Posts by Jonathan Schwatrz

EU court to rule whether Facebook should seek and destroy hate speech

Re: Mycho Re: The Reason For Limiting Words

Does that mean you're willing to fight violence?

'Repeal hate crime laws for free speech' petition passes 14k signatures

Re: phuzz Re: The justice system really has money to waste?

"....Angry raging when you don't get your own way is embarrassing in a toddler, in a grown adult Millennial it's just sad the norm." TFTFY ;)

Re: Tiggity Re: The justice system really has money to waste?

"I'm guessing you do not have to deal with the barely functioning UK rail system on a near daily basis? If you did, you might realise why someone could easily rage tweet thet sort of thing....." It's called self-control. As I was taught from a young age - "engage brain before opening mouth". It would seem even smarter to engage brain before Tweeting, especially given that you have zero control over the likely audience of a Tweet. Whilst I have suffered the "joys" of the UK rail "service" many times, I have always kept my grumbling to a select audience and not felt the need to mindlessly shriek it over the Internet. Might I suggest the Millennial tendency to "look-at-me"-ism is really the culprit here?

Re: TimeMaster T Re: My view

"You should be able to get up on a soap box on any street corner and start speaking your views, even if you say that Gay's should be stoned....." The English law is that it is illegal to make those statements as a command or incitement to an illegal act. As an example, on a street in England, it used to be arguably legally acceptable (though morally repugnant) to say "gays should be stoned", but illegal to say "stone the gays" - the latter is incitement to commit assault and possibly murder. But, under the new English statutes, just saying "gays should be stoned" to an audience that might be distressed by your statement would count as hate speech and get you locked up.

I suspect the CPS's argument wasn't that the guy was inciting his dog to murder Jews by giving the command "gas the Jews", that would seem a tad silly and would seem to fall under the humour clause in Part 3A of the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, but that his putting the video of it on the 'net could be classed as hate speech as viewers could be distressed by the sentiment.

1 in 5 STEM bros whinge they can't catch a break in tech world they run

Re: Sir Runcible Spoon Re: Form is temporary but class is permanent.

I'll take two, please, Spoony.

Why stop there?

".....Nearly one fifth of the men surveyed – the type of guys who account for 80 per cent of the tech staff and 75 per cent of leadership at Google...." Will the author be so happy squawking his latest bit of virtue-signaling if we asked why there aren't more female writers on The Reg? Surely we can find San Fran-based females from minorities to replace Shaun Nichols. Indeed, the Wikipedia article on El Reg seems awfully light on any female names, let alone minority ones, and stuffed full of what sound like white male names as editors and senior management - surely El Reg should practice what it preaches (or just give up on the virtue-signaling)?

No wonder Marvin the robot was miserable: AI will make the rich richer – and the poor poorer

Gee, where have we heard this before....?

".....That is to say workers in our brave new world will still have things to do, but many of them, assisting and assisted by machines, will be paid poorly while robot owners get rich....." Luddites 2.0

Memo man Damore is back – with lawyers: Now Google sued for 'punishing' white men

Re: normalperson Re: I am confused

".....but a single conservative comment will get you attacked....." When people admit they have been more harassed for coming out as Republican than gay by their Democrat friends and family it kinda shows how nasty the "progressive" groupthink has become. It's very hard to build consensus when people insist you have "become evil" just because you don't share their viewpoint.

Re: cbars Re: I am confused

"If you discriminate in all directions...." Well, no, as it is likely to be different staff at the company discriminating in different ways, but all just as liable as they are all supposed to be working in a non-discriminatory manner. It is quite easy for a large organization to actually have staff with completely opposing viewpoints that both think they are right when they tip the scales in what they view as "the right direction", and actually both are discriminatory in their hiring practices. Given that being pro-women and "minorities" is more hip'n'trendy I'm betting the majority of San Fran bias is more anti-white-male than pro, even if the guilty don't see it as being anti.

Mystery surrounds fate of secret satellite slung by SpaceX

Re: CrazyOldCatMan Re: the 45th Space Wing?

".....WW2 US[1] tanks were very much a case of quantity over quality.....We had thousands of the things and the Germans only had hundreds of theirs....." Once again, for the hard of reading, the most common tank met by British and US tanks in the European Campaign was the Panzer MkIV, not the Panther, the Tiger nor the Tiger II. The Sherman was just as good as the Panzer IV and superior in some respects (sloped front armour for a start), and the ROQF 75mm-armed British tanks like the Churchill and Cromwell had few problems dealing with the Panzer IV as well. The British switched to the ROQF 75mm to gain better HE performance, not for hole-punching, as HE was becoming more important than AP. HE was more important as the majority of British and Yank tank losses from Alamein onwards were to anti-tank guns, not German tanks.

