either ignorant or stupid
The answer is apparently both. I wasn't expecting that, I thought you were just ignorant.
I am, and will remain, anonymous because I have always meant this account to be anonymous. I have said things under the cover of anonymity which I did not intend to be traced to me personally, in fact that's probably the biggest benefit of anonymity. I'm not going to throw away that protection just for your little pissing contest. I don't have any other accounts here, this is the account where I have posted 100% of my posts. Many of those included information that I do not want to be traced to me, so therefore you're going to have to keep pissing and acting like you're winning some contest. I CAN prove anything I want to you, but I WON'T prove anything. My anonymity is more valuable to me than any stupid contest with you. And it always will be. But, why stop now APK? Go ahead and continue to prove that you are both ignorant as well as stupid and try to get me to prove who I am again, like I ever will. If I would have engaged with you using a different account than my own, then I would have no problem telling you who I am. I don't want various things that I've said to be identified with me though, so that's not going to happen.
your name on it + SOLELY YOUR WORK too!
Oh, really? You mean you don't want me to list an "achievement" where I suggested a few Win32 API calls to someone else's project, but they ended up rejecting my suggestions? Or if I make some efficiency improvements to someone else's project, which then almost wins an award but doesn't, I shouldn't list that either? Because it's not solely my own work, right?
As for all of your other shit, it's ridiculous that you don't think I earn what I earn. Literally ridiculous, as in worthy of ridicule. You are worthy of ridicule. If I showed you what my house or car looked like, you would probably also not believe they're mine. Face it man, I have an education in computer science and I've used it to bring in a steady 6-figure income with full benefits by my mid 30s. I've been contributing to a 401k since my early 20s, you want to guess where that is now? I wrote the software which literally runs the company that I work for (and that was as an intern for them 14 years ago, but it's still running the company today). After the original programmer left I redesigned and rewrote the core customer-facing application from scratch, by myself, and worked on it by myself for at least 3 or 4 years before I got another programmer to help me (this is a completely separate application from the one running the company; this is the one we sell). At this point, as the CTO, that situation is better but my stamp is still on that application and I still work on it, I just have a team to help me now. And there you are approaching your mid 50s, not believing that anything that I have actually done is possible, crowing about all of these stupid little achievements like suggesting Win32 API calls and earning $100 for a forum post like you're some big shot. It's ridiculous. Worthy of ridicule. You are ridiculous. Stop being ridiculous. It's gotten very old and tiresome. I'm sorry if you're not happy with your life, but that isn't going to change by claiming that all of these little stupid things are somehow major meaningful accomplishments. Focus on doing things that will actually make you happy instead of trying to pull up some bullshit list of stupid crap and act like it's made of gold. Make yourself happy, man. I have, that's why I decided to get a degree in computer science and then program for a living, I knew that would make me happy because of how much I enjoyed it and how much it was worth. You apparently once played lacrosse, which is great and all, but don't sit there and act like I can't have possibly done all of the things that I have in fact done. My anonymity on this site is worth too much for the ridiculous likes of you and your insatiable egotistical greed for self-congratulation.
how come you can't BIG talker?
I'd like to test a theory, I hope you'll indulge me.
Every time I've answered that question, I've answered it exactly the same way.
So, to test my theory: do you know what my answer is and always has been? You're either ignorant or stupid, and I'm betting on one of those. So, what has always been my answer to that question, APK?
many 1,000's use it & even dozens of /.'ers like & use it
Wow. That's impressive. No, seriously, "many 1,000's". It's so impressive that you don't even bother to spell out "thousands". That's serious business. How do you know that's the case, though? Do you track your users, does your software phone home? How do you know that "many 1,000's" use it, exactly? Are you tracking your users? Or are you not tracking them, and you're just pulling that number straight out of your ass? Which one is it? You're tracking your users, aren't you?
In the meantime, "many 1,000,000's" use my software to actually help them do their jobs instead of manage a single text file on their computer. But, hey man, I don't want you to feel insecure or anything, so good job on getting that $100 8 years ago.
since you're ALLEGEDLY still working you CAN'T be doing all that well being a wageslave (I'm not & haven't had to be one in a decade++).
