You [ganjadude] are so inconsistent and erratic and unlinked to reality that it is only natural to assume that you are probably lying about your vote, too. I can't recall that you have actually said anything in support of your claim to dislike the Donald. If I'm incorrect in my interpretation of the probabilities, then I suppose I should apologize, but I really see no reason to value you or your opinion that much.
What I can say is that if I am presented with data, then I am obliged to evaluate it. Many people have presented what they claim to be data showing that Hillary committed some criminal action, notwithstanding decades of her not being arrested. I have even done what I could to evaluate the accuracy and credibility of the evidence. It was lacking, and there is no need to evaluate the same evidence again. (Actually, I can't recall that you have even bothered with anything resembling evidence.)
Appears to me that this discussion is pointless and closed. There are no witches and Hillary is not a witch.
Hmm... I guess it has to do with the nature of truth?
There are some truths that really are indisputable. 2 + 2 = 4. Objects are attracted to objects by gravity.
Popular opinion and feelings are not that sort of truth. Yes, it is a real thing that many people have a certain option or feel certain ways. However those things can be manipulated.
I would content that Trumpists think there is no meaningful or important difference between those types of truths. They can't understand why changing popular opinion about the law of gravity wouldn't change how gravity works. Or as Trump's favorite accountant put it when asked how much is 2 plus 2:
So how do you explain the incompetence of all of the so-called Republicans who have failed to arrest her for all these years? Or maybe you're just saying they are insincere or blind or whatever?
I don't have any doubts about their sincerity, but even if they were as stupid as I think many of them are, how is it possible they have failed to arrest her? I suppose for that matter we can ask why you haven't provided your incontrovertible evidence to the proper authorities?
Is it possible you are wrong?
Is it certain that this "discussion" is pointless and closed?
Let me be clear that at this point I don't care about your motivations. You might be nuts or you might be paid to fake it. No one cares.
Are you suggesting that anyone spent comparable amounts of money investigating Al Capone? Of course, the largest flaw in your "evidence" is that he did get arrested.
Or are you trying to suggest that Hillary Clinton is a criminal mastermind? In that case you just forgot to say anything?
From your tone, I don't think you want to prove my point. Not even clear about that. However you do seem to be providing additional evidence about one of my other points (in other discussions) about some of the people who voted for Trump, so I guess I should thank you?
Are you referring to the "spicy" bondage games? Was the Donald really so jaded and foolish? It's still hard for me to believe that Trump was wild enough to get involved in that, though it is possible and the organizer has been convicted... Bad things happened.
As regards possible videos, I don't think Putin would do anything so crude, but rather he would figure out ways to ramp up the pressure. I do agree with you that Trump is lacking in Nixon's "grace" and whatever passed for "dignity" in those days. I think it's just the weight of the numbers that may drag Trump into the Bill Cosby space. If he follows up on his Gettysburg promise to sue the women, then he's going to have to testify in court, and either confess or perjure himself. If he doesn't sue them, then I'm convinced there are a large number of additional women just waiting for the value of their Donald stories to get high enough. I really don't see how Trump can cling to the office once he's firmly established as a sexual predator.
Then again, President Obama got away with some heavy marijuana in his youth... I recommend The Boy Kings of Texas for interesting historical background of those years.
That is NOT my point, but it is the kind of sloppy thinking that allowed Trump to get so many votes. I specifically said "arrest" because "indictment" is not sufficiently meaningful and I said NOTHING about being convicted or not being convicted.
If she had ever been arrested, I'm pretty sure it would have made the news. Almost as sure regarding indictment, but she could have been named as a co-conspirator with a ham sandwich, as the joke goes.
Having lived through those days, I'm pretty sure that's partly revisionist history. I'm not sure if healthcare was part of the campaign in 1992, but Hillary picked up the issue later on, after she was already first lady. What I can remember of that campaign was mostly the circus-like atmosphere around Perot and my ongoing disgust at Quayle as he normalized Alt-Right idiocy (though that label didn't exist yet). In those days I associated Alt with the newsgroups (which the google finally killed a few years ago).
Well... Basically just noting that I agree with you about certain people, but I still have trouble believing such people are numerous. Genetic (or social?) regression to the mean since we've mostly removed the selective pressures?
Then again, I've been told a large percentage of America believes in Noah and the flood.
Sorry, I STILL can't figure out the hatred of Hillary Clinton. Dare I say that it was trumped up?
If Hillary HAD committed ANY actual crime, how is it possible that decades of savage partisan investigation have somehow never managed to lead to an arrest for ANYTHING? How could they spend so many millions of YOUR taxpayer dollars and fail to find something if there was anything to be found? I think the election result is sufficient to prove that she is not a criminal super-genius, eh?
So exactly what crime do you think she committed?
I'm convinced most of the hatred of Hillary is purely partisan (and transferred from Bill), but some of it is just plain old misogyny. I think her two worst features are (1) She's a lawyer, and (2) She's extremely ambitious.
