Well, it's *something*. I'm a fairly heavy user of Myth (usually around a dozen recordings a day spready across both tuners, though granted it's all SD), and I *never* see the core parts of Myth crash. In my experience, the only questionable bit is MythMusic (and, let's face it, it's kinda craptacular, so that's hardly surprising).
It'd be interesting to investigate what kinds of instability you were seeing. Perhaps it's some weird combination of hardware or something... I'm using stock Hauppauge cards, which are extremely well supported by v4l and Myth, but I chose them specifically for that reason. Or it could be the distro fscking up, rolling out buggy versions of Qt, the linux kernel, or other pieces Myth depends on.
I wonder whether this new release has an option of stripping out commercials from recordings on request. Does it?
MythTV has had the ability to mark the positions of commercials in a piece of recorded content for ages now. It has not, and AFAIK, continues not to have the ability to automatically cut those commercials straight out of the recorded content. Why? Simple: The commercial stripper is far from perfect. It does a decent job most of the time, but it just as often screws up royally. So you really *don't* want it doing something irreversible to your recordings without active user intervention, which is why the solution has always involved a script and setting up a user job that can be triggered from the FE.
'course, I'm not sure why that's a problem. If you're watching the content on a MythTV FE, you can just tell it to automatically skip commercials, and it'll use the marked positions to skip in real-time. If your goal is to play out the content on another device, you probably want to transcode it, scale it, etc, before transferring it to your device (ie, ipod, etc), at which point you can instruct Myth to cut the commercials out.
And as a consequence, it doesn't allow you to manipulate the recording schedule from your TV, resolve conflicts, view your guide data, find programs, or basically anything else that makes a DVR useful.
So as a basic FE, yes, XBMC could work. But it can't replace a proper Myth FE.
I ran MythTV for six years. The last year I've used SageTV. I got sick of MythTV locking up, crashing, and the constant non-stop twiddling with my configuration because I could never get things quite right.
SageTV isn't much better. I spend a lot less time twiddling, but it crashes and freezes about as often as MythTV used to. I'm still looking for that HTPC that just works. I haven't found it yet.
You sure these aren't hardware-related problems? I've had a dual-tuner, split FE/BE Myth system running for, oh... two years now?... with absolutely no problems. Any crashes I've had occurred early on, and have been hardware related (ie, hard disks failing), or problems with Linux itself (XFS+LVM causing hardlocks, bugs in ivtv resulting in tuners dying, etc). 'course, it helps that once I had a working configuration, I didn't touch it at all (ie, no OS updates, etc).
As for fiddling... honestly, I have no idea what you're doing with your system that requires that kind of care and attention. Again, I've been running a Myth system for two years, and it's required basically zero care and feeding once I got the system up and running and working the way I wanted (granted, that took a bit of time early on, particularly on the frontend, getting third-party software working right, tweaking the remote configuration, etc).
Uh, it hasn't been. All this study suggests is that the fetus may begin to develop the most rudimentary language skills in the womb, which isn't even remotely the same as "[learning] the knowledge of entering the deadly and virtually impenetrable Chakravyuha".
So no, this doesn't justify your pet superstition.
Why? The experiment points out that babies may only begin to be influenced by their native language during the last trimester, and the vast majority of abortions happen in the first (late-term abortions are only ever performed when the health of the mother is in jeopardy), well before the brain is developed sufficiently to be considered "alive".
Too many choices and very confusing interfaces. Good job guys!
Yeah, but it's so customizable! Sure, you might get overwhelmed by the clutter and the huge number of rarely-used settings, and yeah, maybe the result is confusing and a little bit ugly. But boy oh boy, it sure is flexible!
And I'm sure the minute they started removing some of those buttons to try to clean things up, there'd be nerds coming out of the woodwork to complain...
How did the Republican's manage to ram through nearly their entire, fairly extreme, legislative agenda for six years, if not more, with a smaller majority in the Senate than the Dems have now?