Feel like a little kid in the container world? Welcome to the club

Re: AC

"....if someone discovered a bug where a process run in one container would allow access to kernel memory belonging to another." We used to call that the IGAS test - as in the CIO says "I Give A Sh*t" test. In the old days of monolithic application servers, where you hosted one application as one part of a solution stack per server, when UNIX started offering co-hosting (where scheduling controls allowed you to host two apps on the same server without conflicts) we used to apply the IGAS test to see if the company was willing to risk hosting a particular application on a server with another application. For example, the CIO at BT might say "I don't give a sh*t about our website, just keep the billing system up", whereas the CTO from Amazon might say "I give a sh*t about the website, it's my priority". The business model defines the application requirement which defines what the business gives a sh*t about. The risk with moving from the one-app-per-server model was that app A would interfere or hog resources from app B, or that patching to app A would mean downtime for app B, or a security hole in app A would give malcontents access to app B too, and if the business actually gave a sh*t about app B then you would not co-host them (possibly not even on an IBM mainframe). Next came virtualization and the IGAS test was still appropriate, then containers (in UNIX this was looooooooooooooong before Kubernetes was even dreamt of). The IGAS test still applies today - if there is something that needs tweaking or patching in the platform layer (such as Mesos) then you are going to have risk even if you're shifting traffic to another node during patching (especially if you have one OS image spread over all the nodes). If your business depends on an app being up and available 24x365, if they really give a sh*t about it, they may prefer to pay for that app to sit on it's own hardware. Which is why businesses may never go completely containerized, just as they never went completely virtualised.

Military alliance NATO adopts official hymn

More European waste in action.

It seems you just can't involve the Continentals in anything without them wasting time and money on frivolities. NATO was/is supposed to be a military alliance, not a party for "cultural" eejits. Guaranteed the proposed European Army will do half what NATO does with twice the budget and fifty times as much useless pomp and "culture". One can only hope Brexit keeps us out of another European money pit like their EU Army.

Time's up: Grace period for Germany's internet hate speech law ends

Re: AC Re: AC AC C'mon Reg...

"....That was over 1200 years ago and of little relevance to 20th century events....." Ah, so only the periods you want to consider are the periods that should be discussed? If you only want to consider "relevant" periods then nothing could be more relevant than the current control of Israel and the West bank by the Jews! Thanks, you just approved Trump's moving of the US embassy to Jerusalem as it is very obvious that Israel and the Jews are in control of Jerusalem. I bet that makes you choke on your double-whipped, two-pump vanilla, wheatgerm latte.

"....the Palestinians still have more Semitic ancestry than the average Israeli...." So you can read the words stating that the Arabs themselves have diagnosed the genetic markers of Palestinian Arabs as showing the majority have Saudi heritage, yet you somehow still manage to deny that and magically twist it to "Semitic" as making them "Palestinian"! Wow, you really are desperate to deny that the Arabs did not originate in Palestine!

"....and were then kicked out by invading Europeans....." HA! Your knowledge of modern history appears to be obfuscated by your having your head up your anus. In 1948, the UN Partition Plan gave the Jews and Arabs of Palestine designated areas of the Palestine Mandate to live in. The Jews accepted their much smaller portion and were willing to live alongside the Muslim (and Christian) Arabs in peace, but the Muslim Arab leaders - especially their imams - rejected the solution because they hated the idea of a Jewish homeland. Consequently, the Palestinian Jews got the legal and recognized state of Israel, and the Palestinian Arabs forfeited their right to a state. The surrounding Muslim Arab countries then attacked the embryonic state of Israel, not the other way round. Try more historical reading.

".....Well no because as I have demonstrated they are largely misleading propaganda / attempts to deflect from the accurate points made with FUD....." You have demonstrated nothing of the sort. All you have done is re-inforce the inaccuracy of your own claims.

".....I have little interest in what Hamas might say...." What, aren't they "Palestinian" enough for you, or is it just because it blew a massive hole in your silliness?

".....Whatever the Palestinians might want to identify themselves as....." But you insisted they must be called and are the only ones that should be allowed to call themselves "Palestinians"!?!

".....doesn't detract from the fact the they were the indigenous population of the region....." Despite the Arabs' own genetic research showing the majority of Palestinian Arabs actually came from Saudi.

".....and were largely removed by force....." Actually, the majority of "Palestinian" refugees in 1948 never even saw an Israeli soldier, being ordered to get out of the way of the invading Arab armies by their own leaders. They willingly left assuming they could return and plunder the homes and lands of their Jewish neighbours after the Arabs promised they would drive the Jews into the sea.

