have killed far more Americans over the years, than the 3000 killed on the day of 9/11.
You're taking a bit of the article that quotes Trump's claims and are presenting them as facts. Here's what the article says:
According to the study, immigrants in the country illegally were also 11.5 percent less likely than native-born Americans to be convicted of sexual assault and 79 percent less likely to be convicted of larceny.
The study found higher conviction rates among illegal immigrants for gambling, kidnapping, smuggling and vagrancy, but those offenses were rare and made up a tiny fraction of overall crime in Texas in 2015.
Also well done for taking umbers for a single incident and comparing them to long-term aggregated numbers from a country of 350,000,000 people in order to make your point sound more dramatic.
Big projection on the screeching there. Seems that you reckon if you screech loudly enough about screeching then people work think it isn't you.
I said phone companies would block sufficiently vexatious users. This is true. You are attempting to deny it by deflection. I guess you have a bit of a reality problem.
...they sure do edit and moderate a lot of the content. Weird.
Not being a publisher does not mean "anything goes". Even old fashioned telephone companies did not have an anything goes and would take action against sufficiently vexatious users. To be clear: not being a publisher does not imply that users are allowed post arbitrarily bad stuff no matter how bad, nor does it imply that they must allow such things.
I take it from your lack of factual responses that the citations I gave back up all the claims I made to your satisfaction. You're welcome.
This is a common fallacy in internet arguments: if you can bury someone in enogh bullshit that they don't bother reading what you wrote, you have somehow "won" because you didn't have every single point rebutted.
No, that's not how anything works. In the real world, that's losing the argument, not winning because not only have you failed to convine someone of your point, but they think you're dshonest as well and likely to be unconvinced by anything you say ever again. Simply spouting bulshit until the person talking to you realises they have better things to do is not winning.
Nonetheless this is all relatively entertaining.
Like I said, I'm going to abandon reading your posts at the first blatant falsehood so if you can post a citation which isn't preceeded by a pile of blatant falsehoods, I'll read it. If the citation donesn't utterly fail to support your point, I'll read the second one and so on and so forth.
However if you can't be bothered to not waste my time, I don't really see why I should be bothered to waste it for you.
why don't I just man up and waste vast amounts of time unpacking a tissue of lies only for him to turn aronud and post more. Yeah that sounds like a fantastic idea. If he can get to the point without blatant falsehoods first, then I'll listen to that point. Until then, I'll stop reading at the first falsehood.
There is an idea propagated by the dishonest on the internet that the onus is on the reader to plough through arbitrarily large amounts of crap to gind the grain of truth. In reality it's way quicker to generate bullshit than disprove it.
Nice try, but the very first line of the first post of mine was quoting the bit of your post I responded to. If you hit a flurry of insults first, then it's your own text you're taking about.
But we both now know that honesty isn't your strongest suit.
In order to save myself vast amounts of time, I'm gong to stop my responses at the first blatantly dishonest thing in your posts.
My brand new (and old) cooker have lighters built in powered from the mains. I've got a lighter too, from when the old one broke, but it's a thing that sparks when you pull the trigger. I think it's piezo powered and has no batteries.
No coffee grinder.
I've got a blender, but it's 700W, way above what USB can do.
My knife sharpener is a steel for day to day, an oilstone and strop for when it's time to get it razor sharp (literally) and some diamond files for when it's really knackered and needs the primary bevel reground. OK I admit that's a little excessive, but the only electric sharpener I've used worth a damn is a tormek.
Anyway I wasn't really terribly aware of those lower power gadgets, but don't they mostly run straight off AC with a small universal or shaded pole motor?
Human activity pushed the climate in one direction, it can push it in the other direction as well via science and engineering.
No, not necessarily because the climate isn't linear. Imagine a ball on top of a flat-topped hill. You can push the ball around with little energy and get it back to the starting point.
Now you give the ball just a bit too much energy and it rolls all the way down the hill. You might need several orders of magnitude more energy to get it back to the starting point now than you put in.