By tossing out the idea of bipartisanship. You know... that thing that the original OP complained the Dems weren't focusing on, thereby trigger off this entire discussion?
So yes, in fact I can blame the Dems for not getting anything done.
Completely agreed. And also completely beside the point.
Something I've noticed is that the Democrats have a majority in both branches of Congress. If they can't pass their agenda over the objection of the Republicans, then something is wrong on the Democrat side.
Agreed. But that wouldn't be very bipartisan, would it?
But way to miss the entire point of the conversation. Really, good job! Did you hear the woosh as the point flew over you?
Because there is always evidence for anyone's point, these days, and you can find economists that say the stimulus hurt and the stimulus helped the economy.
...
If you asked me what I actually thought - in my non-economist and "my macro-econ class boiled down to really complex terms for really simple ideas"-mindset opinion - I would tell you that I think it did nothing good and, if anything, some amount of bad. All it seemed to do to me is put the US government even further into debt. I know, we can't get rid of all debt...
Uhuh. So you have a completely uneducated opinion based on one econ class you took once, then you chose to cherrypick opinions from economists in order to reinforce your views which were, in all probability, already coloured by partisan glasses.
Like I said... that's some very level-headed, unbiased analysis, there.
As an aside, I happen to think this whole idea of bipartisanship is, at this point, completely absurd. Since the last election, the Republicans have clearly chosen to swing even further to the right (one need only see the NY-23 election to see that), latching on to the extreme right-wingers like Sarah Palin. As such, I simply don't think there *can* be any kind of bipartisan effort between the Democrats and the Republicans, simply because they're so distant ideologically. Meanwhile, the Republicans are really interested in one thing at this stage: tearing the Democrats from power. And if that means blocking any and all attempts and meaningful reform, then so be it.
In fact, I would go so far as to say they've concluded that it's in the Republicans' best interests to ensure that *nothing* the Democrats want gets passed, as if the Dems can show any success on the issues that people actually care about (healthcare, the economy, etc), it'll only solidify their hold on the political ground they've gained during the last 4 years. Much like our good friend Rush Limbaugh, I really believe the Republicans hope Obama and the Democrats fail and fail miserably, regardless of the consequences it may have for America.
But the Democrats won't listen to or accept a single change to bills from Republicans
The Republicans aren't proposing simple changes. Once again, their approach is simple: our way or the highway. That's it. Meanwhile, the Democrats have been folding on some of their core proposals in order to get things moving (a public healthcare option being the most glaring). There has been *no* attempt from the right to work toward a bipartisan solution. NONE. The Democrats can hardly be faulted for that kind of uncooperative, even childish behaviour.
Worse, in cases like healthcare, the Republicans are actively blocking measures that over *60%* of the US population supports. If that isn't pure, unadulterated political brinksmanship, I don't know what is.
Ah yes. Reid and Pelosi, Axelrod, Gibbs, and even Obama at times, definitely act like grownups. Especially when they cry about Republicans not being bipartisan and then - for the first time in the history of the rule, I believe - push a bill out of committee without the quorum of two minority group members.
Just on this topic, ignoring the bailouts and all that, the Republicans have taken on a very simple strategy in the last six months or so: Block *all* proposals coming from Democrats. Period. How the hell can you possibly expect the Democrats to fulfill their promises of bipartisanship if the Republicans do everything they possibly can to hijack the democratic process?
We just spent almost a trillion in one year as a "stimulus" that has apparently helped nothing... and if it has, very little and it's really hard to tell and it appears that a lot of it is being wasted.
So, wait, let me get this straight... it's "really hard to tell" if the stimulus has done anything. But, despite that admission, in the very same sentence, you claim it has "apparently helped nothing... and if it has, very little".
Uhuh.
Yup, definitely a clear, unbiased, level-headed analysis, there...