".....their land and property stolen....." You mean like the 850,000 Jews driven out of Arab countries post-1948? Or the Jews driven out of the West Bank and East Jerusalem by the Jordanians?

"......and are now suffering under an occupying genocidal Israeli regime." HA! The Arab Palestinians that stayed in Israel and became Israeli citizens have better rights and standard of living than the Arab Palestinians that fled to their brother Arabs. The ones that fled were deliberately not integrated by their fellow Arabs, they were kept in shabby refugee camps to be used as political pawns. The Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank have better rights and protections under Israeli law than they have in any of their surrounding Arab countries, where their brothers even deny them the full right to work!

".... And if you want to post videos...." I posted links to historical articles, you shrieked "propaganda" and then immediately posted a work of fiction. No doubt it is the same standard as the rest of Arab propaganda with clips lifted from other wars around the World, as shown here, here and here.

Re: AC Re: AC Shaha Alam C'mon Reg...

"Indigenous means "typical of the region"....." For over 3000 years continually, Jews have been typical of the region. You are stubbornly trying to deny an historical fact.

".....Up until the late 19th century the Jewish population of Palestine was less than 5%...." And we know you cherry-picked that period because it was when Jewish residency was lowest due to many Jews having been driven out of the area by Arab invaders. If you insist on cherry-picking periods I can simply respond that pre-610AD there were 0% of Muslims anywhere, so by your logic all Muslims are not actually indigenous to anywhere and are invaders wherever they have gone.

"....Palestinians were long term residents of the region who were removed by force and dispossessed....." Which not only describes the Jews before the arrival of Islam, but also the Jews ethnically-cleansed from the West Bank and surrounding Arab Muslim states post-1948. Please do continue to make my arguments for me, it's almost like you're a fish committing suicide by gun in a barrel.

"....So by your logic because some distant unknown relative might have lived somewhere then gives us the right to dispossess the indigenous population?...." That is very amusing given that your whole argument is based on saying the Jews were not there in the majority in the period you cherry-picked! Would you care to shoot yourself in the other fin?

Re: AC Re: Shaha Alam C'mon Reg...

"What myth would that be?....." That the Arabs in Israel and the West Bank are somehow the only indigenous people of the area due to being descendants of an historic people called the "Palestinians". The real Palestinians were all people of all faiths and ethnic groups living in Mandatory Palestine, which included plenty of Jews. Islam dates from around 610AD, whereas Jews have been living in the area of Mandatory Palestine for over 3000 years, long before the Arabs invaded and long before Islam even existed. That is historical fact.

Re: Voyna i Mor Re: C'mon Reg...

".....The socialist policies in his manifesto, of course, he ditched the moment he became Chancellor....." Mor(e) male bovine manure. As early as 1927, long after he had taken control of the NSDAP, Hitler said in a speech:".... “We are socialists. We are the enemies of today’s capitalist system of exploitation … and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions...."

After he became Chancellor, Hitler instituted some very socialist policies:

1. Nationalisation of education, transportation and healthcare.

2. Employment for all through national building projects such as the autobahns.

3. Strict gun control.

4. Accused the major religions such as the Catholic church of being "right-wing" and seeking to "control the people".

5. Blamed all the economic woes from losing the Great War on the rich "1%", who just happened to be mainly Jewish in Germany at the time.

If you were actually capable of some independent research I think you'd find those type of policies were and still are common amongst socialists.

Re: AC Re: AC Bah!

".....Circa 2000 in one incident isn't a "small number"." True, as a single incident it is a very worrying number and does indicate there was (and probably still is) a worrying tendency towards sexual violence amongst younger male Muslim immigrants in Germany. But, seeing as there are approximately 5 million Muslims in Germany, about 6.1% of the general population, it would seem unfair to say all German Muslims can be called rapists based on the actions of 0.04% of their number. By comparison, the BNP managed to get 1.9% of the popular vote in the 2010 UK General Election, but I bet you wouldn't describe the 2010 British population as 100% Fascist based on the nutty beliefs and actions of those 1.9%, would you?

Re: AC Re: AC C'mon Reg...

"....We do know that the population of Palestine was less than 5% Jewish in the late 19th century....." Not surprising given that the Jews had been driven out in large numbers by the oppression of the Muslim Empire.The British census figures for 1922, which are thought to be the most exact available given the corrupt and indifferent nature of the Ottoman administration, have the Jews at about 11% of the population for Mandatory Palestine. Please note that was just after 73% of Mandatory Palestine was given to the Muslim Arabs as Transjordan. Please note that Jews were forbidden from buying land in Transjordan as it was meant to be land for the Muslim Arabs only, despite there having been Jews resident in the area known as Transjordan for thousands of years. The Jordanians ethnically-cleansed and expelled their remaining Jews in 1948.

