It is the neolibs that post those stupid posts and you just eat it up because it fits so perfectly with what the media have told you a conservative is.
Those posts are solely designed to taint the character of the people that do not support their ideology.
It is so blatant that I cannot believe so many slashdotters fall for it.
These posts do not contain any kind of conservative message, just racial hatred. (And to anticipate the response - racial hatred is not conservatism.)
True enough. Nevertheless, the Republican Party has a long history of playing on such fear and ignorance in order to grab votes. Indeed, and to their credit, during most of the early '90's, they did so with enviable mastery. Unfortunately, one can employ that "those rednecks don't speak for us..." dodge for only so long before a sufficient segment of the public calls bullshit on such hypocrisy and hands the offenders their asses in a couple of consecutive elections. Fortunately, (or unfortunately, for Republicans) the Republican leadership (such as it is right now) has failed utterly to realize this and continues to play to the same fearful and ignorant (redneck) portion of their "base". BTW, apologies up front to those who choose to wear the "redneck" label for reasons other than an unfortunate failure of the educational system.
Honestly, if these "redneck conservatives" are passionate enough to sit by their computers all day and post this garbage, why would they post anonymously? Do you really think someone filled with this much hatred would be afraid of someone seeing their made up username?
Of course! On/., a white sheet isn't very effective, but the AC moniker will do when you're too afraid to show your face while you make an ass of yourself.
More to the point, it is not a belief that has earned the banning, it is a behavior. Break the rules, post self-serving lies (yes, lies, as in deliberate alteration of facts), and so forth and you will find yourself banned. Your race, creed, color, religion, or national origin have nothing to do with it.
Actually, wars, real wars, as opposed to "the war on terror (drugs, etc.)", is quite logical. (With apologies to General Butler) It is the execution of state sponsored racketeering. Even some fake wars, Iraq, for example, are, if you remove the ditto-head blinders, aimed primarily at one thing - profit. No, it was not about "stealing" Iraq's oil. It would have been cheaper to buy it. It is about retaining enough control of a commodity market to maintain dominance in that market. Then there are all the secondary rackets, in the form of no-bid contracts for all your friends. No, war makes a great deal of sense when you look at it through a capitalist lens.
The funding for the "research" is provided by an entity with an agenda other than pure research, e.g. having a vested interest in a particular outcome or finding. Nowhere is this more common that in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry, where entire ersatz journals have been published to provide the appearance of well-documented and peer-reviewed research.
Beyond jailing those involved in such grand misconduct, I don't know where to draw the line, but I believe that separating profit from research, as far as possible, is a good first step. And yes, I am indeed advocating that medical research be "socialized". I have nothing against corporate profits, but when truth, not to mention the public good, takes a back seat to profits, the system is broken when viewed from any impartial perspective.
Sorry, but that dog don't hunt. Paywalls are under consideration by the print media (newspapers) because they can' t figure out how to make their business model work anymore, in an age when a key thing has changed; the barriers to publishing "news" (the other-than-advertising stuff in newspapers) are virtually gone now. It might be argued that fewer and fewer people are willing to actually read something to gain knowledge, the success of Fox News is sad evidence of that, but I think it's largely the fact that one can get the same information, in fact a better stream of it, on the web. Newspaper publishers expecting that they can enjoy a revenue stream and business model that is anything like what worked in the good old days is indeed outrageous.
Look, I read content from about a dozen news sources a day, all on the web, and all via links that Google News has aggregated for me. I might pay for access to the stories that interest me, but what I will pay is nowhere near what the local paper was able to squeeze out of me when they were the only game in town. I do notgive a shit about stick and ball games. Same goes for "society" news and the folksy home-garden-kitchen section. Figure that out and move forward, publishers. Dump the printing plant and all that overhead. Take what you have left and focus on delivering enough value that people (subscribers and advertisers) will pay something for it. Do that because we really do need professional news gatherers as much as, if not more than, ever.
The time to take control away from someone is -before- they abuse the power, not after.
And by the same logic, the argument may be made that a given power should not be placed closer to hands that have a demonstrated history of abusing such powers. Status quo will do nicely, thank you.
Please don't confuse my disdain for the (often half-drunken) boasts made by some dumb-ass with an over-inflated sense of his personal firearms proficiency with those of someone who is willing to stand up (in the appropriate venue at the appropriate time) for his civil rights. You are quite right in observing that more of us should be taking such a stand, but that stand is best not made by some fuck-wit with a gun and more bravado than brains.