That has to be the most ridiculously obtuse thing I've read in a long *long* time. Science and scientists are *specifically* dedicated to the process of disproving theories. Hell, one of the key things that defines a theory as scientific is that it's falsifiable.
Christ, the ignorance displayed by some is truly astonishing...
There are lots of interesting things in life that science does not have all mapped out. Reading someone's thoughts, for example. It is impossible to intelligently debate these things in an online forum such as this. The polite thing to do is to agree to disagree.
No, the polite thing to do is concede that the scientific method has been used to check these sorts of claims, and they've inevitably been bunk. The rational thing to do is yield to facts and quite holding on to childlike superstition.
Now, keep in mind, I'm not claiming this neighbour of yours was deliberately deceitful. Quite the opposite, in fact. The ideomotor effect combined with confirmation bias is a very powerful thing, and as such, he probably believed that he had some sort of supernatural power. But don't be fooled, it was bullshit. Subconscious bullshit, yes, but bullshit all the same.
Thing is, they were the first to tell you they had no clue how or why they could dowse out water, but they could.
They could, could they? You know, I bet there are psychics and faith healers out there that would shovel you the same bullshit.
Sorry, until you've got a controlled study showing your little "witches" perform better than random chance, I'm gonna remain skeptical. Meanwhile, you should send one over to JREF... if her "powers" are real, she could win a million bucks!
I'm part Irish. I'd like you to tell my grandparents that they - and their neighbors, the Italians - are part of a white, privileged, un-discriminated-against upper class.
Oh, wow, so you or your parents or grandparents have been discriminated against for being Irish/Italian? Really? What happened? Did someone refuse you a job? Did a cop harass you? Have you been disproportionately selected for TSA screenings? Were you given an excessively severe sentence in court?
No?
Then guess what? You're part of the privileged white majority, despite what your immigrant ancestors may have gone through.
So, basically you're saying that a poor black person from the ghetto is impossibly held back by factors other than effort?
Did I say that? Huh, no, I didn't. Twit.
What I said was that a poor black kid born in a ghetto is faced with barriers that you never were, barriers that come as a consequence of racism, both contemporary and historical, barriers that you never had to face. Can those barriers be overcome? Certainly. It happens every day. But that doesn't mean those barriers don't exist, that they don't hold people down, or that overcoming them isn't extremely difficult.
Frankly, your worldview is so incredibly simplistic and naive it's hard to imagine you get by from day to day. You seem to honestly believe that everyone is born on the same playing field, and that world is infinitely fair, as if all people, from birth to death, are faced with the same difficulties and offered the same opportunities throughout their lives, and the only difference is how hard they work. You're seemingly one of those jackasses that believes that those suffering in poverty do so only because they're lazy and unmotivated, that socioeconomic or cultural factors can't possibly come into play. Worse, you couch it in some sort of holier-than-thou libertarian bullshit, convinced you're just trying to do those poor people a favour by refusing to believe that the outcomes in a person's life are sometimes influenced by factors that are out of their control.
That kind of blindness would be funny if it weren't so sad and counterproductive.
I'm just being snarky, but the Irish were treated like crap historically. Alot of groups were. African Americans included. There is a major difference though...baggage.
Well, that and one other pesky little detail: ongoing racism, right now, today. Or have you frequently found yourself discriminated against for being of Irish descent?
I came to the town I now live in, with a suitcase, backpack and a couple hundred dollars. I got my education by working hard, while going to school. I bussed tables at a restaurant, lived with a bunch of people I didn't really like, and focused on the goal.
Uhuh. And imagine how much harder that would've been if your primary school education had been at an inner city school where crime is rampant, good teachers can't be found, and books and equipment are out-dated. Imagine how much harder that would've been if you grew up in a community paralyzed by drugs, violence, and criminality. Imagine how much harder it would've been if, being black or Arabic or Sikh, employers would refuse to hire you, or your landlord would refuse to rent a place to you.