".....This is recent invasion by people who largely have no connection to the region....." Firstly, Islam and the Arabs are not native to the region, it was an invading socio-religious empire. Secondly, the 1931 British census showed the Jewish population having grown over 100% in size but only to 16% of the population due to the large number of Arabs that had also "invaded" the area even after the Ottomans had been defeated in the Great War.

".....But still have more semitic heritage than the average Israeli!....'" Quite simply that statement is male bovine manure. Genetic studies of the Arabs worldwide, under the supervision of the Arabs in Dubai, shows two things. Firstly, the Arabs as a people have some of the highest levels of genetic disorders of any people. Secondly, those same genetic flaws are just as endemic in the Arabs in "Palestine" as they are in other Arab countries, proving that their ancestors originated from Saudi Arabia. So the majority of Arab "Palestinians" had ancestors that were not native to the region at all and were actually the "invaders" you mentioned as people "who largely have no connection to the region".

".....There is an ethnic group called Palestinians...." All people living in the area known as Palestine were referred to as "Palestinians", including many Jews and Christians from Syria and Lebanon, and even ex-pat Brits from the armed services that settled there post-1918. They were all "Palestinians" before the PLO hijacked the term. The Arabs in Mandate Palestine actually wanted to be called "South Syrians" for political reasons, then switched their tune after they lost in 1948.

".....and Palestine is named twice in the Balfour Declaration....." The general area of Palestine, including modern-day Israel and Jordan, parts of Syria and the Lebanon, not the specific fake state as you pretend.

".....You are just recycling Israeli propaganda." I am stating easily demonstrable and historical facts, it is you that is posting political whimsy. If you think my points are false then please provide some form of counter rather than just whining.

BTW, even Hamas has a problem sticking with the "Palestinian" schpiel.

Re: Shaha Alam Re: C'mon Reg...

"....funny thing about political party names, they're mostly about propaganda....." Yes, and the whole "Palestinian" myth was a fabrication created by the KGB and the PLO as a propaganda ploy. Oh, you didn't know that? This is my surprised face, honest.

".....nazis were facists....." <Sigh> Back to the "you're not a socialist unless I say you're a socialist" historical revisioning? Go read up on Benito Mussolini, father of Fascism, and you'll discover his socialist roots. Oh, and by the way, the father of "Palestinian" Arab nationalism, Amin al-Husseini, was a buddy of Hitler's, recruited Muslims for the SS and was very keen on the Holocaust. Just saying, seeing as you seem so quick to throw around the "Nazi" tag.

Re: AC Re: C'mon Reg...

"....the current population of Israel is mostly European in genetic origin...." Really? You want to pretend there were no Jews in Israel before 1948? The intermixing with Europeans was because many Jews were forced out of historic Palestine by the Muslims, not because their ancestors did not originate in Israel. On the other hand, the majority of Arab Palestinians have genetic markers showing their ancestors originated in North Africa, Saudi Arabia and Mesopotamia. The influx of modern-day Arabs into the area is actually easy to demonstrate by the fact the preponderance of common surnames amongst the Palestinian Arabs are actually of North African heritage.

"....the indigenous population of Palestinians!" There is no such race as "Palestinians" and no such country as "Palestine". The area covered by historic Roman Palestine included Lebanon, parts of modern Syria and Iraq, and all of modern Jordan. The indigenous people that lived in that area were a host of religions including Jews and Christians, and has been ruled over by many peoples, from the Canaanites to the British Empire. There were zero Muslims and virtually zero Arabs in Roman Palestine as Islam simply didn't exist in the time when the region was originally called Palestine, and the Arabs and Islam didn't arrive in the region in numbers until Mo started his push out of the deserts of what we call Saudi Arabia today. Indeed, as late as the 1931 census of Palestine the local Muslims were insistent they be classified as "Southern Syrians" rather than "Palestinians", as also recorded by the League of Nations (previous incarnation of the UN) in 1926. Ironically, under the UN Partition Plan for Mandate Palestine, the Jewish authorities were referred to as the Jewish Agency For Palestine as they were just as "Palestinian" as the Arabs. Funnier still, the local Arabs can't even use the name "Palestine" in their own language as Arabic doesn't have a hard P, they have to use "Falestin". a corruption of the old Philistines. The creation of the "Palestinian People" was simply a propaganda ploy of the PLO and the KGB, one you seem to have fallen for hook, line and sinker.

Re: Voyna i Mor Re: C'mon Reg...