If climate is more like that, then there's no engineering we could achieve to move it back.
Huh you went for none of the above, instead going for "lie about what I said". Well, that's an angle I guess.
Claim: Social science departments at universities like Yale have explicitly defined themselves as institutions for political change, not institutions concerned with seeking truth.
No, that wasn't your claim I took issue with. We both know that, see your post was here:
The claim I took issue with as you can clearly see was this:
Unfortunately, a lot of the social sciences these days just teaches a view of history in which the Enlightenment, the Roman Empire, and technology are just tools of the male patriarchy to suppress women and Africans.
I know that, and you know that. Your dishonesty is utterly astounding.
I already have in another thread to someone who asked.
Oh right, so you made a claim but the onus is on me to go and prove it for you! It doesn't take a university education of any sort to tell when you're utterly full of it.
But you're a bigoted, ignorant jerk
Waaah no you're the bigot!!!111oneoneONE11!
You know the word "bigot" actualy means something, right?
who can't bring himself to say "I didn't know that, can you please provide me with a reference?"
That would kind of work as a lame-ass excuse if you weren't posting blatant bullshit as facts. I'm not sure if you're about to double down claiming the truth is out there "like aliens!", double down on the whining that your bullshit has been spotted or start posting links to very dubious sources.
I guess we hire teenagers as EU regulators these days? Apparently none of them recall what the mobile charger landscape looked like not long ago when every damn manufacturer had some proprietary bullshit power connector and oddball voltage requirement. Believe me a LOT of progress has been made to narrow down that field in the last 10 - 15 years.
Yes, which coincidentally happned right around the time where the EU said (of chargers) more or less "sort your shit out or we'll sort it out for you".
The manufacturers did, but not quite enough for the EU's satisfaction.
And with the charger/interface market now essentially being narrowed down to two connectors,
3, not 2. Quite a bit of smaller new kit comes with USB micro.
Proably the smallest kitchen appliance I have in terms of wattage is maybe my fridge, maybe my slow cooker at 300W. The physically smallest is a stick blender but it's 700W. Everything smaller runs of button or coin cells.
One usually doesn't automatically provide evidence for widely known facts
It's not a widely known fact. And it doesn't take (in your words) an "oxford education" to know when you're blatantly makshit up and refusing to provide any evidence.
No, just another well-known fact that you happen to be ignorant of
IOW you made it up and can't provide anything credible to back up your claim.
but I'm happy with his performance as president so far:
Well, yes that figures!
And in the aftermath of the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton has revealed herself to be far worse than I imagined, an incompetent, corrupt, angry psychopath.
Right yes more made up facts. I can really see why you love Trump so much.
No, much. Ad homenim is "The reason you're argument is wrong is because you're an idiot". This is "your argument is wrong because reasons therefore you're an idiot". Quite different, though it doesn't surprise me it's beyond your grasp.
Computing Science is BOTH Theory AND Application. Academics who teach ONLY theory are literally missing HALF of the equation.
That I think qualifies as "not even wrong". some bits are pure theory, some pure application and some a mix of both. It's fine to teach the just theory for the theoretical bits.
Spotted the shitty teacher who can't code and tries to justify it.
If it helps you sleep better ot believe that then sure go ahead.
Theory ALWAYS comes AFTER Application. Application PROVES that the Theory is correct.
You literally contradict the first sentence in the second.
Riiiight, I'm the idiot for calling out the bullshit of Theory without Application is _exactly_ why those in the academic ivory tower tend to be blind.
Try implementing a modern crypto algorithm or a modern error correction code without Galois theory. That predaes the existence of computers by over 100 years, never mind the existence of modern techniques.
But sure, the application came first because angry dude with a chip on his shlder the size of colorado said so on the internet.
You got so angry at the title, you flipped your shit and wrote an angry post without even reading the first word of the summary. I'll grant you that's actually quite impressive since the word it right there and kind of hard to miss.