I think the DNC was like me. The DNC and I live in the real world and we still can't figure out what the Hillary hatred is supposed to be about. Not sure about the DNC, but as a scientific sort of person I think the truth is supposed to win out.
We know about the Donald. He has a track record of thousands of lawsuits, though I think he initiated most of them as counter-suits against people who were suing him. I do wonder how many millions of dollars he saved on that $25 million settlement for Trump University (by bribing the Florida Attorney-General so she didn't join in), but it obviously doesn't really matter, does it?
Or divide and conquer, if you prefer. Trump is claiming that he prefers to keep other countries from bidding under American workers, but I'm already convinced he was lying when he promised to return good jobs to the former industrial states. He just wants the low bidders to be other states, and in this case of high tech jobs, Florida lost the race to the bottom.
Then again, I also suspect he was lying when he said he would prevent other countries from doing the same to American workers. Can't really tell yet. He's said pretty much everything on every issue, but I think it's going to come down to his personal and family profits. In other words, he'll make some deal with China to keep making his ties there and then lie to his supporters about it. Worked great so far.
Still expecting the Donald to get Bill-Cosby-ed out of office within a few months.
You must be a new article here? Or am I just making excuses for the decline of Slashdot?
Anyway, no funny or insightful posts yet, and not even any mentions that I could find of the important issues, especially the negative sides of those issues.
For some people it's a good thing, but in my case it's much harder to stay focused on work when I'm at home. Lack of high-bandwidth contact with my coworkers is also a major problem. Security problems, too, both for the physical security of corporate documents and equipment and the communications security as the information travels over public and often poorly secured networks.
Compromise solution wasn't mentioned, with smaller offices that are also remote from the companies main sites. Hard to use such offices effectively, and still a barrier to team gatherings.
I did find a few mentions of the big plus for the companies. Not the costs, but actually the increased ease of disposing of unneeded and less connected human resources.
By the way, most of this has become theoretical to me, sadly.
Gawd, I hate typos, but "BitHub" several times is a brain freeze of a worrisome sort... I meant "GitHub", and it's no excuse that I stopped using it years ago. Perhaps distracted by some recent BitTorrent stuff? No legitimate relation, obviously.
Slashdot Mirror
Z^7
Z^4
You [ganjadude] are so inconsistent and erratic and unlinked to reality that it is only natural to assume that you are probably lying about your vote, too. I can't recall that you have actually said anything in support of your claim to dislike the Donald. If I'm incorrect in my interpretation of the probabilities, then I suppose I should apologize, but I really see no reason to value you or your opinion that much.
What I can say is that if I am presented with data, then I am obliged to evaluate it. Many people have presented what they claim to be data showing that Hillary committed some criminal action, notwithstanding decades of her not being arrested. I have even done what I could to evaluate the accuracy and credibility of the evidence. It was lacking, and there is no need to evaluate the same evidence again. (Actually, I can't recall that you have even bothered with anything resembling evidence.)
Appears to me that this discussion is pointless and closed. There are no witches and Hillary is not a witch.
Hmm... I guess it has to do with the nature of truth?
There are some truths that really are indisputable. 2 + 2 = 4. Objects are attracted to objects by gravity.
Popular opinion and feelings are not that sort of truth. Yes, it is a real thing that many people have a certain option or feel certain ways. However those things can be manipulated.
I would content that Trumpists think there is no meaningful or important difference between those types of truths. They can't understand why changing popular opinion about the law of gravity wouldn't change how gravity works. Or as Trump's favorite accountant put it when asked how much is 2 plus 2:
"How much do you want it to be?"
So how do you explain the incompetence of all of the so-called Republicans who have failed to arrest her for all these years? Or maybe you're just saying they are insincere or blind or whatever?
I don't have any doubts about their sincerity, but even if they were as stupid as I think many of them are, how is it possible they have failed to arrest her? I suppose for that matter we can ask why you haven't provided your incontrovertible evidence to the proper authorities?
Is it possible you are wrong?
Is it certain that this "discussion" is pointless and closed?
Let me be clear that at this point I don't care about your motivations. You might be nuts or you might be paid to fake it. No one cares.
Z^6
Z^3
Are you suggesting that anyone spent comparable amounts of money investigating Al Capone? Of course, the largest flaw in your "evidence" is that he did get arrested.
Or are you trying to suggest that Hillary Clinton is a criminal mastermind? In that case you just forgot to say anything?
From your tone, I don't think you want to prove my point. Not even clear about that. However you do seem to be providing additional evidence about one of my other points (in other discussions) about some of the people who voted for Trump, so I guess I should thank you?
Are you referring to the "spicy" bondage games? Was the Donald really so jaded and foolish? It's still hard for me to believe that Trump was wild enough to get involved in that, though it is possible and the organizer has been convicted... Bad things happened.
