Years ago, I had pneumonia, and the antibiotic I was put on for it was z-pack (I am allergic to penicillin), and between that, the super-tylenol and one other medication, I had some very strange hallucinations.
The problem isn't that us "liberalists" don't want you to say anything bad. The problem is that you want to say bad things and then skip the fucking consequences.
Nobody said free speech had to be nice. Nobody said I or anyone else has to agree with everything you or anyone else says.
But if someone says something horribly racist in a public venue, guess what, cupcake? There are generally consequences for that sort of shit. Trump saw that happen early in his campaign when he said a bunch of racist shit, and he had business deals cancelled and NBC decided they didn't want him on "The Apprentice" any more. (This was before he got the nomination.)
Yeah, Trump still won the Presidency, but there were consequences to his speech. And the problem isn't (or isn't just) special snowflakes who want a safe space regardless of the realities of the world, it's the racist shitbags of the world who think they can spout their racist shitbaggery without any worry of affecting their real life or their access to venues (such as Twitter) to spout said racist shitbaggery.
Twitter is well within their rights under their Terms of Service to ban people. Deal with it.
Yeah, there's a problem with that. You have groups like BLM protesting loudly, and some people get a giant case of the chapped ass over it. "How dare they protest loudly? No one can take them seriously when they're being so loud and vocal and upset."
Then Kaepernick kneels during the National Anthem, and some people get a giant case of the chapped ass over it. "How dare you protest quietly by doing that thing we don't like? No one can take them seriously when they're being so offensive by not standing during the National Anthem." You know, regardless of the fact that probably 95% of the people watching the game at home don't stand during the National Anthem.
What the people getting a giant case of the chapped ass are really saying is "How dare you protest at all?"
Depends on the campus and what the duties of the specific campus cop are. At the university I went to, the campus police were, IIRC, part of the city police force, just assigned to the campus. Some of them carried sidearms, but some of them were in administration of the campus police, so they didn't.
Considering that the orange idiot thinks that burning a U.S. flag merits prison time or loss of citizenship, I'd say it's a given that he has a low regard for constitutional rights.
I seem to recall more than a few conservative talking heads "threatening" to leave the U.S. if/when Obama did something they didn't like, and then not following through on it either.
Also, I given to understand that the entire thing can by bypassed by using a VPN. Not that the vast majority of people affected by this will use a VPN, simply because they don't have the requisite knowledge.
So, of course, you have proof of millions of votes coming from illegal/undocumented aliens? And, of course, you have proof of dead people voting in substantial enough numbers to make a difference?
I think the difference is, no one expects the Enquirer to be accurate. I mean, for fuck's sake, they've had stories about Bigfoot and Elvis meeting.
With print publication, there are startup costs, printing costs, distribution costs. Some dingus scrawling conspiracy theories and passing them out at the Circle K is not going to have a wide distribution, for example.
But it's relatively easy to create a fake news website. It can be relatively cheap. Much cheaper than trying to get national level distribution for something like the Enquirer.
The same idiots who wanted the F-35 to be able to do everything and therefore it does nothing well? There seems to be this idea that as long as the money keeps rolling in to the military-industrial complex, it doesn't matter if none of these projects ever really works well. Just keep that money rolling. We'll win wars on quantity, not quality.
The problem is, in the Victorian age, automation freed people up from some jobs, but not everything was automated, so there were still jobs to be had. Sure, they might also be backbreaking labor, but it was still a job.
We're on the cusp of self-driving cars right now. They're not perfect, and it's most cases, it's not true auto-pilot yet, but it's getting there. Assuming no road-blocks (no pun intended) in the way, within 5-10 years, we're going to have self-driving cars.
And there goes the taxi industry. And the trucking industry. What jobs will they transition to? Okay, sure, not every taxi driver and trucker will be out of work on the same day, but their jobs are going to go away. What happens then?
It's going to be incremental. We're not all going to wake up one day and find out that automation has taken away all of our jobs. But saying it's not going to happen at all is facetious at best.
There's a difference between a journalist not properly explaining some scientific matter, and MAKING SHIT UP. I don't expect your average journalist to have an understaring of, say, astrophysics, or material science, or computer programming. I do expect, that if they call themselves journalists, they are at least trying to portray the truth. Sure, maybe it's a biased truth. But that's still different from MAKING SHIT UP.
I don't know, maybe it has something to do with that big statue on Ellis Island. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"
You'll notice it doesn't say "But only if you're white."
And depending on when the time travelers kill Hitler, it could make things worse. I mean, Hitler rose to power on a populist wave, made promises that he couldn't possibly keep concerning massive rebuilding projects, and was completely incompetent when it came to anything related to the military.