No of course he hasn't. He's one of that crowd who basically believe that the world is out to get them. At this point facts don't matter: they "know" the world is out to get them, therefore any claim about someone percieved to be on the wrong side must be true.
I notice you tried arguing against him with facts. It won't work: he isn't interested in the truth and no amount of it will dissuade him. In fact because of the backfire affect, he'll believe it more strongly and lump you in with his opporessors.
True enough. Unfortunately, a lot of the social sciences these days just teaches a view of history in which the Enlightenment, the Roman Empire, and technology are just tools of the male patriarchy to suppress women and Africans
That sounds like a made up fact.
In other words, you have no idea it's true, you've never done one, but it fits your world view to beilieve that's the case, so you just go right agead and claim it regardless. Out of interest did you vote for Trump?
Frankly, people SHOULD have the right to protest against wrong or abhorrent views. The Earth is NOT flat. Global warming is a real thing. Treating fellow humans badly because of the color of their skin or their country of birth is abhorrent. Deal with it.
Well I'd agree with that, more or less.
More or less, eh? That doesn't sound like an unqualified agreement. So, which is the less part? with you it could be anything, but I think the earth not being flat is most likely.
So why aren't you up in arms when someone points out the number of educators in the humanities and liberal arts and/or leftwing elitists, and so-on who hold racist views?
Because your definition of the word "racist" doesn't match anyone else's except for the small, loud minority of right-idenifying internet posters who want to discredit the entire idea of racism.
Slashdot Mirror
have killed far more Americans over the years, than the 3000 killed on the day of 9/11.
You're taking a bit of the article that quotes Trump's claims and are presenting them as facts. Here's what the article says:
Also well done for taking umbers for a single incident and comparing them to long-term aggregated numbers from a country of 350,000,000 people in order to make your point sound more dramatic.
You're extremely dishonest.
Big projection on the screeching there. Seems that you reckon if you screech loudly enough about screeching then people work think it isn't you.
I said phone companies would block sufficiently vexatious users. This is true. You are attempting to deny it by deflection. I guess you have a bit of a reality problem.
...they sure do edit and moderate a lot of the content. Weird.
Not being a publisher does not mean "anything goes". Even old fashioned telephone companies did not have an anything goes and would take action against sufficiently vexatious users. To be clear: not being a publisher does not imply that users are allowed post arbitrarily bad stuff no matter how bad, nor does it imply that they must allow such things.
Can we mod this one funny? It made me laugh more than the original.
From TFS, these are the velociraptors of ticks. They know no fear and are always hungry. They have no concerns but devouring their prey.
That's funny, it looks like hunter2 to me!
How about them?
Do you have any evidence or are you just JAQing off?
yes indeed the modern European intellectual is not prepared to listen to every single one of your lies then work though them one at a time.
We modern European intellectuals are smart enough to realize it's a waste of time.
I take it from your lack of factual responses that the citations I gave back up all the claims I made to your satisfaction. You're welcome.
This is a common fallacy in internet arguments: if you can bury someone in enogh bullshit that they don't bother reading what you wrote, you have somehow "won" because you didn't have every single point rebutted.
No, that's not how anything works. In the real world, that's losing the argument, not winning because not only have you failed to convine someone of your point, but they think you're dshonest as well and likely to be unconvinced by anything you say ever again. Simply spouting bulshit until the person talking to you realises they have better things to do is not winning.
Nonetheless this is all relatively entertaining.
Like I said, I'm going to abandon reading your posts at the first blatant falsehood so if you can post a citation which isn't preceeded by a pile of blatant falsehoods, I'll read it. If the citation donesn't utterly fail to support your point, I'll read the second one and so on and so forth.
However if you can't be bothered to not waste my time, I don't really see why I should be bothered to waste it for you.
Why don't you just man up...
why don't I just man up and waste vast amounts of time unpacking a tissue of lies only for him to turn aronud and post more. Yeah that sounds like a fantastic idea. If he can get to the point without blatant falsehoods first, then I'll listen to that point. Until then, I'll stop reading at the first falsehood.
