Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re: Can we see this evidence? (Score 1) 491

> You've got yourself befuddled as to what this conversation is about.

I do not. You are arguing with me because I showed you that your argument has problems that leads to this kind of pointless discourse you are having with the OP. You're trying to win a pissing match with ANYONE who challenges what you are saying OR what your point is, where you aren't quite smart enough to understand what the issues are. Good luck.

Comment Re: Can we see this evidence? (Score 1) 491

> Innocence is a legal concept, not a moral one.

You are incorrect. Please understand that US law is not the arbiter of morality. It's known to be flawed, which should give you the proper perspective.

> Basically, you are suggested HRC should negotiate with the Trump supporters so that they stop saying that she is...

You are incorrect. I did not.

> In other words, your argument is with the OP who suggested that HRC be tried via the ballot box

I am not making an argument. I am trying to clarify that your reasoning is flawed without asserting correctness of conclusion. The "ballot box" (which ostensibly is in regards to POTUS) only results in one political change, in context. This does not mean it only indicates one outcome occurred. Correct yourself by not using the OPs weasel words and concepts, that leave a great deal to interpretation.

> if that is what you prefer.


Comment Re: Can we see this evidence? (Score 1) 491

> Can't have it both ways.

Of course you can. That's reality. You make compromises on priorities in a representative political structure.

People are going to vote for her despite what they believe and some another way because of what they believe. This has absolutely nothing to do with "innocence" (which is a moral concept).

Comment Re:If it's like Politifake, expect far left bias. (Score 4, Insightful) 367

I guess you are in the camp of "both are establishment", which makes no sense to me. They both have money and are elitist, but that's not the issue in a principate. This may literally be one of the last times (in anyone reading's lifetime) that the political arena will result in a choice between a self-appointed egoist (who basically scammed his way via celebrity) and a multinational political favorite for POTUS. This will poison that contest forever, either through his failure to win or his failure as a president.

Comment Re:BASIC by any other name (Score 4, Informative) 370

> Line numbers

That's a benefit. Understanding and being able to reference the order of execution explicitly and the cost of changes, is a huge lesson that it enforces accidentally.
Talk about Poke and Peek, then we're getting into the problems with (apple) BASIC.

> Nothing about BASIC makes it more suited to beginners than many other languages out there, including but not limited to Python

Lack of features makes it more suited to beginners. Less things to need to understand or use for additional complexity.
Algebra is taught before Calculus, necessarily. Humans learn with blocks before bridges.

Comment Re:Desperate Donald, there's no point... (Score 1) 500

> I honestly doubt Trump gives a shit about slashdot, so you'd have to explain better how it's relevant in any context.

Just because you don't understand the context, doesn't mean the debate doesn't exist. As is obvious from the content, it has nothing to do with Trump so that's a non sequitur or a disingenuous derail attempt. Quibbling about the type of trolling is not productive anyway. That's statistically, the use of AC on /. - At least between us, there's some accountability, unlike the ACs that pepper this thread.

Comment Re:Desperate Donald, there's no point... (Score 1) 500

Because it's a troll if you take it out of context (meaning in regard to the topic instead of /.'s system), otherwise his response is insightful. After decades, it's safe to say that anonymous speech (ACs) havent been helpful here. My biggest gripe is that is sucks up mod points (which could be doled out based on the number of non-ac posts) that would otherwise help build a community. Instead, I believe it has thinned it.

Comment Re:And yet... (Score 1) 500

> I doubt you could even point out Syria or Aleppo on an unlabeled map without a quick Google search first.

As a candidate for POTUS, knowing something about the region is part of the job. He failed 2 basic interview questions (which developers do you admire, er uh...). He's unqualified, it's ok, lots of people are. Some of them are running for president anyway.

Comment Re:The house always wins (Score 0) 843

> For a guy who's built his candidacy on an ego trip this is important.

I don't think he's a billionaire either. At least, not in the same sense as the Clintons aren't billionaires. There's not a lot of value to actually being one, vs saying you are (or are not) one since the whole point is being able to leverage (other) capital. Being "unwilling" to self-fund his campaign was enough to recognize a fraudulent claim. That being said, his candidacy is based on his popularity so his ego is incidental. I don't care if Hillary is physically or even mentally damaged anymore than if Trump has a billion dollars or not. I think it's clear as to what things are true and neither matter to me in the slightest. While Trump may end up being a puppet, policy good and bad, can be undone. Hopefully he undoes some of the bad with the inevitable good he will unravel. Or maybe he won't do anything of the sort, but I'll roll the dice on him over Hillary.

Slashdot Top Deals

Wishing without work is like fishing without bait. -- Frank Tyger