".....if you continue to parrot such ridiculous lies, we'll know you are in bad faith....." Ah, you appear to be one of the rank-and-file Lefties I mentioned earlier, still unable to reconcile the socialist roots of fascism. Your "you're only a socialist if you fit my definition of socialism" revisionism does not match up with historic fact.

Re: AC Re: C'mon Reg...

".....The Nazis were the German socialist party." Factually correct, something that seems to have escaped the down-voters. The Nazis were the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei" (English: National-Socialist German Workers' Party). Indeed, the model for Adolf's Nazis was the success of Benito Mussolini in Italy, Mussolini having been the leading light of the Italian Socialist Party. The modern Left likes to pretend ignorance on those facts, though it may not be pretend by the majority of rank-and-file Lefties as they do seem to be a bit short on historic education.

Re: Jonathan Richards 1 Re: Well this could get messy...

".....but Muslims do not worship the prophet Mohammed....." Well, IMHO, that in itself is an interesting bit of schizoid behavior in Islam. Islam proclaims idolism is "wrong" yet Muslims idolise the Koran so much that they threaten death to anyone that mistreats their sacred book. They also make the same threats against those that "demean" Mohammed, even having laws in Islamic countries to punish those that blaspheme (teddybear namers included).

And it is not just "the backwards hordes in the 'Stans. Several years ago we hosted a party. I had a copy of the Koran (an English translation) on my study bookshelf, to which two interesting objections were raised by one of my Muslim guests, a neurosurgeon who was born in the US, went to US schools and graduated from a top US college. The first objection was that the Koran should not be shelved with "common books" such as Western history pieces as that was "disrespectful". The second was that my desk faced the shelves and so the soles of my shoes were pointing at the Koran whenever I sat at my desk - this was, apparently, also "disrespectful". Yet when we discussed the matter he denied that Islam idolized the Koran!

So, no, Muslims do - by their actions - worship Mohammed, and also idolize the Koran.

Re: ecofeco Re: Bah!

".....The amount of on-line comments supporting Nazi's right to free speech is... fucking scary." <Sigh> No, we are not all raving "Nazis" just because we question why only "Nazis" seem to be targeted by many of these censoring laws. IMHO, in this case, Beatrix von Storch's comment is obviously incorrect as it tars all Muslim men with the same brush based on the actions of a minority. But the rush to silence "Nazis" is worrying given how the governments of Europe have been half-heartedly chasing the social media giants for years to get them to remove Islamic extremist material and posts, including stuff that broke existing incitement laws, yet they are falling over themselves to shut down "Nazis" at top speed. We are not supporting "Nazis", we are questioning why free speech is being selectively applied. The obvious answer is that there is a political bent to all this - the "Nazis" threaten the established governments of Europe, as shown by the rise of so many Right-leaning (and even outright Right-extreme) groups across Europe, therefore they must be silenced. If you cannot debate something as obviously silly as Beatrix von Storch's comment then it is either because you are not smart or you believe the people are simply not smart enough to make their own minds up and need to be "managed for their own good"- that is the type of totalitarianism which "anti-fascists" claim they want to avoid, but which history shows us is the result of such controls. And using laws to silence political opponents is a slippery slope. You either defend everyone's right to free speech inside the law or you are not defending free speech.

Re: AC Re: Bah!

".....Surely that's covered under fair comment on factual local events?...." No, it's not as it implies all Muslim men in Germany are part of rapist gangs, whereas the reality of the Cologne events were that a small number of the Muslim men in Germany were involved. Now, if she had argued that Islamic societal norms and teachings encourages the abuse of women then she might have had more of a debatable point, but the blanket statement is wrong.

Who's king of the hyperconverged castle? Dell or Nutanix? It's not as clear-cut as it seems

So who is the real market leader?

Given that the majority of companies I have worked with have started their generalized virtualization journey in the old days with VMware on vanilla x86-64 servers, I would suspect the majority simply moved on to VMware's vSAN for their "hyperconverged" platform, mainly because it meant they re-used their old vSphere skills. So I suspect the figures for the HCI market are really the tip of the iceberg, with the DIY efforts using COTS servers and storage being the much larger part hidden beneath the waves.

The hounds of storage track converged and hyperconverged beasts

$2.99bn? Ho-hum.

As the definition of a "hyper-converged system" seems to be "completely software defined compute, networking and storage", surely the cloud monsters like AWS are actually the largest HCSs in existence? As far as the cloud customers are concerned, they interface completely through a software interface that portions out compute, software and networking, so surely the perfect HCS (maybe even a super-duper HCS as they do everything remotely through a web interface as well!). I hear Google alone spends well over $2bn per quarter on their cloud, no idea how Amazon spends, but it suggests "DIY" is actually the biggest HCS revenue sector.

