I keep hearing about these Job Creators creating jobs
That's a common misconception. The word they are actually saying isn't "creators", its "craters". Its an easy mistake; the words sound very similar. But you can always tell from context that they are really saying "Job Craters".
We've seen this before with cities trying their own minimum wage hikes. A few in deep blue states will get away with it, while Republican state legislatures (32 of the 50 states by my count) will pass laws banning cities from doing anything on their own.
Despite the noise that the vocal minority is making over this, I think you will find that most folks, if asked (assuming no one could find out the answer) would support a completed ban on Muslims in the country.
American voters oppose 51 – 46 percent President Donald Trump’s order suspending for 90 days all travel to the U.S. from seven nations, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.
Voters oppose 60 – 37 percent President Trump’s order suspending immigration of all refugees from any nation to the U.S. for 120 days, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University Poll finds.
Voters also oppose 70 – 26 percent Trump’s order suspending indefinitely all immigration of Syrian refugees to the U.S.
Exactly what I expect from Disney: the safest choice.
On the bright side, that means we likely won't have to suffer through two and a half hours of shaky-cam and lens flares. A lot of what passes for "innovation" these days in directing, I can do without.
The "public person" thing is only even an issue if the claimant can show that the thing said was untrue. I didn't get into that can of worms, not because I didn't know it was there, but because I'm highly skeptical that Mr. Coal King can even get that far.
He'd have to prove in court that something said wasn't true (and then that it somehow cost him money).
Oliver ('s attorneys) would be able to subpoena all the guy's business records pertaining to the claims, which would make them public record. If they are public record, they can be used in his show (or anyone else's).
We may have to rename the Streisand Effect after this is all over.
There are various assumptions to make before pulling over the side of the road which may or may not be safer than simply having the car continue. You have to make sure there is an unobstructed emergency strip and you're not just careening the vehicle down a cliff.
Simply slowing the car down would go a long way towards making all of that much easier problems for the computer to solve. It would also make any collision that does happen much less serious, and in this particular case would have prevented the collision entirely. (This is why expert drivers, when something unexpected happens, will reflexively remove their foot from the accelerator.)
So it seems like simply having the autopilot start to slow the car when the human isn't responding should at least be a baseline behavior. If it say puts the hazards on and keeps doing this, eventually the "getting safely off the road" problem should be easily solvable.
It would have the added benefit of being behavior that is annoying enough to the occupants to incentivize them to not ignore the warnings.
The real reason the EC was created was appeasement of slavers
No mod points, but this is exactly the reason. Remember that slaves (obviously) and other people who didn't own land weren't allowed to vote in most states. So in a flat vote, voters in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania alone would probably have overwhelmed the votes of all the slave states combined. However, once you rig up this weird system where slave states get to count great masses of people who they would never consider allowing to actually vote (slaves, sharecroppers, etc), then suddenly 5 of the first 6 POTUS were native to Virginia.
The electoral college is an attempt to balance political power between rural and urban voters.
That's what many US school history books say. However, US school history books have to be approved by groups of political appointees in every state who are kind of famous for not wanting any uncomfortable truths put into them.
Turns out we have extensive documentation over the constitutional deliberations on this matter. A simple plebiscite for President was preferred initially by some, but would not fly with the slave states. At the time, only land-owning (white) men were generally allowed to vote, and the plantation society in those states was centered around a very few big landowners and oodles of landless workers/slaves. This meant in a simple popular vote for POTUS, slave states would have almost no say. Northern free states with their small family farms and shopkeepers would vastly outvote them. Their only hope would be to enfranchise their slaves (which of course is essentially an oxymoron).
The Electoral College's entire purpose in its weird indirect design was to give slave states a voice in electing a POTUS proportional to their population, rather than to the amount of humans they actually allowed to vote. Slave states were even allowed to include their slaves (well, 3/5 of them) in this count. During elections, if some states didn't even have a vote for POTUS (and many didn't for the next 100 years) that was their business.
Certianly there are other justifications for the EC that you hear today (if there weren't we would have ditched it long ago). However, Slavery is the reason it came to be in the first place.
I've used it because I wanted to look stuff up (mostly reviews, not prices), and my tablet is much better for reading such things than my phone due to the extra screen real-estate.