Killing Hitler before or early on in the invasion of Russia would have been good for the overall German war effort, not to mention it would have significantly changed the Normandy invasion. (The German Panzer reserves weren't released to stop the Normandy invasion because people were afraid to wake up Hitler with bad news. Well, that, and the Allies did an exceptional job of convincing a portion of the Nazi High Command that the invasion would be at Calais under Patton.)
I often find it's due to changing requirements from management, or to this odd idea that they have that they can't possibly tell us the entire process that we're working on, so we either end up not understanding the end goals (because of lack of knowledge), or have to refactor things in order to implement the steps they only told about after we finished the first part of the project.
Uh, yes there are. I mean, I don't think there are any "no masks whatsoever, under no conditions at all, we mean it" laws, but there are laws that prohibit masks.
Except some of the polls showing Trump behind are from Fox News.
When Fox has a recent poll that shows Clinton is ahead by 6-7 points (depending on whether it's a 2-way poll or 4-way), well, I really doubt they're carrying water for Clinton.
And you have to understand... there's a certain percentage of the voting populace that is going to vote for the Republican candidate no matter who it is or how they are presented (good, bad, indifferent). There are likewise going to be a certain percentage of voters that are going to vote for the Democratic candidate no matter who it is or how they are presented (good, bad, indifferent).
It doesn't matter what scandals dog those candidates, they will always get a certain percentage of the electorate.
The trick is appealing to those who normally fall into one party or the other but don't care much for the candidate AND getting voters who class themselves as "independent".
Unless something causes an inordinate number of voters from one party or the other to stay home, it is generally impossible to win the Presidential election with just the voters that you can automatically count on. You have to attract voters from outside those blocks.
And Trump hasn't been doing so.
Sure, he's gotten a few. Can't argue that. But he's spent so much time actively insulting blocks of voters that he's effectively reversed the inroads that the Republican party started making among (for example) Hispanic voters after Romney's defeat in 2012. Not to mention African-American voters, some Jewish voters, some Asian voters....
He's trying (whether he means to or not) rely on the angry older white voter, and hey, he's gotten that block fairly well nailed down. But it's been at the expense of every other block of voters that he would need to win.
The "easiest" path for a Trump victory in two weeks is to carry every state that Romney won in 2012 and then flip enough states to make up the 64 electoral votes that Romney fell short of.
The problem there is that not only is Trump apparently failing to do that (it's unlikely that he's going to flip Pennsylvania or Florida, and Ohio might be out of reach as well), it's possible that he's going to lose some of the states that Romney won. He might lose Arizona, he might lose North Carolina. Hell, he might lose Utah.
Facebook and other social media don't need to do anything to make Trump look bad. They just need to give him a forum, and Trump will do that himself.
That's because Fox is pro-Republican, and being pro-Republican and anti-Trump has a fair amount of crossover.
Let's face it, Trump is the Republican candidate, but he is doing far and away more harm to the party than anyone else who ran for the nomination could have. For example, I don't care for Ted Cruz, and I think he'd probably be losing right now as well if he were the Republican candidate, but he, at least, doesn't flip out at 3 a.m. and go on Twitter rants, and he almost certainly wouldn't have been doing some of the insanely stupid shit that Trump has done in the last few weeks (not to mention the last few months).
Sure, Cruz would have almost certainly made different mistakes. Or Rubio, or whoever, but they at least understand the system. They don't go treating the entire thing like a season of a TV show.
Trump won the nomination because, with as many people running for the nomination, all he had to do was get more attention than the next person down in the field. The field was so fragmented that it was easy to do.
But he tried the same shit when he officially got the nomination, and it doesn't work. The goal after getting the nomination is to attract enough people who might be on the fence about you, and Trump could not stop insulting people left and right. He's effectively alienated most of the groups that the Republican party tried making inroads with since Romney lost.
I mean, most likely, as larger storage media became commercially available, he probably stepped up his game. I can't imagine how you could sneak 50 ZIP disks in and out of an NSA facility weekly and not get caught much sooner.
Well, he supposedly did this over the course of 20 years. However....
That actually means the problem is worse. How, over the course of 20 years, did no one notice this? I mean, let's say he had two week's vacation every year, he's still absconding with 50 Gigs of data a week for 20 years. (On average, and assuming that the 50 Terabyte estimate is accurate.)
Okay, sure you can get a cheap USB drive that has 128 or 256 Gigs of space on it, but 20 years ago? A shitload of ZIP disks? Physically removing the hard drives?
And the sad thing is, probably half the people who should have caught this have already retired.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you saying we should be on a toddler-based economy?
Years ago, I had pneumonia, and the antibiotic I was put on for it was z-pack (I am allergic to penicillin), and between that, the super-tylenol and one other medication, I had some very strange hallucinations.