So yeah, congratulations, pulling yourself up by your proverbial bootstraps. Great for you, buddy. But you did it without the legacy of racism and slavery holding you back, and that makes it an awful lot easier to climb the ol' social ladder.
But of course, I don't expect you to understand any of this. You seem to believe that racism isn't alive and well in the US. That a black president somehow makes everything magically okay, wiping away the inner-city ghettos, the unjust justice system, the poverty economic, social, and cultural poverty. That's absurd, of course, but I'm beginning to realize that describes your entire view on race and racism in America.
Poverty and slums and ghettos are fairly universal thoughout the world, and very rarely does it matter what color of skin one has, compared to others.
And that right there is where you lost me. This statement is utterly absurd. Poverty is very often linked to ethnicity *specifically* because ethnic groups are targeted. Are are you going to try and convince me that ghettos in the US aren't predominantly non-anglo?
In fact, that's the whole fucking point. As a white person, your parents, and their grandparents, and so on, haven't been subject to the legacy of US slavery and ongoing racism. As a consequence, you have wealth and power that individuals of those groups don't... hell, the very fact that you've supposedly "been to slums around the world" is proof of that fact (last I checked, the poor and downtrodden can't really afford to visit international slums).
As for your claims of traveling the world, if that didn't open your eyes to the wealth and power you possess, then, frankly, you're an idiot. If anything, such experiences should've highlighted to you the sheer level of wealth, freedom, and power you enjoy, which would never have been available to you had you been born a minority in a St. Louis slum.
THAT is why libertarianism is popular around here, as it is about liberty of all people
No, libertarianism is about liberty for those who can afford it. Fortunately, Slashdot is overwhelmingly dominated by middle to upper-middle class nerds who think that they're downtrodden because the government wants to take away their right to mod their Xbox. But they have no idea what real poverty is like, and as such, they lack the vision to understand just how much power the wealthy have over the poor thanks to their possessing the lion's share of the world's wealth, despite making up a fraction of the world's population.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it's *something*. I'm a fairly heavy user of Myth (usually around a dozen recordings a day spready across both tuners, though granted it's all SD), and I *never* see the core parts of Myth crash. In my experience, the only questionable bit is MythMusic (and, let's face it, it's kinda craptacular, so that's hardly surprising).
It'd be interesting to investigate what kinds of instability you were seeing. Perhaps it's some weird combination of hardware or something... I'm using stock Hauppauge cards, which are extremely well supported by v4l and Myth, but I chose them specifically for that reason. Or it could be the distro fscking up, rolling out buggy versions of Qt, the linux kernel, or other pieces Myth depends on.
I wonder whether this new release has an option of stripping out commercials from recordings on request. Does it?
MythTV has had the ability to mark the positions of commercials in a piece of recorded content for ages now. It has not, and AFAIK, continues not to have the ability to automatically cut those commercials straight out of the recorded content. Why? Simple: The commercial stripper is far from perfect. It does a decent job most of the time, but it just as often screws up royally. So you really *don't* want it doing something irreversible to your recordings without active user intervention, which is why the solution has always involved a script and setting up a user job that can be triggered from the FE.
'course, I'm not sure why that's a problem. If you're watching the content on a MythTV FE, you can just tell it to automatically skip commercials, and it'll use the marked positions to skip in real-time. If your goal is to play out the content on another device, you probably want to transcode it, scale it, etc, before transferring it to your device (ie, ipod, etc), at which point you can instruct Myth to cut the commercials out.
And as a consequence, it doesn't allow you to manipulate the recording schedule from your TV, resolve conflicts, view your guide data, find programs, or basically anything else that makes a DVR useful.
So as a basic FE, yes, XBMC could work. But it can't replace a proper Myth FE.
I ran MythTV for six years. The last year I've used SageTV. I got sick of MythTV locking up, crashing, and the constant non-stop twiddling with my configuration because I could never get things quite right.