I'll tell you what, APK. Since I'm 37 and have been making a 6 figure salary for years, let's check back in 15 years when I'll be as old as you are now, and let's compare bank accounts and personal achievements. Stay tuned for whether or not I decide to pull out an 8 year old $100 award and wave that around like it's a big deal.
As to your 'skills'? LOL - your crusade to stop me posting didn't even work out too well, now did it?
Are you trying to equate programming ability with stopping your spam? I never tried to get you to stop posting. Only to get you to stop spamming. I note that now you link to search engine results pages for a search of your software. You've changed your behavior and it's been considerably less annoying over the past several months. I'll call that a win.
My guess, that IF you're a 'coder', you're just another 'webdouche'
Who cares about your guesses? You guess everything under the sun, and the vast majority of things are wrong. You've proven that over and over. Your word is not worth any more than your text file management utility. You work so hard to try and call me a blowhard, why do you think that is, Prof. Freud? You're the one trying so hard to prove various assertions, make yourself seem superior, and make baseless guesses without the first shred of evidence. You do that because of how insecure you are about yourself. It's sad. It's pathetic. So are you. Have a great rest of the year.
Why so angry, APK? Are you still butthurt from last August when I tore apart all of your worthless "achievements"?
coming in days later thinking I wouldn't catch your LYING bitch ass?
You self-important twat, I was out of town for the holidays and believe it or not, I don't spent my off time thinking about you.
But look at you, you sure found my message and showed up to shit all over the site again, didn't you? You're still stalking everyone like some weird pervy creeper old guy hanging around a high school trying to talk to the girls. Sorry you've got nothing better to do than try to wave around your micro-peen and assert your imagined dominance, but you don't need to be angry at me about it. That's a "you" issue, not a "me" issue. It's not my problem that I state matter-of-fact things which happen every day and you think they're so unbelievable. Nothing I'm saying is even remotely unbelievable, and it's sad that you think it is. You're a sad, angry guy APK.
You seriously think that $100/hr isn't realistic for custom development? That's sad, APK. If you call up my company and ask for custom development quotes or mods for our application, you're going to get quoted at over $100/hr. There's some overhead for testing and project management, but that's my time you're paying for. The fact that you seem to think that's unrealistic is a sad statement about you. Even when I was working for myself I would quote projects at $100/hr. It's really not that big of a deal, but I guess that's why you're reaching back to $100 forum payments in 2008 to scrape the barrel for your own achievements.
And, what's with you and the phrase "in computing"? Why do you always say that? Are you trying to suggest that if I'm writing software to actually help people do their job, instead of little cheesy text-file management utilities that a first-year CS student would be happy with in order to help people use a computer, then somehow my contribution is less than yours? Otherwise, why do you always qualify your lame statements of perceived superiority with "in computing"? I help people do their jobs, man. I'm not here to help you manage a text file or defrag a hard drive like it's 1998, I'm actually helping people make their own money. Weird that I get paid a lot to do that, isn't it?
I don't do a lot of chatting online, sorry. But I'm sure that others would enjoy your stories too.
So answer the question in my subject AmicusNYCL
Why? I've answered that question every single time you've asked it, so why would it make a difference if I answered it yet again? You're still going to ignore it.
& you're still either unemployed OR a wageslave making peanuts
Yeah, you know so much about me, don't you? Keep making claims that you can't back up, because it really makes it seem like you know what you're talking about. I earn a 6 figure salary with benefits, I don't need to talk about being paid $100 for a forum post like it's some major achievement in my life. $100 won't even buy an hour of work from me.
I've also got commercially sold code to my credit
Oh wooooooow. What an achievement, APK. My software is going into nearly 100 departments in a state (every department), but man you've got "commercially sold code"? That's so much better than having every single employee of the state using my software. That's the latest news, stay tuned over the next several months to hear about other major contracts if you'd like to. They happen often, I don't have to go back to 2008 in order to find something to be proud of.
Clue: I don't have to work for ANYONE anymore
And you've decided to take all of this financial freedom and free time, and use it to spam Slashdot? That's as high as you aim? C'mon man, I'm sure you can find something better to do with your millions than professionally annoy people.