I should say, I've tried to use it. Generally I don't usually bother because you can't really rely on a store having usable wifi, and its a PITA to drag around a tablet that I can't even use.
I typically look products I find while browsing up on Amazon not for the prices (I expect a premium to take it home now), but for the reviews. Something like an appliance or a car stereo has a huge potential for grief, so only a fool would buy one without making sure it doesn't have a big well-known issue.
If I can't look it up. I'll do it when I get home. If I remember. Most likely not, but if I do, I'll just buy it online at that point. Hmmm...perhaps this is a smart move by Amazon...
My favorite part of this story is that, due to all the secrecy involved, this company can get no kudos for refusing to facilitate spying, almost certainly knew that, and yet they did it anyway.
“The true test of a man’s character is what he does when no one is watching.” John Wooden
It made me wonder - what can a company even do for absolution once the mob has decided they are to be punished?
This is why service industry companies that last have PR departments, and move heaven-and-earth to not appear publicly to be douchebags. The free market is SUPPOSED to be a Darwinian environment where in the long-term better companies survive and crappy ones fail. That means from time to time companies that make crappy choices have to fail. That's how the system works. You shouldn't feel sorry for them, but instead cheer the process on. Your pity is better reserved for those abused by the douchebags in the first place.
I don't think you understand that people wanted something different and when Trump won there was hope for things to be different
That's the standard armchair QB analysis. The problem is it doesn't really stand up to any look at the actual numbers. It turned out that in the general election, the demographics of the actual vote were almost exactly the same as 2012, except that "people of color" (particularly black voters) didn't come out in the numbers they did in 2012. There was no big new swing in existing voters. Many states that Trump swung from blue to red actually gave him less votes than Romney (eg: Michigan). Large swaths of people did not change parties. Its just that Clinton did not bring out all the Obama voters, so she lost.
What does this mean for the primary? Most likely all those people who voted Trump weren't new Republicans. They were the same Republicans that party has had for the last 4-8 years. If their electorate is now more nativist, racist, supremacist, or just flat out gullible than in the past, that's almost certainly because the party itself (and most prominently is media outlets) spent the last two cycles cultivating and nurturing exactly those qualities.
This is 100% correct. However, since the Republicans took Congress over in 2010, it has been transformed into a body that serves no other purpose than generating good headlines for its own members on conservative media outlets. So calling another new bill "grandstanding" isn't exactly making any kind of new point.
That change later haunted the GOP when it became clear that only Trump will be the nominee because of that rule change.
Trump would have become their nominee no matter what rules they adopted. He won twice votes as anybody else, and all but 15 states. If the Republican party didn't want someone like that as their nominee, then they shouldn't have spent the previous 8 years training their voters to respond to his kind of nonsense. You reap what you sew.
Had Comey not done his political stunt with the Weiner's e-mails it wouldn't have flipped the election and I doubt they expected it to. Yet Nate Silver's numbers are pretty clear: Hillary had 6%+ lead until Comey did that and down 3%+ points after, close enough for the EC to do its thing. Had it not been for Comey the election would not have even been close.
Comey has been routinely insisting that he had no choice but to do what he did. He had previously gone to Congress and reported that the investigation had been closed. The problem with that, he testified last week, is that saying such a thing creates a duty to correct if it becomes untrue later. Some extra unprocessed emails popped up, and he felt he had a duty to report that. You can well imagine the Republican reaction if something interesting DID turn up in those emails (even if it was only interesting if you squint hard and incant "Clinton's a Crook" three times), and he had hidden their existence before the election. They of course eventually turned up the same nothing that all the previous ones had, but by then it was too late.
So now Comey thought he had a lesson-learned: don't publicly report on investigations, so you won't have that "duty to correct". The problem there is that when Trump came into office, and was told he wasn't (at the time) under investigation, he wanted that information publicized. Comey explained why he didn't want to do that, based on what happened with Clinton, but it looks like Trump was not enamored of that answer.
If you are alleging vote frauds, very simple. Liberals, Democrats and Rinos have pushed insecure voting and counting methods for years
One wonders how much this long list of "enemies" of yours is going to keep growing before you realize who is really behind it. I suspect you have about 80% of the USA in there already.