Re: baspax Re: Integrated Systems

".....a bit of context and translation...."

Converged = "Pffft, that's so last year's stuff, it's old and we need to sell newer stuff."

Hyper-converged = "More converged than the old stuff, totally-software-defined, more so than last year's stuff, just take our word for it and buy some!"

Integrated platforms = "What, are you living in the Stone Age!?!?!"

IIRC, we can blame Forresters Research for the moniker "hyper-converged". Still, it is interesting to see Dell leading the charge after all those years propping up the x64 sales charts. Props to Mikey Dell.

Re: CheesyTheClown Re: Integrated Systems

"....Look at scale out database solutions....." True, but the last time I checked most businesses did more than just run big databases, even the enterprise ones.

Long Island Iced Tea Corp renamed itself to Long Blockchain – and its shares went bananas

If only it weren't so tragic.

I had a number of discussions around virtual currencies this week with what can only be termed politely "the optimistic uninformed", all of whom insisted BTC/Etherium/Verge could be trusted to pay out "because of the blockchain". None of these virtual currency SMEs actually had a clue what a blockchain is or how it works. Fools and their money.

Re: handleocast Re: Non alchoholic?

".....After greatly simplifying the process the end result was the same." My many years in the IT industry lead me to suspect you are a proud MBA "achiever".

Beyond code PEBCAK lies KMACYOYO, PENCIL and PAFO

Re: Agincourt and Crecy! Re: NFN

"....Normal for Norfolk" The Left-Pondian version is "Normal For Florida" or FMS - "Florida Man Syndrome".

Classics

RTFM - Read The F***ing Manual, as in the problem is simple to solve and you would have solved it if you had read the man pages before calling support.

DNT - Do Not Trust, as in the user so labelled will always answer questions evasively (or outright lie) to avoid admitting they broke something - "Did you change anything?" "Well, not today....."

A few years back, a certain IT giant opened their internal knowledge base up for customers to peruse in the hope it would get them to self-solve simpler problems. Unfortunately, the knowledge base included the entries made in call logs by their support staff and the company didn't think to sanitise the entries first, and many of the call logs were littered with RTFMs, DNTs and worse (my fave was a customer that a member of staff had described as the person "so f***ing technically-inept that she probably shouldn't be allowed to use a vibrator"!)

Twitter's not dreaming of a white supremacist Xmas: Accounts nuked

Re: Snorlax Re: Snorlax Snorlax Only the small fish?

"Sure snowflake, keep it going. You're really showing us all how smart your are..." And there you have simply reinforced the opinion that you have nothing to offer in defence of your viewpoint other than "snappy" comebacks.

You insist Microsoft should have done more, yet you cannot provide a supporting argument for that belief other than "'cos she is a woman". This makes me think you are either a mindless dolt that merely adopts the most populist viewpoint unquestioningly, or - ironically - a subconscious misogynist that assumes all women need to be protected as they are not strong enough to survive without your titling the scales in their favour, whilst thinking your tilting makes you too virtuous to be criticized.

Re: Snorlax Re: Snorlax Only the small fish?

"Ok, you think 'logical fallacy is a buzzword?...." No, I was implying that you think you don't have to supply an actual argument to support your point of view because you slapped down a trendy buzzphrase. You did not explain why you thought I had posited a logical fallacy, you simply said "I label your argument a 'logical fallacy', therefore I win!"

".....You can call it a 'thinking fail' or 'brainfart'...." Actually, neither of those is equivalent to a logical fallacy. A logical fallacy is an argument that contains an error but still sways people to your line of thought (some people also insist the speaker must also deceitfully use the flawed argument whilst knowing of the error contained to make it a logical fallacy).

".....if adults who use big words make you uncomfortable..." Oh, I don't think you're in any danger of achieving an adult level of conversation.

Re: Lars Re: Chad H.

"....Calm down...." Why is it the standard Lefty assumption that anyone that even points out an inconsistency in their "logic" must be raving angry? I'm more amused at the reflexive shrieking of posters here.

"....create a Twitter or buy it...." Sorry, not all of us are so dependent on social media for a life, thanks. Should Twitter reduce itself into a pretzel of PC do-goodness is actually of no matter to myself, but it is amusing to poke fun at those that assume they "know what is best for everyone", whether they are of the Left or the Right, when they do not realise that they are repeating the same fallacies as the Nazis and the Soviets. If you cannot summon the intelligence to be able to defeat the arguments of people like Paul Golding then I am not sure you should even be using a computer. Free speech is about facing up to bad ideas and defeating them with facts, not banning them simply because it is easier. Of course, if all you are doing is a bit of corporate virtual signaling then it is even worse to pretend to hold the moral high ground.