Coming through the door of my house without being accompanied by the local constabulary will result in the FCC jackboots leaving on stretchers. It's really that simple.:-)
"I am not afraid of the main who wants twelve nuclear bombs, but I am terrified of the main who wants only one."
It most certainly would not be "better if everybody had them", for there are those who are will can not be deterred by the threat of retaliation. A nation state, with resources, infrastructure, and people to lose in such an exchange, yes. An amorphic political group, or even a nation with a desperate and/or irrational leadership (North Korea, for example), not nearly so much.
It was the conclusion of the appellate court that the police did not act "in good faith". They presented what were essentially lies to the court in order to obtain their warrant. Their culpability started at that point. One need not prove malice to recover damages stemming from negligence and incompetence on the part of the police department, though by my reading of the "facts", there was much more at play here than simple cluelessness. If I were a lawyer, I would definitely take the pro bono bet on the tort case that appears to be called for here.
Uh-huh. Sure...
Seems like there's always at least one libertarian-wannabe-cum-gun-nut who has to make that statement about whatever unwarranted government intrusion is under discussion.
Look, I'm a big 2nd Ammendment supporter, and I have a more-than-healthy disdain for government overstepping it's bounds ("Patriot Act", anyone?) but this knuckle-dragger boast is so lame that needs to be laid to rest, already.
Why would I mod you down? I have the points to do it right now, BTW. Your argument is sound. Your knowledge of the current state of Linux desktop distributions though, not so much. The Xandros distro that came on my Eeepc is nothing if not "full-retard". Big friendly buttons that enable commonly used functions. Clearly, "ease of use" is not the show stopper here.
Start over.
It seems that he was arrested for being a smart ass. Not that it is a good reason to be arrested, but still an important distinction.
Agreed, partly. I don't believe that telling the rent-a-cops to fuck off is really being "a smart ass". Not in the least, because that implies that calling someone out for trying to trample upon your rights is somehow a negative thing, even if in only a slightly anti-social (as opposed to illegal) way.
On your own, eh? Really?
Tell me about your rig. Did you build it yourself? No, I mean all of it. No? I didn't think so. If it was a solid-state rig, you'd likely never be able to fabricate all of the components. If it was tube rig, did you wind your own transformers? Fabricate their cores yourself? Roll your own capacitors? And I will assume that you, like virtually all overly romantic radio amateurs, lack any of the arcane skills required to actually make your own vacuum tubes.
- if society reset itself to zero tomorrow - I could still pull off this feat
I've got news for you. The notion that HAM's can step in and effectively fill a void in such a rare scenario is, largely, a myth. And before you start, I am a licensed amateur radio operator and a retired emergency services professional (fire and EMS), so yes, I do know what I am talking about.
It is true that there are groups of disciplined operators, who are given the opportunity to train with emergency services agencies, so that capabilities may be known and proper procedures worked out and learned. These dedicated amateurs can indeed be a valuable resource, if properly utilized. I've seen it work that way, but unfortunately, such situations are extremely rare. Most hams would simply get in the way, often through no fault of their own.
So let's dispense with the "...because there might be a flood, or something..." argument for
Yeah, well what if you were stranded on a desert island (or in deepest suburbia during a fiber cut) and only had a car battery and a bunch of copper wire. You could make a spark-gap transmitter and call for help in Morse code.
So that's why we should make you whippersnappers learn CW. And another thing..., oh. They don't need to learn CW anymore? Well..., that's why we should keep vast swaths of valuable, but largely unused, radio spectrum reserved exclusively for a few elitist paleo-nerds. Now get off my lawn!
The progress will be slow but I have confidence Americans will increasingly reject the Republicans within their current government.
There. Fixed that for you.
Yes, yes. I know that there are more countries in "America" than the U.S., but everybody still calls us Americans.
The point is that one has to be struck by the similarity of two groups of culturally conservative old men who have become dangerously out of touch with the world they live in. Both are becoming marginalized as a result. Just sayin'.
Why do you think that the Democratic Party is fascist? Because you and the others in the ditto-head legions heard some blow-hard entertainer use the term?