Its so nice that the professional Russian trolls have moved onto other targets, so that I can again read "+5 Insightful" comments like this one that are actually insightful. I think they are busy today protecting Putin at home. Probably won't last, but I'm going to enjoy it while it lasts.
I actually agree with a lot of this, but I don't think it makes sense to downplay the military (specifically naval) threat.
Last I checked, they had two aircraft carriers
That would be more reassuring if it weren't for the fact that last *I* checked, they had only one carrier, and no planes that could land on it. They currently have those two, two more under construction, and another planned. Two to Five operable fleet carriers is actually pretty dang muscular. Sure, they may have to think twice about anything the US will fight over, but would the US fight to protect Vietnam? How about Taiwan? China seems pretty determined to get Taiwan back, and with 5 carriers the only way to stop them would be a full-blown shooting war with the USA (with a very chancy result, given China's logistical advantages in that part of the world).
China has been very aggressive lately with their maritime neighbors. This is making all their neighbors think hard about rearmament. If anyone thinks that will end with some gun-induced peaceful Nirvana in the region, I'd say they've been reading too many John Ringo novels (or perhaps not enough. They're a good way to spend time, and clearly reality-based politics is not this kind of persons' bag).
I just said this here last week: The Russians post comments on Finnish news sites and forums in Finnish. If they have the time and the resources to do propaganda on sites with readerships that are a tiny tiny fraction of/.'s, there's absolutely no doubt that they're actively posting and moderating here as well.
There was absolutely no doubt of that during the election. The moderation of politicial stories took a sudden and drastic turn. What was even more obvious was that even more than pro-trump posts, what was getting +5 mods was ridicule of the meer idea that Putin or Russians might be involved. You tell me what group of people would be flooding a US political forum with their #1 priority being promoting Russia and Russian politicians and only their #2 priority being promoting their favorite US politician?
I had to quit posting on the stories, simply because it got to be such a drag reading page after page of upvoted Russian propaganda. They basically removed/. as a useful forum for the last 3 months of the election.
Slashdot Mirror
I keep hearing about these Job Creators creating jobs
That's a common misconception. The word they are actually saying isn't "creators", its "craters". Its an easy mistake; the words sound very similar. But you can always tell from context that they are really saying "Job Craters".
We've seen this before with cities trying their own minimum wage hikes. A few in deep blue states will get away with it, while Republican state legislatures (32 of the 50 states by my count) will pass laws banning cities from doing anything on their own.
Despite the noise that the vocal minority is making over this, I think you will find that most folks, if asked (assuming no one could find out the answer) would support a completed ban on Muslims in the country.
You think incorrectly. Most Americans are against it.
American voters oppose 51 – 46 percent President Donald Trump’s order suspending for 90 days all travel to the U.S. from seven nations, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today. Voters oppose 60 – 37 percent President Trump’s order suspending immigration of all refugees from any nation to the U.S. for 120 days, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University Poll finds. Voters also oppose 70 – 26 percent Trump’s order suspending indefinitely all immigration of Syrian refugees to the U.S.
Exactly what I expect from Disney: the safest choice.
On the bright side, that means we likely won't have to suffer through two and a half hours of shaky-cam and lens flares. A lot of what passes for "innovation" these days in directing, I can do without.
The "public person" thing is only even an issue if the claimant can show that the thing said was untrue. I didn't get into that can of worms, not because I didn't know it was there, but because I'm highly skeptical that Mr. Coal King can even get that far.
In the US, for it to be defamation, it has to be untrue.
That means a couple of things:
We may have to rename the Streisand Effect after this is all over.
There are various assumptions to make before pulling over the side of the road which may or may not be safer than simply having the car continue. You have to make sure there is an unobstructed emergency strip and you're not just careening the vehicle down a cliff.
Simply slowing the car down would go a long way towards making all of that much easier problems for the computer to solve. It would also make any collision that does happen much less serious, and in this particular case would have prevented the collision entirely. (This is why expert drivers, when something unexpected happens, will reflexively remove their foot from the accelerator.)
So it seems like simply having the autopilot start to slow the car when the human isn't responding should at least be a baseline behavior. If it say puts the hazards on and keeps doing this, eventually the "getting safely off the road" problem should be easily solvable.