He might just be submitting his latest $100 forum post. That $100 he got 8 years ago has stretched far enough, daddy needs a new sock.
Cerebus: the dyslexic guardian of the underworld.
meanwhile he does nothing all day.
How do you know what he does all day? I missed the part of the movie where the filmmaker described the guy's routine every day. Maybe he has the phone off while he's working. Maybe he helps his friends. Maybe he meets women and tries to get them to give him money.
Where is his income from?
He stayed in at least one homeless shelter and doesn't have enough money for a bus. He probably doesn't have a huge amount of income, or maybe he just sends what he does make to family somewhere else.
Then the phone is sold off every two weeks
Where are you getting this "every two weeks" from? Did you miss the part of the movie where the filmmaker thinks he has a certain picture of the guy and then shows up and actually sees him and realizes that the guy isn't what he had in mind? But here you are, thinking you know all about the guy. Do you detect the irony at all?
That's just it, there's so much smog generating so much lift that the planes physically can't land. Even if they stop the engines it just sits there hovering.
This is just the one of a long sequence of clearly illegal actions.
That's a fairly one-sided view. The tribunal did decide that their territorial claims in the Spratleys and other islands were invalid, but what's the rest of the long chain of clearly illegal actions?
I for one could be convinced to side with the Chinese navy on this one. a drone, unannounced, shows up in my countries waters without a known broadcast beacon and seemingly oblivious to attempts to make contact with it. I dont know if ifs monitoring salinity, or floating its way to a shipping yard with a half-ton of explosives. it is my prerogative to seize the drone and report to my superiors the incident.
Are you stoned? Not that there's anything wrong with that, but are you?
Try this one: 100 miles northwest of Subic Bay in the Philippines, a Chinese naval ship is shadowing an American ship crewed by civilians. The Chinese see a drone come to the surface and see the American ship heading to pick it up. The Chinese drop a small boat into the water and use it to outrun the American ship to the drone, which they pick up and bring back to their ship despite the repeated calls over the radio from the American ship that what they're doing is illegal. The Chinese acknowledge receiving the transmissions but don't respond.
In your scenario, where some random drone shows up off your coast, yeah I wouldn't have a problem with them taking it. But, in the real world in which we actually live, when we're cruising 100 miles off the coast of the Philippines and they jump in the water to race us to our drone and take it before we get there, that's pretty much theft. In fact I believe that it is literally piracy.
All we have to do is tell Russia that China stole our remote-controlled boat. Putin will be like "well obviously you need to start a trade war and re-position your global manufacturing industries". Putin understands that remote-controlled boats are serious business.
Absolutely agree. China stole our remote-controlled boat. The least we should do is cut off trade between the two largest economies in the world. Remote-controlled boats are serious business.
I agree. Everyone knows that there is no such thing as free content on the internet. Wikimedia needs to stop with this charade, add advertisements, and block people using ad-blockers like any other respectable site. That is the only way that so-called "free" websites can exist on the internet.
First up, this was on CNN
The unedited version of that is a bizarre exchange in itself. It's almost like Obama and that lady understand that they're talking about a particular thing (citizens who have family members here illegally, maybe?) but don't really clarify what that is. Also, I would have liked for him to stop her when she says "and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country" and point out that that's not what citizen means. Citizen is a legal distinction, not a state of being. Canada contributes to this country. Canada is not an American citizen and can't vote.
They showed a quick screenshot of the site where the other lady found the story though, which is here. It specifies what they edited out, which does seem a little deceptive but, again, it was like they were talking about one thing when people watching (including me) were hearing something else. I agree with Cavuto, when talking about illegal immigrants and voting it should be made obvious that they can't vote. Maybe they covered that earlier in the interview, I don't know. I'm not sure how someone here illegally would even vote though, when I go in I show my ID and they look at their list to make sure I'm at the right place. You can't just walk in and cast a ballot. I guess if someone is bound and determined to vote or appear to be a citizen then they can get fake identification, social security, etc, and that kind of thing is fairly difficult to stop if someone is really determined. I don't think that people can casually just go and vote if they decide they want to though.
Interested in your thoughts on this.