Wake the hell up, man. The labels don't mean much, the actions of our elected officials do, and those actions are, largely, bought and paid for by corporate interests. The telecom lobby is arguably the most powerful in Washington. They are, without question, able to buy whatever influence they need or want. The only completely correct term for that is corruption. Our "elected" officials are elected to, ostensibly, represent the interests of their constituents. At the national level, the fund raising required to get elected and stay elected is almost a full-time job. Those interests who make that job "easier" become the new constituents. Unless/until we take away the ability of corporations (entities which, rightfully, have no votes) will wield influence that is very often at odds with the interests of the people. The term you want to remember and demand of all your elected officials is "campaign finance reform".
My advice is to adopt only the project management tools and methods that you need to get the job done effectively. It is all too easy to become mired in learning a complex discipline (project management) when all you really need is a well thought out flow chart and a good ER diagram. In other words, do not spend your valuable time trying to learn MS Project or any of the several readily available alternatives. They are tools for someone well-schooled in the techniques in managing complex projects. Your flow chart could easily expand into groups of related tasks, one grouping for each element in the chart. To manage that, a simple task list manager will do.
Uhm... how about...
When you are innocent and have no clue as to what the interrogators want to hear, it can take some guesswork to come up with the "right" answer, sometimes a lot of guesswork.
So let me get this straight...
In Stockholm, for $11 per month, I can get the same 4-6 mbps that Comcast claims to be selling me here in Houston, for $50 per month? Boy, am I stupid. I though that protecting the free market from "evils" like socialism was the only way that "competition" could flourish and as a consumer I'd get the best possible deal. Could it be that the Fox News talking heads have been lying to me? And that just maybe, "the commons" is not the place to allow monopolistic corporations to entrench themselves?
Welcome, y'all, to Loozeeanna. Say what you want about our politicians ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huey_Long for example) but they are nothing if not responsive to the needs of their "kunstichency". If Remy Cousinlove heard Reverend Slackjaw talk about this threat to the sanctity of human purity on Sunday, you can bet that some senator will hear about it on Monday and start the machine that makes a bunch of noise that Remy and the Reverend want to hear. Never mind that it's a complete waste of time to even discuss, much less legislate over such a thing. As long as their mollified, the senator gets re-elected and the people he really represents, continue to get what they paid for.
Slashdot Mirror
It is the neolibs that post those stupid posts and you just eat it up because it fits so perfectly with what the media have told you a conservative is.
Those posts are solely designed to taint the character of the people that do not support their ideology.
It is so blatant that I cannot believe so many slashdotters fall for it.
These posts do not contain any kind of conservative message, just racial hatred. (And to anticipate the response - racial hatred is not conservatism.)
True enough. Nevertheless, the Republican Party has a long history of playing on such fear and ignorance in order to grab votes. Indeed, and to their credit, during most of the early '90's, they did so with enviable mastery. Unfortunately, one can employ that "those rednecks don't speak for us..." dodge for only so long before a sufficient segment of the public calls bullshit on such hypocrisy and hands the offenders their asses in a couple of consecutive elections. Fortunately, (or unfortunately, for Republicans) the Republican leadership (such as it is right now) has failed utterly to realize this and continues to play to the same fearful and ignorant (redneck) portion of their "base".
BTW, apologies up front to those who choose to wear the "redneck" label for reasons other than an unfortunate failure of the educational system.
Honestly, if these "redneck conservatives" are passionate enough to sit by their computers all day and post this garbage, why would they post anonymously? Do you really think someone filled with this much hatred would be afraid of someone seeing their made up username?
Of course! On /., a white sheet isn't very effective, but the AC moniker will do when you're too afraid to show your face while you make an ass of yourself.
More to the point, it is not a belief that has earned the banning, it is a behavior. Break the rules, post self-serving lies (yes, lies, as in deliberate alteration of facts), and so forth and you will find yourself banned. Your race, creed, color, religion, or national origin have nothing to do with it.
Actually, wars, real wars, as opposed to "the war on terror (drugs, etc.)", is quite logical. (With apologies to General Butler) It is the execution of state sponsored racketeering. Even some fake wars, Iraq, for example, are, if you remove the ditto-head blinders, aimed primarily at one thing - profit. No, it was not about "stealing" Iraq's oil. It would have been cheaper to buy it. It is about retaining enough control of a commodity market to maintain dominance in that market. Then there are all the secondary rackets, in the form of no-bid contracts for all your friends. No, war makes a great deal of sense when you look at it through a capitalist lens.
We must find a radically different social structure to organize research and education in science after The Big Crunch
(right-wing nut-job radio voice)
Socialist...