As regards possible videos, I don't think Putin would do anything so crude, but rather he would figure out ways to ramp up the pressure. I do agree with you that Trump is lacking in Nixon's "grace" and whatever passed for "dignity" in those days. I think it's just the weight of the numbers that may drag Trump into the Bill Cosby space. If he follows up on his Gettysburg promise to sue the women, then he's going to have to testify in court, and either confess or perjure himself. If he doesn't sue them, then I'm convinced there are a large number of additional women just waiting for the value of their Donald stories to get high enough. I really don't see how Trump can cling to the office once he's firmly established as a sexual predator.
Then again, President Obama got away with some heavy marijuana in his youth... I recommend The Boy Kings of Texas for interesting historical background of those years.
Irrational. 'Nuff said.
That is NOT my point, but it is the kind of sloppy thinking that allowed Trump to get so many votes. I specifically said "arrest" because "indictment" is not sufficiently meaningful and I said NOTHING about being convicted or not being convicted.
If she had ever been arrested, I'm pretty sure it would have made the news. Almost as sure regarding indictment, but she could have been named as a co-conspirator with a ham sandwich, as the joke goes.
Having lived through those days, I'm pretty sure that's partly revisionist history. I'm not sure if healthcare was part of the campaign in 1992, but Hillary picked up the issue later on, after she was already first lady. What I can remember of that campaign was mostly the circus-like atmosphere around Perot and my ongoing disgust at Quayle as he normalized Alt-Right idiocy (though that label didn't exist yet). In those days I associated Alt with the newsgroups (which the google finally killed a few years ago).
Well... Basically just noting that I agree with you about certain people, but I still have trouble believing such people are numerous. Genetic (or social?) regression to the mean since we've mostly removed the selective pressures?
Then again, I've been told a large percentage of America believes in Noah and the flood.
I think the worst thing about Hillary (from an outside non US view) is: she simply is ugly.
Trump is ugly, too.
However people seem to prefer an ugly man over an ugly woman all the time (no idea if that is a general rule, but it looks to me like it is).
Considering Trump's long-term involvement with beauty pageants (for women, of course), I can't decide if that's funny or insightful.
Anyway, if elections were beauty pageants, I don't see how that could make them any more ridiculous than this last one.
ZZ
Z^10
Z^5
Sorry, I STILL can't figure out the hatred of Hillary Clinton. Dare I say that it was trumped up?
If Hillary HAD committed ANY actual crime, how is it possible that decades of savage partisan investigation have somehow never managed to lead to an arrest for ANYTHING? How could they spend so many millions of YOUR taxpayer dollars and fail to find something if there was anything to be found? I think the election result is sufficient to prove that she is not a criminal super-genius, eh?
So exactly what crime do you think she committed?
I'm convinced most of the hatred of Hillary is purely partisan (and transferred from Bill), but some of it is just plain old misogyny. I think her two worst features are (1) She's a lawyer, and (2) She's extremely ambitious.
I think the DNC was like me. The DNC and I live in the real world and we still can't figure out what the Hillary hatred is supposed to be about. Not sure about the DNC, but as a scientific sort of person I think the truth is supposed to win out.
We know about the Donald. He has a track record of thousands of lawsuits, though I think he initiated most of them as counter-suits against people who were suing him. I do wonder how many millions of dollars he saved on that $25 million settlement for Trump University (by bribing the Florida Attorney-General so she didn't join in), but it obviously doesn't really matter, does it?
Or divide and conquer, if you prefer. Trump is claiming that he prefers to keep other countries from bidding under American workers, but I'm already convinced he was lying when he promised to return good jobs to the former industrial states. He just wants the low bidders to be other states, and in this case of high tech jobs, Florida lost the race to the bottom.
Then again, I also suspect he was lying when he said he would prevent other countries from doing the same to American workers. Can't really tell yet. He's said pretty much everything on every issue, but I think it's going to come down to his personal and family profits. In other words, he'll make some deal with China to keep making his ties there and then lie to his supporters about it. Worked great so far.
Still expecting the Donald to get Bill-Cosby-ed out of office within a few months.
Z^9
Z^4
You must be a new article here? Or am I just making excuses for the decline of Slashdot?
Anyway, no funny or insightful posts yet, and not even any mentions that I could find of the important issues, especially the negative sides of those issues.
For some people it's a good thing, but in my case it's much harder to stay focused on work when I'm at home. Lack of high-bandwidth contact with my coworkers is also a major problem. Security problems, too, both for the physical security of corporate documents and equipment and the communications security as the information travels over public and often poorly secured networks.
Compromise solution wasn't mentioned, with smaller offices that are also remote from the companies main sites. Hard to use such offices effectively, and still a barrier to team gatherings.
I did find a few mentions of the big plus for the companies. Not the costs, but actually the increased ease of disposing of unneeded and less connected human resources.
By the way, most of this has become theoretical to me, sadly.
Z^8
Z^3
Gawd, I hate typos, but "BitHub" several times is a brain freeze of a worrisome sort... I meant "GitHub", and it's no excuse that I stopped using it years ago. Perhaps distracted by some recent BitTorrent stuff? No legitimate relation, obviously.