It would have the added benefit of being behavior that is annoying enough to the occupants to incentivize them to not ignore the warnings.
The real reason the EC was created was appeasement of slavers
No mod points, but this is exactly the reason. Remember that slaves (obviously) and other people who didn't own land weren't allowed to vote in most states. So in a flat vote, voters in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania alone would probably have overwhelmed the votes of all the slave states combined. However, once you rig up this weird system where slave states get to count great masses of people who they would never consider allowing to actually vote (slaves, sharecroppers, etc), then suddenly 5 of the first 6 POTUS were native to Virginia.
The electoral college is an attempt to balance political power between rural and urban voters.
That's what many US school history books say. However, US school history books have to be approved by groups of political appointees in every state who are kind of famous for not wanting any uncomfortable truths put into them.
Turns out we have extensive documentation over the constitutional deliberations on this matter. A simple plebiscite for President was preferred initially by some, but would not fly with the slave states. At the time, only land-owning (white) men were generally allowed to vote, and the plantation society in those states was centered around a very few big landowners and oodles of landless workers/slaves. This meant in a simple popular vote for POTUS, slave states would have almost no say. Northern free states with their small family farms and shopkeepers would vastly outvote them. Their only hope would be to enfranchise their slaves (which of course is essentially an oxymoron).
The Electoral College's entire purpose in its weird indirect design was to give slave states a voice in electing a POTUS proportional to their population, rather than to the amount of humans they actually allowed to vote. Slave states were even allowed to include their slaves (well, 3/5 of them) in this count. During elections, if some states didn't even have a vote for POTUS (and many didn't for the next 100 years) that was their business.
Certianly there are other justifications for the EC that you hear today (if there weren't we would have ditched it long ago). However, Slavery is the reason it came to be in the first place.
I've used it because I wanted to look stuff up (mostly reviews, not prices), and my tablet is much better for reading such things than my phone due to the extra screen real-estate.
I should say, I've tried to use it. Generally I don't usually bother because you can't really rely on a store having usable wifi, and its a PITA to drag around a tablet that I can't even use.
So how do they know why I'm looking at Amazon?
I typically look products I find while browsing up on Amazon not for the prices (I expect a premium to take it home now), but for the reviews. Something like an appliance or a car stereo has a huge potential for grief, so only a fool would buy one without making sure it doesn't have a big well-known issue.
If I can't look it up. I'll do it when I get home. If I remember. Most likely not, but if I do, I'll just buy it online at that point. Hmmm...perhaps this is a smart move by Amazon...
Computer equipment often does not like to operate after frosting over.
My favorite part of this story is that, due to all the secrecy involved, this company can get no kudos for refusing to facilitate spying, almost certainly knew that, and yet they did it anyway.
“The true test of a man’s character is what he does when no one is watching.” John Wooden
It made me wonder - what can a company even do for absolution once the mob has decided they are to be punished?
This is why service industry companies that last have PR departments, and move heaven-and-earth to not appear publicly to be douchebags. The free market is SUPPOSED to be a Darwinian environment where in the long-term better companies survive and crappy ones fail. That means from time to time companies that make crappy choices have to fail. That's how the system works. You shouldn't feel sorry for them, but instead cheer the process on. Your pity is better reserved for those abused by the douchebags in the first place.
There's an old Turkish proverb that seems appropriate here: A fish rots from the head-down.
They have carefully included the technological advances in the script in a truly seamless manner.
I have to disagree, Regan's hair was far more realistic
I don't think you understand that people wanted something different and when Trump won there was hope for things to be different
That's the standard armchair QB analysis. The problem is it doesn't really stand up to any look at the actual numbers. It turned out that in the general election, the demographics of the actual vote were almost exactly the same as 2012, except that "people of color" (particularly black voters) didn't come out in the numbers they did in 2012. There was no big new swing in existing voters. Many states that Trump swung from blue to red actually gave him less votes than Romney (eg: Michigan). Large swaths of people did not change parties. Its just that Clinton did not bring out all the Obama voters, so she lost.
What does this mean for the primary? Most likely all those people who voted Trump weren't new Republicans. They were the same Republicans that party has had for the last 4-8 years. If their electorate is now more nativist, racist, supremacist, or just flat out gullible than in the past, that's almost certainly because the party itself (and most prominently is media outlets) spent the last two cycles cultivating and nurturing exactly those qualities.