Re: Snorlax Re: Only the small fish?

"..........Comparing those who disagree with white supremacy or whatever to San Francisco hipsters is just a sad logical fallacy on your part." It seems you really like the term "logical fallacy", even if you don't seem to understand what it actually means, is it the latest buzzterm in Snowflakeville? The bit that flew waaaaaaay over your head is that Twitter has not outlined how it will judge either "undesirability" or "association", leaving Twitter the wriggle room to ban whomever they like, but also leaving them very open to accusations of bias.

".....are pretty much universally repugnant....." You really have to get over yourself - your worldview is very unlikely to be either universal nor unchallenged, even on Twitter. I know you Lefties feel super-comfortable whenever you can label an opponent as "racist" or "Nazi" as you think it means you can skip any form of supporting argument, but you have over-used it so much it's just become a meaningless whine.

Re: Snorlax Re: Chad H.

".....False equivalence. You're not very good at putting together a coherent argument, are you?....' Actually, it's more likely just a more extreme example you found hard to process. Maybe you should find a responsible adult to help you? It is quite a simple connection - I bet even someone as blinkered as you appear to be might agree that a member of Antifa is much more likely to associate with Bernie Sanders voters than Trump supporters, therefore they are associating with the Democrat party (Sanders stood for the Dems rather than as an independent in the last election), therefore - under Twitter's new rules - the whole Democrat Party and anyone that associates with them are "guilty by association" every time Antifa riot. Since Twitter seems to be deliberately lose with their implementation of these new rules on "association" it is easy to point out the bias involved. Now, I might think that the people Twitter are banning deserve a ban (if I had any interest in the waste of bandwidth Twitter is), but if they are going to ban on political grounds then they should acknowledge that and not pretend at hypocritical impartiality.

Re: Chad H.

I'm not sure what refusal of service has to do with the matter. This is a company that is setting out to limit access to its service based on "association" with political "assholes" - you may think it's fine as long as it is those you find objectionable getting banned, but what if the pendulum swings and it is those you support that get banned in future, would you be celebrating as much? Consider the unlikely event that Trump bought Twitter, would you be happy with him making those decisions? Would you happily accept a Twitter ban of the Democrat Party because of Antifa riots? How about a ban of CAIR after the next time Hamas shoots a rocket into Israel?

Only the small fish?

"....Twitter has, for several years, been lambasted for giving a platform to groups with highly objectionable views...." The thing is just about anyone can find someone on Twitter they find "objectionable", so who gets to decide who is "too objectionable" and who is not? Is the only guideline "we straw-polled a San Fran hipster coffee-shop and let them decide"? It seems so as there are many "objectionable" groups outside the "Alt-Right" posting on Twitter that have not been treated with equal vigour. It could just be the ultimate corporate virtue-signal given that Twitter have steered clear of banning people like Richard B. Spencer, probably because a bigger-fish like Spencer would have the time, knowledge and backing to sue Twitter for defamation (and Virginia has a criminal defamation law, § 18.2-417).

Ex-Microsoft intern claimed one of her fellow temps raped her. Her bosses hired him

Re: Kristian Walsh Re: Kristian Walsh I don't know...

".....I'm guessing you think I'm female. Guess again....." Just cruel parents then?

".....I also never said the accused was guilty, nor did I suggest that accused persons should be considered guilty for certain crimes......" But you wanted Microsoft to treat him as if he was considered guilty of the crime.

".....However, leaving two employees together who are in such serious conflict with each other is disgraceful behaviour towards whichever of them is the wronged party....." But your whole approach is it doesn't matter who the guilty party is, him for rape or her for lying, he should automatically be the one punished because he is a he.

".... Her complaint was about how badly her employer has handled the situation....." Her complaint was that Microsoft didn't do what she wanted, without actually specifying why Microsoft should have other than "I have a vagina".

Re: Francis Boyle

"If she had passed and was penetrated...." Well, surely that would be necrophilia then?

Re: hnwombat Re: hnwombat So what did the police say?

"I'm cis-male...." Right! In my experience, the only people that use that term are not straight men, not unless they're hipster millennial metrosexuals looking to virtue-signal. Oh look, I can apply labels too!

"....you didn't understand the subtleties of the point that I was trying to make....' Hmmm, it seemed your "point" was "she female, he male, therefore he must be guilty and punished, cos she said so". You have failed to provide any other argument. You definitely did not provide any form of legal argument, just an emotive one.