We do need to strengthen the entire process. I find it hard to believe that the government wouldn't know who its citizens are, at some level in some department. Even if that's just the social security administration, or State, or somewhere. One of the agencies has to be able to tell, and it seems like another symptom of the problem of disparate governments or agencies not sharing data with each other. I'm trying to get a green card for my wife, and the applications (e.g. I-130, I-864, etc) do ask to make sure I'm a citizen and list the various ways to prove that (birth certificate, etc). I think that these symptoms are sort of a casualty of the state/federal divide, the case for stronger states rights sometimes has side effects of putting up walls between the state and federal governments so that a state, for example, can't determine if someone is a citizen by looking them up. I think that should change, I think that even a police officer who pulls someone over should be able to look them up in a federal database and get basic personal information like their name, date of birth, and status in the US. They should be able to tell that I'm a citizen and my wife is here on an H1-B without us needing to prove it. Likewise, they should be able to tell when someone isn't on that list, and that should be used in the voting process.
First claiming any source to the right of The Washington Times is "fake"
No, I didn't claim that. I called out several publications who do things like write stories as if they're true, when the only source they have is a tweet. I expect more from people who refer to themselves as journalists. It just so happens that the sites with the most influence have a conservative audience, but it's not restricted to the far right. That's just where the most money is, because the authors who specifically set out to write fake news have found that liberal audiences don't click on links to fake stories or share them nearly as often as conservatives do:
We've tried to do similar things to liberals. It just has never worked, it never takes off. You'll get debunked within the first two comments and then the whole thing just kind of fizzles out. ...
Everything about [a story about an FBI agent investigating Clinton's emails involved in a murder-suicide] was fictional. The town, the people, the sheriff, the FBI guy. Then, we had our social media guys kind of go out and do a little dropping it throughout Trump groups and Trump forums and boy it spread like wildfire.
The story he was referring to was posted on a site called denverguardian.com which had the local weather for Denver on the front page, but the fake article was literally the only article on the entire site. The 1.6 million visitors didn't even bother to click around the site to see who they are getting their information from, but they will believe it and then go out and share it. That's what you did when you linked to a story on The Washington Times that was making vague suggestions that California is or will be registering illegal immigrants to vote (even though they chose their language carefully to avoid making that specific claim, when you read it and post references to it you fill in the blanks for them and just say it's happening). And, like he said, it's not a new phenomenon. Glenn Beck was fully aware that conservatives would eat up stories and pay him if he cried on air or got out his chalk board to try and draw lines between things that have no connection. He didn't earn tens of millions of dollars because no one believed him. They just never did their own research, which is something I see more and more of from people who call themselves conservatives.
If you really want to continue such a discussion, I'd like to hear you acknowledge that non-citizens clearly do vote in elections.
Well, then allow me to copy and paste:
I have no doubt that the voter rolls of every single state have people on them who shouldn't be there
I guess I'll continue that quote since it's on topic:
but to suggest that California has somehow institutionalized this is ridiculous. And then trying to claim that no one is investigating because it doesn't matter because California always goes Democrat is also ridiculous.
If YOU want to continue the discussion, I'd like you to admit that, according to every study that has ever been done on the subject, voter fraud is a statistically insignificant issue. Once you admit that, then there's really not much else to talk about. Yeah, it would be fantastic if voter rolls in every state were 100% correct and accurate, but the fact is that voter fraud is not an issue with any sort of measurable impact on the outcome of federal elections, and if any state started registering illegal immigrants to vote en masse you would see an investigation in no time. People would be tripping over each other for the chance to lead the investigation and get their own name out there. The reason why there is no investigation in California is because what you suggested is happening is not. It's not happening. That is not the way things work in California or any other state.
I already know the number is greater than zero, and provided the citations.
Oh, you did? Were those the citations from Illinois and Ohio, which are not California, or are you talking about the one from California from 1997, which has nothing to do with laws passed in 2015? Which one of those citations proves your claim that illegal immigrants are being automatically registered to vote in California due to two completely separate laws that were passed in 2015? You're claiming that "this is how" the California system works now, that illegal immigrants are registered to vote, and that "nothing is stopping them" from actually voting. I have no doubt that the voter rolls of every single state have people on them who shouldn't be there, but to suggest that California has somehow institutionalized this is ridiculous. And then trying to claim that no one is investigating because it doesn't matter because California always goes Democrat is also ridiculous.