This is 100% correct. However, since the Republicans took Congress over in 2010, it has been transformed into a body that serves no other purpose than generating good headlines for its own members on conservative media outlets. So calling another new bill "grandstanding" isn't exactly making any kind of new point.
I love that sitcom about the aging wannabe-celebrity becoming US president.
The original back in the 1980's was better. The current reboot kind of sucks.
That change later haunted the GOP when it became clear that only Trump will be the nominee because of that rule change.
Trump would have become their nominee no matter what rules they adopted. He won twice votes as anybody else, and all but 15 states. If the Republican party didn't want someone like that as their nominee, then they shouldn't have spent the previous 8 years training their voters to respond to his kind of nonsense. You reap what you sew.
Had Comey not done his political stunt with the Weiner's e-mails it wouldn't have flipped the election and I doubt they expected it to. Yet Nate Silver's numbers are pretty clear: Hillary had 6%+ lead until Comey did that and down 3%+ points after, close enough for the EC to do its thing. Had it not been for Comey the election would not have even been close.
Comey has been routinely insisting that he had no choice but to do what he did. He had previously gone to Congress and reported that the investigation had been closed. The problem with that, he testified last week, is that saying such a thing creates a duty to correct if it becomes untrue later. Some extra unprocessed emails popped up, and he felt he had a duty to report that. You can well imagine the Republican reaction if something interesting DID turn up in those emails (even if it was only interesting if you squint hard and incant "Clinton's a Crook" three times), and he had hidden their existence before the election. They of course eventually turned up the same nothing that all the previous ones had, but by then it was too late.
So now Comey thought he had a lesson-learned: don't publicly report on investigations, so you won't have that "duty to correct". The problem there is that when Trump came into office, and was told he wasn't (at the time) under investigation, he wanted that information publicized. Comey explained why he didn't want to do that, based on what happened with Clinton, but it looks like Trump was not enamored of that answer.
If you are alleging vote frauds, very simple. Liberals, Democrats and Rinos have pushed insecure voting and counting methods for years
One wonders how much this long list of "enemies" of yours is going to keep growing before you realize who is really behind it. I suspect you have about 80% of the USA in there already.
Its so nice that the professional Russian trolls have moved onto other targets, so that I can again read "+5 Insightful" comments like this one that are actually insightful. I think they are busy today protecting Putin at home. Probably won't last, but I'm going to enjoy it while it lasts.
I actually agree with a lot of this, but I don't think it makes sense to downplay the military (specifically naval) threat.
Last I checked, they had two aircraft carriers
That would be more reassuring if it weren't for the fact that last *I* checked, they had only one carrier, and no planes that could land on it. They currently have those two, two more under construction, and another planned. Two to Five operable fleet carriers is actually pretty dang muscular. Sure, they may have to think twice about anything the US will fight over, but would the US fight to protect Vietnam? How about Taiwan? China seems pretty determined to get Taiwan back, and with 5 carriers the only way to stop them would be a full-blown shooting war with the USA (with a very chancy result, given China's logistical advantages in that part of the world).
China has been very aggressive lately with their maritime neighbors. This is making all their neighbors think hard about rearmament. If anyone thinks that will end with some gun-induced peaceful Nirvana in the region, I'd say they've been reading too many John Ringo novels (or perhaps not enough. They're a good way to spend time, and clearly reality-based politics is not this kind of persons' bag).
I just said this here last week: The Russians post comments on Finnish news sites and forums in Finnish. If they have the time and the resources to do propaganda on sites with readerships that are a tiny tiny fraction of /.'s, there's absolutely no doubt that they're actively posting and moderating here as well.
There was absolutely no doubt of that during the election. The moderation of politicial stories took a sudden and drastic turn. What was even more obvious was that even more than pro-trump posts, what was getting +5 mods was ridicule of the meer idea that Putin or Russians might be involved. You tell me what group of people would be flooding a US political forum with their #1 priority being promoting Russia and Russian politicians and only their #2 priority being promoting their favorite US politician?
I had to quit posting on the stories, simply because it got to be such a drag reading page after page of upvoted Russian propaganda. They basically removed /. as a useful forum for the last 3 months of the election.