SageTV isn't much better. I spend a lot less time twiddling, but it crashes and freezes about as often as MythTV used to. I'm still looking for that HTPC that just works. I haven't found it yet.
You sure these aren't hardware-related problems? I've had a dual-tuner, split FE/BE Myth system running for, oh... two years now?... with absolutely no problems. Any crashes I've had occurred early on, and have been hardware related (ie, hard disks failing), or problems with Linux itself (XFS+LVM causing hardlocks, bugs in ivtv resulting in tuners dying, etc). 'course, it helps that once I had a working configuration, I didn't touch it at all (ie, no OS updates, etc).
As for fiddling... honestly, I have no idea what you're doing with your system that requires that kind of care and attention. Again, I've been running a Myth system for two years, and it's required basically zero care and feeding once I got the system up and running and working the way I wanted (granted, that took a bit of time early on, particularly on the frontend, getting third-party software working right, tweaking the remote configuration, etc).
Obviously, an abortion harms a person, the developing baby. When a baby is conceived, it is a person.
FAIL.
Uh, it hasn't been. All this study suggests is that the fetus may begin to develop the most rudimentary language skills in the womb, which isn't even remotely the same as "[learning] the knowledge of entering the deadly and virtually impenetrable Chakravyuha".
So no, this doesn't justify your pet superstition.
Why? The experiment points out that babies may only begin to be influenced by their native language during the last trimester, and the vast majority of abortions happen in the first (late-term abortions are only ever performed when the health of the mother is in jeopardy), well before the brain is developed sufficiently to be considered "alive".
Too many choices and very confusing interfaces. Good job guys!
Yeah, but it's so customizable! Sure, you might get overwhelmed by the clutter and the huge number of rarely-used settings, and yeah, maybe the result is confusing and a little bit ugly. But boy oh boy, it sure is flexible!
And I'm sure the minute they started removing some of those buttons to try to clean things up, there'd be nerds coming out of the woodwork to complain...
Oh, I see, you want to play empty pseudo-philosophical games. Well, enjoy your high-minded masturbation.
How did the Republican's manage to ram through nearly their entire, fairly extreme, legislative agenda for six years, if not more, with a smaller majority in the Senate than the Dems have now?
By tossing out the idea of bipartisanship. You know... that thing that the original OP complained the Dems weren't focusing on, thereby trigger off this entire discussion?
So yes, in fact I can blame the Dems for not getting anything done.
Completely agreed. And also completely beside the point.
Something I've noticed is that the Democrats have a majority in both branches of Congress. If they can't pass their agenda over the objection of the Republicans, then something is wrong on the Democrat side.
Agreed. But that wouldn't be very bipartisan, would it?
But way to miss the entire point of the conversation. Really, good job! Did you hear the woosh as the point flew over you?
Uhuh. So you have a completely uneducated opinion based on one econ class you took once, then you chose to cherrypick opinions from economists in order to reinforce your views which were, in all probability, already coloured by partisan glasses.
Like I said... that's some very level-headed, unbiased analysis, there.
Confirmation bias. Look it up.
As an aside, I happen to think this whole idea of bipartisanship is, at this point, completely absurd. Since the last election, the Republicans have clearly chosen to swing even further to the right (one need only see the NY-23 election to see that), latching on to the extreme right-wingers like Sarah Palin. As such, I simply don't think there *can* be any kind of bipartisan effort between the Democrats and the Republicans, simply because they're so distant ideologically. Meanwhile, the Republicans are really interested in one thing at this stage: tearing the Democrats from power. And if that means blocking any and all attempts and meaningful reform, then so be it.
In fact, I would go so far as to say they've concluded that it's in the Republicans' best interests to ensure that *nothing* the Democrats want gets passed, as if the Dems can show any success on the issues that people actually care about (healthcare, the economy, etc), it'll only solidify their hold on the political ground they've gained during the last 4 years. Much like our good friend Rush Limbaugh, I really believe the Republicans hope Obama and the Democrats fail and fail miserably, regardless of the consequences it may have for America.
