Slashdot Mirror


User: fustakrakich

fustakrakich's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
13,737
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 13,737

  1. Re:if you opted-out.. on How Whisper Tracks Users Who Don't Share Their Location · · Score: 4, Insightful

    principles? Wrong planet, buddy. This is business...

  2. Re:Android on Google Releases Android 5.0 Lollipop SDK and Nexus Preview Images · · Score: 1

    Sounds perfectly cromulent to me...

  3. Re:Fission is Dead on Fusion and Fission/LFTR: Let's Do Both, Smartly · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not about nuclear itself. We just can't trust the people running the industry, and that includes government oversight. They will cut corners and claim cost overruns every chance they get. It turns out that big business is just as funky as a traveling carnival show... They're all a bunch of hucksters. This is what makes nuclear look bad. Well, that, and a couple of well publicized accidents, caused by what? Corner cutting and corruption. Nuclear can be very safe and secure.

  4. Re:freedoms f----d on Trans-Pacific Partnership May Endanger World Health, Newly Leaked Chapter Shows · · Score: 1

    No one has ever tried to find out. But yes, anyone who has read the back cover of a psychology textbook can understand why the numbers are perfectly plausible.

  5. One small problem on Fusion and Fission/LFTR: Let's Do Both, Smartly · · Score: 1

    History has shown (most recently with the baby boomers) that humans don't handle abundance so well. I mean, by all means, go for it, just don't be all slovenly about it.

  6. Re:I am SHOCKED! on How English Beat German As the Language of Science · · Score: 1

    Clearly that is not the case in Germany...

    You don't know that. Propaganda is still as effective as it has always been. It's even working on you this very moment. Let's see what would happen if Germans voted in somebody the Americans don't like. It would be like Chile in 1973. So please, save it. Occupation can wear a velvet glove also.

  7. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 1

    And dig... You even come with your own moderator... That's cool...

  8. Re:(Re:The Children!) Why? I'm not a pedophile! on FBI Director Continues His Campaign Against Encryption · · Score: 1

    No, I am not allowing the Nuremberg defense. You just have to vote more carefully to make sure people like him are never appointed to the position. The people you put in charge like his work. I' sorry. That's just the way it is.

  9. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 1

    The law says what it says quite explicitly. I cannot account for bad reading comprehension by a corrupt judge.

  10. Re:fix bayonets on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 1

    At one hundred yards, volley fire, present...

    The guy who pulls the trigger is the one to blame....

    And what about Radio Rwanda?

    People followed, don't blame the leader for his success.

  11. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 1

    Yes

  12. When are you going to believe me? on The Guardian Reveals That Whisper App Tracks "Anonymous" Users · · Score: 2

    When I tell you that privacy policies are pure BS? It doesn't matter if it's Whisper, Apple, or Google. They are tracking you, probably under orders. We won't know, unless we rearrange the house!

  13. Re:freedoms f----d on Trans-Pacific Partnership May Endanger World Health, Newly Leaked Chapter Shows · · Score: 1

    I just got done saying vote both factions out. There are other alternatives. Take a chance with one of them. You can always vote them out in two years. But if you're going to keep on voting for business as usual, take your complaints to somebody who gives a damn.

  14. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 1

    Sorry sir, you need to point out a single one in the 1st amendment. Not what the courts say, what the statue says. Read it word for word, and find me the exception, anything at all, even an allowance for one.

  15. Re:freedoms f----d on Trans-Pacific Partnership May Endanger World Health, Newly Leaked Chapter Shows · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You're givin' us trickle-down there. Don't care for that crap.

    You know, the entire House of representatives is up for election, every single one of the bastards. It's a big opportunity to vote out both factions of the incumbent ruling party. Sure would be cool to see it happen.

    That's a hint y'all, you know, in case you really want to, like, do something about this TPP business.

  16. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 1

    The effect is what the person provides. Is everybody going to react the same way to the same words? No. If I can ignore "bad" words, you can too. If you can't, then the problem is yours, not the guy who says them. His problem is related, but the power of his words come from you, the believer. Your reaction is your own responsibility, not his. All this shit is more than adequately documented. All those nasty folks of the last century got their power from the people who followed them. Our world is built by us, not the charismatic we follow, and then try to blame. The same rules must apply on all levels. And don't buy your next RV from Crazy Eddie. As far as offense to the ears, the only issue is the decibel level. The content is nothing, as long as everyone remains in tune, well, preferably. It's a matter of esthetics. And as a compromise, I'll wear a mask if I offend your eyes :-)

  17. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 1

    No that wouldn't matter either. The bank is (or most definitely should be held) responsible for its security, whether the info is posted or not. You all have this whole thing so backwards, and I'm going to take the hits for it. Belief in the propaganda is so thick..

    Bleh, fuck it... waddami gonna do?

  18. Re:(Re:The Children!) Why? I'm not a pedophile! on FBI Director Continues His Campaign Against Encryption · · Score: 1

    The thing is, if they need a warrant, they will produce one. If they don't like you, you are screwed.

    Even the best trained dog gets a rolled up paper across the snout once in a while.

    What would you punish this guy for? He's doing exactly what he's told, and I'm certain he's not peeing on the carpet.

  19. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 1

    That is absolute BS. A gun and the bullets are physical objects, capable of causing real harm. Words can do no such thing, never, impossible, unless they can trigger a robot.

  20. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 1

    That's bullshit. Words do nothing. And I don't care if a story sounds *plausible* to the believer, he would still be the moron to chase down.

    It's not the pen, it's the man's conscious that decides what happens with the sword. You're only trying to pass blame, you are saying "the devil made me do it" is a valid excuse, and fuck that.

  21. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Quite simply, my beef is with the morons who would believe you. To you yourself, the only proper response would be crafty verbal one. I might need to hire a writer for such a purpose...

  22. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 1

    By the followers, even if by fear, that's the only way it can grow. Without them, nothing happens. It could hardly be more simple.

  23. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 1

    *sigh* I've already replied to this nonsense too many times. You people have the wrong guy.

  24. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: 0

    Thank you for that affirmation with the mere wave of the hand. I love it :-)

  25. Re:Why not? When you have kids.. on Court Rules Parents May Be Liable For What Their Kids Post On Facebook · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    I'm saying libel and slander laws are bullshit. Sanction the believers who act, not the preacher who speaks.