There is an idea propagated by the dishonest on the internet that the onus is on the reader to plough through arbitrarily large amounts of crap to gind the grain of truth. In reality it's way quicker to generate bullshit than disprove it.
Oh, I'm sorry, with your flurry of insults,
Nice try, but the very first line of the first post of mine was quoting the bit of your post I responded to. If you hit a flurry of insults first, then it's your own text you're taking about.
But we both now know that honesty isn't your strongest suit.
In order to save myself vast amounts of time, I'm gong to stop my responses at the first blatantly dishonest thing in your posts.
No electric can opener, no milk frother.
My brand new (and old) cooker have lighters built in powered from the mains. I've got a lighter too, from when the old one broke, but it's a thing that sparks when you pull the trigger. I think it's piezo powered and has no batteries.
No coffee grinder.
I've got a blender, but it's 700W, way above what USB can do.
My knife sharpener is a steel for day to day, an oilstone and strop for when it's time to get it razor sharp (literally) and some diamond files for when it's really knackered and needs the primary bevel reground. OK I admit that's a little excessive, but the only electric sharpener I've used worth a damn is a tormek.
Anyway I wasn't really terribly aware of those lower power gadgets, but don't they mostly run straight off AC with a small universal or shaded pole motor?
Human activity pushed the climate in one direction, it can push it in the other direction as well via science and engineering.
No, not necessarily because the climate isn't linear. Imagine a ball on top of a flat-topped hill. You can push the ball around with little energy and get it back to the starting point.
Now you give the ball just a bit too much energy and it rolls all the way down the hill. You might need several orders of magnitude more energy to get it back to the starting point now than you put in.
If climate is more like that, then there's no engineering we could achieve to move it back.
Huh you went for none of the above, instead going for "lie about what I said". Well, that's an angle I guess.
Claim: Social science departments at universities like Yale have explicitly defined themselves as institutions for political change, not institutions concerned with seeking truth.
No, that wasn't your claim I took issue with. We both know that, see your post was here:
https://slashdot.org/comments....
My reply was here:
https://slashdot.org/comments....
The claim I took issue with as you can clearly see was this:
Unfortunately, a lot of the social sciences these days just teaches a view of history in which the Enlightenment, the Roman Empire, and technology are just tools of the male patriarchy to suppress women and Africans.
I know that, and you know that. Your dishonesty is utterly astounding.
I already have in another thread to someone who asked.
Oh right, so you made a claim but the onus is on me to go and prove it for you! It doesn't take a university education of any sort to tell when you're utterly full of it.
But you're a bigoted, ignorant jerk
Waaah no you're the bigot!!!111oneoneONE11!
You know the word "bigot" actualy means something, right?
who can't bring himself to say "I didn't know that, can you please provide me with a reference?"
That would kind of work as a lame-ass excuse if you weren't posting blatant bullshit as facts. I'm not sure if you're about to double down claiming the truth is out there "like aliens!", double down on the whining that your bullshit has been spotted or start posting links to very dubious sources.
I guess we hire teenagers as EU regulators these days? Apparently none of them recall what the mobile charger landscape looked like not long ago when every damn manufacturer had some proprietary bullshit power connector and oddball voltage requirement. Believe me a LOT of progress has been made to narrow down that field in the last 10 - 15 years.
Yes, which coincidentally happned right around the time where the EU said (of chargers) more or less "sort your shit out or we'll sort it out for you".
The manufacturers did, but not quite enough for the EU's satisfaction.
And with the charger/interface market now essentially being narrowed down to two connectors,
3, not 2. Quite a bit of smaller new kit comes with USB micro.
USB Power Delivery is the favored choice, but there is Qualcomm Quickcharge, Samsung Adaptive Fast Charge, and more all still on the market.