(/right-wing nut-job radio voice)
The funding for the "research" is provided by an entity with an agenda other than pure research, e.g. having a vested interest in a particular outcome or finding. Nowhere is this more common that in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry, where entire ersatz journals have been published to provide the appearance of well-documented and peer-reviewed research.
Beyond jailing those involved in such grand misconduct, I don't know where to draw the line, but I believe that separating profit from research, as far as possible, is a good first step. And yes, I am indeed advocating that medical research be "socialized". I have nothing against corporate profits, but when truth, not to mention the public good, takes a back seat to profits, the system is broken when viewed from any impartial perspective.
Sorry, but that dog don't hunt. Paywalls are under consideration by the print media (newspapers) because they can' t figure out how to make their business model work anymore, in an age when a key thing has changed; the barriers to publishing "news" (the other-than-advertising stuff in newspapers) are virtually gone now. It might be argued that fewer and fewer people are willing to actually read something to gain knowledge, the success of Fox News is sad evidence of that, but I think it's largely the fact that one can get the same information, in fact a better stream of it, on the web. Newspaper publishers expecting that they can enjoy a revenue stream and business model that is anything like what worked in the good old days is indeed outrageous.
Look, I read content from about a dozen news sources a day, all on the web, and all via links that Google News has aggregated for me. I might pay for access to the stories that interest me, but what I will pay is nowhere near what the local paper was able to squeeze out of me when they were the only game in town. I do notgive a shit about stick and ball games. Same goes for "society" news and the folksy home-garden-kitchen section. Figure that out and move forward, publishers. Dump the printing plant and all that overhead. Take what you have left and focus on delivering enough value that people (subscribers and advertisers) will pay something for it. Do that because we really do need professional news gatherers as much as, if not more than, ever.
The time to take control away from someone is -before- they abuse the power, not after.
And by the same logic, the argument may be made that a given power should not be placed closer to hands that have a demonstrated history of abusing such powers. Status quo will do nicely, thank you.
Please don't confuse my disdain for the (often half-drunken) boasts made by some dumb-ass with an over-inflated sense of his personal firearms proficiency with those of someone who is willing to stand up (in the appropriate venue at the appropriate time) for his civil rights. You are quite right in observing that more of us should be taking such a stand, but that stand is best not made by some fuck-wit with a gun and more bravado than brains.
Coming through the door of my house without being accompanied by the local constabulary will result in the FCC jackboots leaving on stretchers. It's really that simple. :-)
Uh-huh. Sure.
"I am not afraid of the main who wants twelve nuclear bombs, but I am terrified of the main who wants only one."
It most certainly would not be "better if everybody had them", for there are those who are will can not be deterred by the threat of retaliation. A nation state, with resources, infrastructure, and people to lose in such an exchange, yes. An amorphic political group, or even a nation with a desperate and/or irrational leadership (North Korea, for example), not nearly so much.
It was the conclusion of the appellate court that the police did not act "in good faith". They presented what were essentially lies to the court in order to obtain their warrant. Their culpability started at that point. One need not prove malice to recover damages stemming from negligence and incompetence on the part of the police department, though by my reading of the "facts", there was much more at play here than simple cluelessness. If I were a lawyer, I would definitely take the pro bono bet on the tort case that appears to be called for here.
That was easy. Oh, and BTW, piss on you, CBS.
Uh-huh. Sure...
Seems like there's always at least one libertarian-wannabe-cum-gun-nut who has to make that statement about whatever unwarranted government intrusion is under discussion.
Look, I'm a big 2nd Ammendment supporter, and I have a more-than-healthy disdain for government overstepping it's bounds ("Patriot Act", anyone?) but this knuckle-dragger boast is so lame that needs to be laid to rest, already.
Why would I mod you down? I have the points to do it right now, BTW. Your argument is sound. Your knowledge of the current state of Linux desktop distributions though, not so much. The Xandros distro that came on my Eeepc is nothing if not "full-retard". Big friendly buttons that enable commonly used functions. Clearly, "ease of use" is not the show stopper here.
Start over.
It seems that he was arrested for being a smart ass. Not that it is a good reason to be arrested, but still an important distinction.
Agreed, partly. I don't believe that telling the rent-a-cops to fuck off is really being "a smart ass". Not in the least, because that implies that calling someone out for trying to trample upon your rights is somehow a negative thing, even if in only a slightly anti-social (as opposed to illegal) way.