But the Democrats won't listen to or accept a single change to bills from Republicans
The Republicans aren't proposing simple changes. Once again, their approach is simple: our way or the highway. That's it. Meanwhile, the Democrats have been folding on some of their core proposals in order to get things moving (a public healthcare option being the most glaring). There has been *no* attempt from the right to work toward a bipartisan solution. NONE. The Democrats can hardly be faulted for that kind of uncooperative, even childish behaviour.
Worse, in cases like healthcare, the Republicans are actively blocking measures that over *60%* of the US population supports. If that isn't pure, unadulterated political brinksmanship, I don't know what is.
Ah yes. Reid and Pelosi, Axelrod, Gibbs, and even Obama at times, definitely act like grownups. Especially when they cry about Republicans not being bipartisan and then - for the first time in the history of the rule, I believe - push a bill out of committee without the quorum of two minority group members.
Just on this topic, ignoring the bailouts and all that, the Republicans have taken on a very simple strategy in the last six months or so: Block *all* proposals coming from Democrats. Period. How the hell can you possibly expect the Democrats to fulfill their promises of bipartisanship if the Republicans do everything they possibly can to hijack the democratic process?
We just spent almost a trillion in one year as a "stimulus" that has apparently helped nothing... and if it has, very little and it's really hard to tell and it appears that a lot of it is being wasted.
So, wait, let me get this straight... it's "really hard to tell" if the stimulus has done anything. But, despite that admission, in the very same sentence, you claim it has "apparently helped nothing... and if it has, very little".
Uhuh.
Yup, definitely a clear, unbiased, level-headed analysis, there...
Oh for goodness sake... 'alot' is not a word! :)
You can't disprove or prove anything.
That has to be the most ridiculously obtuse thing I've read in a long *long* time. Science and scientists are *specifically* dedicated to the process of disproving theories. Hell, one of the key things that defines a theory as scientific is that it's falsifiable.
Christ, the ignorance displayed by some is truly astonishing...
There are lots of interesting things in life that science does not have all mapped out. Reading someone's thoughts, for example. It is impossible to intelligently debate these things in an online forum such as this. The polite thing to do is to agree to disagree.
No, the polite thing to do is concede that the scientific method has been used to check these sorts of claims, and they've inevitably been bunk. The rational thing to do is yield to facts and quite holding on to childlike superstition.
Now, keep in mind, I'm not claiming this neighbour of yours was deliberately deceitful. Quite the opposite, in fact. The ideomotor effect combined with confirmation bias is a very powerful thing, and as such, he probably believed that he had some sort of supernatural power. But don't be fooled, it was bullshit. Subconscious bullshit, yes, but bullshit all the same.
Thing is, they were the first to tell you they had no clue how or why they could dowse out water, but they could.
They could, could they? You know, I bet there are psychics and faith healers out there that would shovel you the same bullshit.
Sorry, until you've got a controlled study showing your little "witches" perform better than random chance, I'm gonna remain skeptical. Meanwhile, you should send one over to JREF... if her "powers" are real, she could win a million bucks!
I'm part Irish. I'd like you to tell my grandparents that they - and their neighbors, the Italians - are part of a white, privileged, un-discriminated-against upper class.
Oh, wow, so you or your parents or grandparents have been discriminated against for being Irish/Italian? Really? What happened? Did someone refuse you a job? Did a cop harass you? Have you been disproportionately selected for TSA screenings? Were you given an excessively severe sentence in court?
No?
Then guess what? You're part of the privileged white majority, despite what your immigrant ancestors may have gone through.
So, basically you're saying that a poor black person from the ghetto is impossibly held back by factors other than effort?
Did I say that? Huh, no, I didn't. Twit.