There are companies making multi-protocol charger chips now.
small kitchen appliances,
Proably the smallest kitchen appliance I have in terms of wattage is maybe my fridge, maybe my slow cooker at 300W. The physically smallest is a stick blender but it's 700W. Everything smaller runs of button or coin cells.
One usually doesn't automatically provide evidence for widely known facts
It's not a widely known fact. And it doesn't take (in your words) an "oxford education" to know when you're blatantly makshit up and refusing to provide any evidence.
No, just another well-known fact that you happen to be ignorant of
IOW you made it up and can't provide anything credible to back up your claim.
but I'm happy with his performance as president so far:
Well, yes that figures!
And in the aftermath of the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton has revealed herself to be far worse than I imagined, an incompetent, corrupt, angry psychopath.
Right yes more made up facts. I can really see why you love Trump so much.
Ad hominem much ?
No, much. Ad homenim is "The reason you're argument is wrong is because you're an idiot". This is "your argument is wrong because reasons therefore you're an idiot". Quite different, though it doesn't surprise me it's beyond your grasp.
Computing Science is BOTH Theory AND Application. Academics who teach ONLY theory are literally missing HALF of the equation.
That I think qualifies as "not even wrong". some bits are pure theory, some pure application and some a mix of both. It's fine to teach the just theory for the theoretical bits.
Spotted the shitty teacher who can't code and tries to justify it.
If it helps you sleep better ot believe that then sure go ahead.
Theory ALWAYS comes AFTER Application. Application PROVES that the Theory is correct.
You literally contradict the first sentence in the second.
Riiiight, I'm the idiot for calling out the bullshit of Theory without Application is _exactly_ why those in the academic ivory tower tend to be blind.
Try implementing a modern crypto algorithm or a modern error correction code without Galois theory. That predaes the existence of computers by over 100 years, never mind the existence of modern techniques.
But sure, the application came first because angry dude with a chip on his shlder the size of colorado said so on the internet.
Well, you failed to provide a shred of evidence.
You made the claim: the onus is on you t oback it up. Otherwise you're just spouting lies that fit your worldview.
, and laughed about killing people.
Another made-up fact!
I'm amazed you didn't vote for Trump. He sonuds right up your street. I somewhat suspecect you claiming to not vote for him is a made up fact too.
Yes that someone is you.
You got so angry at the title, you flipped your shit and wrote an angry post without even reading the first word of the summary. I'll grant you that's actually quite impressive since the word it right there and kind of hard to miss.
The author is an engineering professor.
Have you taken a humanities course recently
No of course he hasn't. He's one of that crowd who basically believe that the world is out to get them. At this point facts don't matter: they "know" the world is out to get them, therefore any claim about someone percieved to be on the wrong side must be true.
I notice you tried arguing against him with facts. It won't work: he isn't interested in the truth and no amount of it will dissuade him. In fact because of the backfire affect, he'll believe it more strongly and lump you in with his opporessors.
True enough. Unfortunately, a lot of the social sciences these days just teaches a view of history in which the Enlightenment, the Roman Empire, and technology are just tools of the male patriarchy to suppress women and Africans
That sounds like a made up fact.
In other words, you have no idea it's true, you've never done one, but it fits your world view to beilieve that's the case, so you just go right agead and claim it regardless. Out of interest did you vote for Trump?
Frankly, people SHOULD have the right to protest against wrong or abhorrent views. The Earth is NOT flat. Global warming is a real thing. Treating fellow humans badly because of the color of their skin or their country of birth is abhorrent. Deal with it.
Well I'd agree with that, more or less.
More or less, eh? That doesn't sound like an unqualified agreement. So, which is the less part? with you it could be anything, but I think the earth not being flat is most likely.
So why aren't you up in arms when someone points out the number of educators in the humanities and liberal arts and/or leftwing elitists, and so-on who hold racist views?
Because your definition of the word "racist" doesn't match anyone else's except for the small, loud minority of right-idenifying internet posters who want to discredit the entire idea of racism.