I was never a Trump supporter, but his election has provided one benefit for me: seeing the rage and sadness of people like you.
You consider that a benefit, huh? I've got some news for you, and it's not even fake: fake news, like the stuff you're spreading, is a major reason why Trump is in office. Another major reason is because he ran against the only person who could possibly lose to him, the Democrats handed the election to him. And they didn't even need any illegally-registered voters to do it. You don't have to explicitly support him, all you have to do is spread fake anti-liberal news to get your conservative buddies all riled up. It just so happens that the people who are pissed off by your fake news see Trump as their only option. So, in a way, you do support him. Trump is out there claiming that millions of illegal immigrants voted in the election, and here you are with your stories describing how California makes that happen.
It's easy to bring up this straw man to knock down, isn't it? Something that I never claimed was true.
Oh c'mon, you need to own your arguments if you're going to make them. Don't back away now, either admit you were wrong or stand up for your opinion.
Is that proof that there were "millions" of illegal votes? No, of course not. But there is no way to prove otherwise.
There's no way to prove that millions of illegal immigrants are not voting! You sure as hell said that. You're trying to step as close to the line as you possibly can, and I think that you avoid crossing it because you know that claim is full of shit.
You also said this:
That doesn't mean they are legally allowed to vote, but they are registered, and there is nothing stopping them from voting.
Only the first part of that sentence is true, the rest, which you state as verifiable fact, is bullshit.
Then you quote this genius as some sort of "proof" or "evidence" that you aren't making this up:
will effectively change the form of governance in California from a Republic whose elected officials are determined by United States citizens and will guarantee that noncitizens will participate in all California elections going forward
That's not evidence of anything, that's some frightened idiot's opinion of what "might" happen in the scary new world.
But you don't get to try to change the story to accuse other people of using straw man arguments. The story, which you are pushing around as true, is "millions of illegal immigrants are voting in California". That is the headline. That is the story you are pushing. You don't get to sit there and say "well, maybe it's less a million, who knows, we can't verify!" because that undermines your entire argument. If you can't verify then you don't even know whether the number is greater than zero! But those details don't matter to you, so you don't get to draw the line about where the number is and then accuse people of using a straw man if they cross that line. Own the story that you're pushing, or admit it's bullshit. Don't sit there and push this crap and then say "well only 6 illegal immigrants actually voted, but this is the way California is now". No, it's not.
But hey, I toss out a bunch of facts about the California political system to show how ridiculous your rebuttal is, you just shout "straw man!" and ignore everything else. I suppose I'll take that as an implicit acknowledgment that you can't counter any of the facts I'm bringing up, and I'm not going to let you change the subject either.
Your argument is obviously flawed, it is not based on reality, and if it were even remotely true then Republicans in California would be having an absolute field day with it and the balance of power in California would shift. But none of that is happening, because it's a completely bullshit story. A bullshit story which you still believe, by the way. That does not inspire rage or spittle or anything else which you like to imagine your opponents as being like (we've discussed that about you before), what it does inspire is a little bit of pity for you, and sadness that there are so many people like you who are so gullible. Trump is your president, you're going to have to own everything he does. People like you are the reason he's there. Whatever happens, it's because of people like you who believe in lies and then turn around and try to spread them yourself. It's actually rather deplorable, but it doesn't inspire rage in me. Only sadness.
Nobody cares. California only votes Democrat, so no one is going to put resources into investigating
Oh. The land of Reagan doesn't care about corrupt Democrats. Got it.
Here's a fun fact for you: California has gone for Democratic presidential candidates 18 times, and for Republican candidates 23 times. From 1952 through 1988 it went Republican for every election except the one in 1964.
They have had 38 governors. 15 of them have been Democrats, 22 Republicans. One of those Democrats was the second governor in American history to get recalled by voters, maybe you remember that, and he was replaced with a Republican (perhaps you've heard of him). Here's how libby California voted in that election. Republican candidates got over 62% of the vote on about 61% voter turnout.