What I said was that a poor black kid born in a ghetto is faced with barriers that you never were, barriers that come as a consequence of racism, both contemporary and historical, barriers that you never had to face. Can those barriers be overcome? Certainly. It happens every day. But that doesn't mean those barriers don't exist, that they don't hold people down, or that overcoming them isn't extremely difficult.
Frankly, your worldview is so incredibly simplistic and naive it's hard to imagine you get by from day to day. You seem to honestly believe that everyone is born on the same playing field, and that world is infinitely fair, as if all people, from birth to death, are faced with the same difficulties and offered the same opportunities throughout their lives, and the only difference is how hard they work. You're seemingly one of those jackasses that believes that those suffering in poverty do so only because they're lazy and unmotivated, that socioeconomic or cultural factors can't possibly come into play. Worse, you couch it in some sort of holier-than-thou libertarian bullshit, convinced you're just trying to do those poor people a favour by refusing to believe that the outcomes in a person's life are sometimes influenced by factors that are out of their control.
That kind of blindness would be funny if it weren't so sad and counterproductive.
I'm just being snarky, but the Irish were treated like crap historically. Alot of groups were. African Americans included. There is a major difference though...baggage.
Well, that and one other pesky little detail: ongoing racism, right now, today. Or have you frequently found yourself discriminated against for being of Irish descent?
Yeah. Didn't think so.
I came to the town I now live in, with a suitcase, backpack and a couple hundred dollars. I got my education by working hard, while going to school. I bussed tables at a restaurant, lived with a bunch of people I didn't really like, and focused on the goal.
Uhuh. And imagine how much harder that would've been if your primary school education had been at an inner city school where crime is rampant, good teachers can't be found, and books and equipment are out-dated. Imagine how much harder that would've been if you grew up in a community paralyzed by drugs, violence, and criminality. Imagine how much harder it would've been if, being black or Arabic or Sikh, employers would refuse to hire you, or your landlord would refuse to rent a place to you.
So yeah, congratulations, pulling yourself up by your proverbial bootstraps. Great for you, buddy. But you did it without the legacy of racism and slavery holding you back, and that makes it an awful lot easier to climb the ol' social ladder.
But of course, I don't expect you to understand any of this. You seem to believe that racism isn't alive and well in the US. That a black president somehow makes everything magically okay, wiping away the inner-city ghettos, the unjust justice system, the poverty economic, social, and cultural poverty. That's absurd, of course, but I'm beginning to realize that describes your entire view on race and racism in America.
Poverty and slums and ghettos are fairly universal thoughout the world, and very rarely does it matter what color of skin one has, compared to others.
And that right there is where you lost me. This statement is utterly absurd. Poverty is very often linked to ethnicity *specifically* because ethnic groups are targeted. Are are you going to try and convince me that ghettos in the US aren't predominantly non-anglo?
In fact, that's the whole fucking point. As a white person, your parents, and their grandparents, and so on, haven't been subject to the legacy of US slavery and ongoing racism. As a consequence, you have wealth and power that individuals of those groups don't... hell, the very fact that you've supposedly "been to slums around the world" is proof of that fact (last I checked, the poor and downtrodden can't really afford to visit international slums).
As for your claims of traveling the world, if that didn't open your eyes to the wealth and power you possess, then, frankly, you're an idiot. If anything, such experiences should've highlighted to you the sheer level of wealth, freedom, and power you enjoy, which would never have been available to you had you been born a minority in a St. Louis slum.
THAT is why libertarianism is popular around here, as it is about liberty of all people
No, libertarianism is about liberty for those who can afford it. Fortunately, Slashdot is overwhelmingly dominated by middle to upper-middle class nerds who think that they're downtrodden because the government wants to take away their right to mod their Xbox. But they have no idea what real poverty is like, and as such, they lack the vision to understand just how much power the wealthy have over the poor thanks to their possessing the lion's share of the world's wealth, despite making up a fraction of the world's population.