Tell me about your rig. Did you build it yourself? No, I mean all of it. No? I didn't think so. If it was a solid-state rig, you'd likely never be able to fabricate all of the components. If it was tube rig, did you wind your own transformers? Fabricate their cores yourself? Roll your own capacitors? And I will assume that you, like virtually all overly romantic radio amateurs, lack any of the arcane skills required to actually make your own vacuum tubes.
- if society reset itself to zero tomorrow - I could still pull off this feat
Sorry, but no. You could not.
I've got news for you. The notion that HAM's can step in and effectively fill a void in such a rare scenario is, largely, a myth. And before you start, I am a licensed amateur radio operator and a retired emergency services professional (fire and EMS), so yes, I do know what I am talking about.
It is true that there are groups of disciplined operators, who are given the opportunity to train with emergency services agencies, so that capabilities may be known and proper procedures worked out and learned. These dedicated amateurs can indeed be a valuable resource, if properly utilized. I've seen it work that way, but unfortunately, such situations are extremely rare. Most hams would simply get in the way, often through no fault of their own.
So let's dispense with the "...because there might be a flood, or something..." argument for
Yeah, well what if you were stranded on a desert island (or in deepest suburbia during a fiber cut) and only had a car battery and a bunch of copper wire. You could make a spark-gap transmitter and call for help in Morse code.
So that's why we should make you whippersnappers learn CW. And another thing..., oh. They don't need to learn CW anymore? Well..., that's why we should keep vast swaths of valuable, but largely unused, radio spectrum reserved exclusively for a few elitist paleo-nerds. Now get off my lawn!
The progress will be slow but I have confidence Americans will increasingly reject the Republicans within their current government.
There. Fixed that for you. Yes, yes. I know that there are more countries in "America" than the U.S., but everybody still calls us Americans. The point is that one has to be struck by the similarity of two groups of culturally conservative old men who have become dangerously out of touch with the world they live in. Both are becoming marginalized as a result. Just sayin'.
Why do you think that the Democratic Party is fascist? Because you and the others in the ditto-head legions heard some blow-hard entertainer use the term?
Wake the hell up, man. The labels don't mean much, the actions of our elected officials do, and those actions are, largely, bought and paid for by corporate interests. The telecom lobby is arguably the most powerful in Washington. They are, without question, able to buy whatever influence they need or want. The only completely correct term for that is corruption . Our "elected" officials are elected to, ostensibly, represent the interests of their constituents. At the national level, the fund raising required to get elected and stay elected is almost a full-time job. Those interests who make that job "easier" become the new constituents. Unless/until we take away the ability of corporations (entities which, rightfully, have no votes) will wield influence that is very often at odds with the interests of the people. The term you want to remember and demand of all your elected officials is "campaign finance reform".
My advice is to adopt only the project management tools and methods that you need to get the job done effectively. It is all too easy to become mired in learning a complex discipline (project management) when all you really need is a well thought out flow chart and a good ER diagram. In other words, do not spend your valuable time trying to learn MS Project or any of the several readily available alternatives. They are tools for someone well-schooled in the techniques in managing complex projects. Your flow chart could easily expand into groups of related tasks, one grouping for each element in the chart. To manage that, a simple task list manager will do.
Uhm... how about...
When you are innocent and have no clue as to what the interrogators want to hear, it can take some guesswork to come up with the "right" answer, sometimes a lot of guesswork.
So let me get this straight...
In Stockholm, for $11 per month, I can get the same 4-6 mbps that Comcast claims to be selling me here in Houston, for $50 per month? Boy, am I stupid. I though that protecting the free market from "evils" like socialism was the only way that "competition" could flourish and as a consumer I'd get the best possible deal. Could it be that the Fox News talking heads have been lying to me? And that just maybe, "the commons" is not the place to allow monopolistic corporations to entrench themselves?
Welcome, y'all, to Loozeeanna. Say what you want about our politicians ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huey_Long for example) but they are nothing if not responsive to the needs of their "kunstichency". If Remy Cousinlove heard Reverend Slackjaw talk about this threat to the sanctity of human purity on Sunday, you can bet that some senator will hear about it on Monday and start the machine that makes a bunch of noise that Remy and the Reverend want to hear. Never mind that it's a complete waste of time to even discuss, much less legislate over such a thing. As long as their mollified, the senator gets re-elected and the people he really represents, continue to get what they paid for.
Cue the "hate crime" debate in 3...2...1...