But, yeah, Republicans totally don't care about those 55 electoral votes, or taking control back from the Democrats, right? They know about a major federal voting fraud offense apparently perpetrated by Democrats or liberals or whatever, but they don't care enough to act on it. Makes total sense. They know that Americans in general don't care at all about voter fraud, in fact it wasn't even mentioned during this entire election cycle. Riiiiiight.
Do you even believe yourself?
But, remember, you don't have to be an illegal immigrant to commit voter fraud (look at that, references from this year). It's just easier to blame "scary" groups like immigrants when you're trying to convince 73% of Republicans that the election is going to be stolen from them, even though every actual investigation has shown the actual rates to be statistically negligible.
But, hey, "millions of illegal immigrants voting in California" hits several buttons. It hits your "illegal immigrants are scary" button, the "liberals are evil" button, all kinds of good stuff there. That's why you believe it, even though it is completely false and there is not a single shred of evidence that it exists.
As usual for Snopes, they are not answering the question, they have created a straw man instead.
Hey Kettle, you're so damn black!
Yo dawg, I heard you like logical fallacies. Check this one out: California has one law which allows eligible voters to automatically be registered to vote when they get a driver license, and there's another law that allows undocumented immigrants to receive a special kind of driver license. Therefore, millions of undocumented immigrants are now registered to vote! Totally ignore the fact that they are not eligible voters and just believe the stupid conclusion!
That's entirely the responsibility of the counties. Like Los Angeles County. Which apparently requires proof of citizenship for a marriage license, but only an "affirmation" for voter registration. [ca.gov]
I appreciate the fact that you're finally linking to official sources, but don't think that I don't know what you're doing. You put "affirmation" in quotes, but that word doesn't even appear on the page that you linked to (nor is the word "affirm"). But what it DOES describe is the process of submitting an application for voter registration. So, what exactly do you think happens with those applications? It describes a review process, do you think someone just looks at the application and sees the checkbox marked "yes i am eligible lol" and says "well, that's all I need, approved!" Is that how you think it works? It is, isn't it? That fits your view about what people in California are like, doesn't it?
Let me ask again - can you find a single instance of an illegal immigrant actually voting in California? And, no, don't try to spin that around and act like it's my responsibility. You're the one making the ridiculous claims, the burden of proof sits squarely with you.
Lastly, where is the investigation in California? You have all of those people from groups like "Californians for Fair Voting" (or some name which implies that other people are in opposition to something basic like fair voting) quoted by fantastic reputable news outlets like The Washington Times, so where is their push for an investigation? What about all of the Republicans and conservatives in California, are they all just high as shit from Trump getting elected and haven't bothered to turn their attention to this obvious major problem yet?
You still think it's true though, don't you? I know, you do, you don't have to answer that.
Have you seen any posts from our mutual friend lately? I haven't seen much from him since the last time I tore into him a few months ago.
You can abandon your argument if you want to, but it doesn't change the fact that you're spreading false information with no basis in reality. Do not be part of the problem. Demand proof of claims that seem ridiculous, not year-old stories on sites trying to bait you in to loading them. People used to make fun of people who believed the tabloid stories about Bat Boy and aliens, this is the exact same thing but reaches a much larger audience and for some reason people will believe it if it's posted online. That does not make it true. There are not children being sold for sex out of some pizza restaurant in D.C., and California is not registering millions of illegal immigrants and letting them vote. These are ridiculous claims on the face, and it's trivial to look into them and figure out that there is no basis to the claims. Some fear-mongering article about what "might" happen and trying to connect dots that are far apart does not make it any more believable, regardless of how much it matches your own world views about what you think other people that you disagree with politically are like.
Here's a pretty obvious question you should ask people who make that claim about California: if Republicans in California want to re-take control of things like the governorship, legislature, etc, and they have reason to believe that federal laws are being violated on a massive scale, then where is the investigation? Are the Republicans in California just asleep? Does it pass the smell test? It looks like shit, and it smells like shit, what do you think it is? Do you really want to go around trying to spread it everywhere you can?
Don't be one of those people.
Or, if you still think that millions of illegal immigrants in California are casting votes in federal elections, then grab your assault rifle and head out to "self-investigate". Whatever makes the most sense to you, I guess.