The problem isn't that us "liberalists" don't want you to say anything bad. The problem is that you want to say bad things and then skip the fucking consequences.
Nobody said free speech had to be nice. Nobody said I or anyone else has to agree with everything you or anyone else says.
But if someone says something horribly racist in a public venue, guess what, cupcake? There are generally consequences for that sort of shit. Trump saw that happen early in his campaign when he said a bunch of racist shit, and he had business deals cancelled and NBC decided they didn't want him on "The Apprentice" any more. (This was before he got the nomination.)
Yeah, Trump still won the Presidency, but there were consequences to his speech. And the problem isn't (or isn't just) special snowflakes who want a safe space regardless of the realities of the world, it's the racist shitbags of the world who think they can spout their racist shitbaggery without any worry of affecting their real life or their access to venues (such as Twitter) to spout said racist shitbaggery.
Twitter is well within their rights under their Terms of Service to ban people. Deal with it.
Yeah, there's a problem with that. You have groups like BLM protesting loudly, and some people get a giant case of the chapped ass over it. "How dare they protest loudly? No one can take them seriously when they're being so loud and vocal and upset."
Then Kaepernick kneels during the National Anthem, and some people get a giant case of the chapped ass over it. "How dare you protest quietly by doing that thing we don't like? No one can take them seriously when they're being so offensive by not standing during the National Anthem." You know, regardless of the fact that probably 95% of the people watching the game at home don't stand during the National Anthem.
What the people getting a giant case of the chapped ass are really saying is "How dare you protest at all?"
Depends on the campus and what the duties of the specific campus cop are. At the university I went to, the campus police were, IIRC, part of the city police force, just assigned to the campus. Some of them carried sidearms, but some of them were in administration of the campus police, so they didn't.
Considering that the orange idiot thinks that burning a U.S. flag merits prison time or loss of citizenship, I'd say it's a given that he has a low regard for constitutional rights.
I seem to recall more than a few conservative talking heads "threatening" to leave the U.S. if/when Obama did something they didn't like, and then not following through on it either.
Also, I given to understand that the entire thing can by bypassed by using a VPN. Not that the vast majority of people affected by this will use a VPN, simply because they don't have the requisite knowledge.
So, of course, you have proof of millions of votes coming from illegal/undocumented aliens? And, of course, you have proof of dead people voting in substantial enough numbers to make a difference?
I think the difference is, no one expects the Enquirer to be accurate. I mean, for fuck's sake, they've had stories about Bigfoot and Elvis meeting.
With print publication, there are startup costs, printing costs, distribution costs. Some dingus scrawling conspiracy theories and passing them out at the Circle K is not going to have a wide distribution, for example.
But it's relatively easy to create a fake news website. It can be relatively cheap. Much cheaper than trying to get national level distribution for something like the Enquirer.
There were also videos from 2012 from completely different states that people were trying to pass off as current.
The same idiots who wanted the F-35 to be able to do everything and therefore it does nothing well? There seems to be this idea that as long as the money keeps rolling in to the military-industrial complex, it doesn't matter if none of these projects ever really works well. Just keep that money rolling. We'll win wars on quantity, not quality.
The problem is, in the Victorian age, automation freed people up from some jobs, but not everything was automated, so there were still jobs to be had. Sure, they might also be backbreaking labor, but it was still a job.
We're on the cusp of self-driving cars right now. They're not perfect, and it's most cases, it's not true auto-pilot yet, but it's getting there. Assuming no road-blocks (no pun intended) in the way, within 5-10 years, we're going to have self-driving cars.
And there goes the taxi industry. And the trucking industry. What jobs will they transition to? Okay, sure, not every taxi driver and trucker will be out of work on the same day, but their jobs are going to go away. What happens then?
It's going to be incremental. We're not all going to wake up one day and find out that automation has taken away all of our jobs. But saying it's not going to happen at all is facetious at best.
How did all those articles about how Obama is coming to take your guns work out for you?
There's a difference between a journalist not properly explaining some scientific matter, and MAKING SHIT UP. I don't expect your average journalist to have an understaring of, say, astrophysics, or material science, or computer programming. I do expect, that if they call themselves journalists, they are at least trying to portray the truth. Sure, maybe it's a biased truth. But that's still different from MAKING SHIT UP.
I'm pretty sure they're going to take some time to fuck over the poor as well.
I don't know, maybe it has something to do with that big statue on Ellis Island. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"
You'll notice it doesn't say "But only if you're white."
And depending on when the time travelers kill Hitler, it could make things worse. I mean, Hitler rose to power on a populist wave, made promises that he couldn't possibly keep concerning massive rebuilding projects, and was completely incompetent when it came to anything related to the military.