"....Microsoft has a right and a duty to act based on suspicion....." No, they don't. Just take the time to ask a lawyer, they'll tell you why companies are careful not to give employees a reason to sue them. If Microsoft had transferred the guy without any corroboration of the claimed rape then they would open themselves up to being sued for defamation of character and (ironically) sexual discrimination ("we're changing your internship because you're a guy and she's a woman" - pretty clear cut case of sexual discrimination). They would at least need an HR investigation (usually by a third party) which would need to show something like a witness statement of at least intent on the guy's part. But it looks like the police investigation turned up nothing, which means Microsoft's HR probably would have turned up nothing.

IMHO, you are either blinded by your hatred of Microsoft or have been swimming in the kool aid for far too long. Or both.

Re: Kristian Walsh Re: I don't know...

"........ It's also sad to see some regular and vehemently anti-Microsoft commenters lining up to support the company's cack-handed actions in this case. I guess they can overlook "pure evil" when it has the side-effect of keeping uppity wimmen out of a "real man's industry"." What, so we have to totally ignore the law and forget about innocent unless proven guilty, just because you'll accuse us of being sexist pigs if we don't? Wow, what a threat! Sorry, darling, you can label away, I'll just ignore you. As someone that has worked in the industry for decades, who has recruited women on the value of what they brought to the busines, I don't find your threat that compelling. If anything, your vacuous name-calling is simply setting back the cause of feminism by highlighting the illogicality and unprofessional nature of your demands.

Re: hnwombat Re: So what did the police say?

Wow! Do you just hate men? Your whole post boils down to "she should be believed because she's a woman and he's an evil man"!

"....Microsoft could have, and should have, done more...." On what basis, other than "he has a penis"? Did the police prosecute the guy? Was he ever even charged?

".....The accused should have been transferred; he, after all, was the alleged wrongdoer...." Amazing that you use the word alleged but do not seem to understand what it means.

".....whether there was a crime or not, she perceived one....." So now you want a business to make an important decision (and on one that they could be heavily sued) just because a woman "perceived" something?!?!?

".....Moving someone was necessary simply from a productivity point of view. Absent convincing evidence, the transfer for the accused should not itself be punitive; it should be to another useful experience (since he was an intern), but which involved no further contact with the woman....." So a woman is allowed to remove a competitor for a role and leave a stain on his professional career just because she said so? Darling, maybe you should take your pussy hat off and realise having a vagina does not give you the right to dictate the law.

"....You are not the one who gets to define how bad the crime is. It's the victim that gets to decide." Epic fail! You are stating that there doesn't even need to be an investigation of the alleged crime, it's just automatically the worst possible offence because she's a woman and says so. TBH, women like you are the reason feminism gets such a bad name.

Republican tax bill ready to rescue hard-up tech giants, struggling rich

Hate much?

So, corporations legally keeping their funds outside America = bad, but then establishing tax rules that encourage the repatriation of that cash also = bad because it somehow doesn't punish "the rich"? It seems that whatever Trump proposed the journalistic population of San Fran was going to whine.

UK, US govt and pals on WannaCry culprit: It woz the Norks wot done it

Re: Jack of Shadows Re: Twaddle!

".....The toolbox doesn't have any more tools to use than that." Diplomacy is about bringing pressure to bear. Every headline about "bad Norks" makes it harder for China to dodge their responsibilities when not fully applying UN sanctions.

Re: Voland's right hand Re: So,

"....Russian and the French. They are significantly more restrained on the talking front and significantly less restrained on the "deploy marines backed up by an aircraft carrier and execute the little shit on the spot" front....." Yeah, I think you need to do a lot more reading on actual historical sites and less on IndyMedia. I'm surprised you forgot about the French bombing of the Rainbow Warrior, or is that too old for today's millennial snowflakes? Have you forgotten about the recent French lead on Libya already? You could start improving your historical knowledge by looking up the French history in Algeria and the Soviet adventures in Afghanistan. France is still sticking it's imperial oar in with previous colonies like the Lebanon and Africa states like Mali, and Putin seems to have every interest in returning the Middle East to the days when Arab states were split into those friendly to the West and those in the Soviet sphere.

Re: Paul Crawford Re: So,

".....No mention of the impact being severe due to unpatched machines being publicly exposed?....." Yeah, and people that don't have bars on all their windows are totally to blame when their houses get burgled? And if someone gets stabbed by a mugger it must be their own fault for not wearing a full set of plate armour every time they leave the house? What's next, you're going to accuse women that don't go out in a burka of asking to be raped?

FCC douses America's net neutrality in gas, tosses over a lit match

Oh dear.

I laughed loudest whilst reading this teeth-gnashing article at the bit about "traitorous" luvvies "betraying us" by looking out for the interests of the music and film industries. So, luvvies making political comments are beloved and wise just as long as they're making the right political comments, such as lining up to make endorsement vids for Hillary Clinton's election campaign or bashing Trump? LOL!