Killing Hitler before or early on in the invasion of Russia would have been good for the overall German war effort, not to mention it would have significantly changed the Normandy invasion. (The German Panzer reserves weren't released to stop the Normandy invasion because people were afraid to wake up Hitler with bad news. Well, that, and the Allies did an exceptional job of convincing a portion of the Nazi High Command that the invasion would be at Calais under Patton.)
I often find it's due to changing requirements from management, or to this odd idea that they have that they can't possibly tell us the entire process that we're working on, so we either end up not understanding the end goals (because of lack of knowledge), or have to refactor things in order to implement the steps they only told about after we finished the first part of the project.
Uh, yes there are. I mean, I don't think there are any "no masks whatsoever, under no conditions at all, we mean it" laws, but there are laws that prohibit masks.
http://law.lis.virginia.gov/va...
Except some of the polls showing Trump behind are from Fox News.
When Fox has a recent poll that shows Clinton is ahead by 6-7 points (depending on whether it's a 2-way poll or 4-way), well, I really doubt they're carrying water for Clinton.
And you have to understand... there's a certain percentage of the voting populace that is going to vote for the Republican candidate no matter who it is or how they are presented (good, bad, indifferent). There are likewise going to be a certain percentage of voters that are going to vote for the Democratic candidate no matter who it is or how they are presented (good, bad, indifferent).
It doesn't matter what scandals dog those candidates, they will always get a certain percentage of the electorate.
The trick is appealing to those who normally fall into one party or the other but don't care much for the candidate AND getting voters who class themselves as "independent".
Unless something causes an inordinate number of voters from one party or the other to stay home, it is generally impossible to win the Presidential election with just the voters that you can automatically count on. You have to attract voters from outside those blocks.
And Trump hasn't been doing so.
Sure, he's gotten a few. Can't argue that. But he's spent so much time actively insulting blocks of voters that he's effectively reversed the inroads that the Republican party started making among (for example) Hispanic voters after Romney's defeat in 2012. Not to mention African-American voters, some Jewish voters, some Asian voters....
He's trying (whether he means to or not) rely on the angry older white voter, and hey, he's gotten that block fairly well nailed down. But it's been at the expense of every other block of voters that he would need to win.
The "easiest" path for a Trump victory in two weeks is to carry every state that Romney won in 2012 and then flip enough states to make up the 64 electoral votes that Romney fell short of.
The problem there is that not only is Trump apparently failing to do that (it's unlikely that he's going to flip Pennsylvania or Florida, and Ohio might be out of reach as well), it's possible that he's going to lose some of the states that Romney won. He might lose Arizona, he might lose North Carolina. Hell, he might lose Utah.
Facebook and other social media don't need to do anything to make Trump look bad. They just need to give him a forum, and Trump will do that himself.
That's because Fox is pro-Republican, and being pro-Republican and anti-Trump has a fair amount of crossover.
Let's face it, Trump is the Republican candidate, but he is doing far and away more harm to the party than anyone else who ran for the nomination could have. For example, I don't care for Ted Cruz, and I think he'd probably be losing right now as well if he were the Republican candidate, but he, at least, doesn't flip out at 3 a.m. and go on Twitter rants, and he almost certainly wouldn't have been doing some of the insanely stupid shit that Trump has done in the last few weeks (not to mention the last few months).
Sure, Cruz would have almost certainly made different mistakes. Or Rubio, or whoever, but they at least understand the system. They don't go treating the entire thing like a season of a TV show.
Trump won the nomination because, with as many people running for the nomination, all he had to do was get more attention than the next person down in the field. The field was so fragmented that it was easy to do.
But he tried the same shit when he officially got the nomination, and it doesn't work. The goal after getting the nomination is to attract enough people who might be on the fence about you, and Trump could not stop insulting people left and right. He's effectively alienated most of the groups that the Republican party tried making inroads with since Romney lost.
That's why Fox News is anti-Trump.
I mean, most likely, as larger storage media became commercially available, he probably stepped up his game. I can't imagine how you could sneak 50 ZIP disks in and out of an NSA facility weekly and not get caught much sooner.
Well, he supposedly did this over the course of 20 years. However....
That actually means the problem is worse. How, over the course of 20 years, did no one notice this? I mean, let's say he had two week's vacation every year, he's still absconding with 50 Gigs of data a week for 20 years. (On average, and assuming that the 50 Terabyte estimate is accurate.)
Okay, sure you can get a cheap USB drive that has 128 or 256 Gigs of space on it, but 20 years ago? A shitload of ZIP disks? Physically removing the hard drives?
And the sad thing is, probably half the people who should have caught this have already retired.
..... blessings upon him? WTF?