News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by jondubois on Monday February 06, 2017 @03:56AM (#13577717)
I don't know what Americans are protesting about. I don't agree with the bans at all but at least you have a president who is true to his words for once - For me that is a higher moral value. You have to take the good with the bad.

I don't agree with Trump on a lot of things but I can respect a politician who does what he says he'll do.

It's a refreshing break from the typical Washington charlatans who don't do anything of their own accord and instead just do what their crooked lobbyist friends tell them.

All that said, I've had a few Iranian friends/colleagues (fellow engineers) and it's really strange to think that they're not allowed to go to the US now because they're such decent, balanced people - Also, I can't help but think about those people who left Iran 40 years ago before it was under Islamic rule but still have Citizenship.

Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by qzervaas on Monday February 06, 2017 @04:12AM (#13577821)
He says a lot of words. Many are false, some are true.

I don't understand how everybody (well, many people at least) ignore the obvious pathological lying and conclude he's doing what he said he would.

Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by joering2 on Monday February 06, 2017 @04:49AM (#13578012)
Because this is what is called to be a master at pitching snake's oil.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by coldtea on Monday February 06, 2017 @05:05AM (#13578103)
What "pathological lying"? He is no more lying than the average politician, and maybe less.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by celticninja on Monday February 06, 2017 @05:21AM (#13578184)
What about his statements on the crowd sizes? He also said Mexico was going to pay for the wall and that doesn't look like it will happen at all.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by Cthulhu_ on Monday February 06, 2017 @06:42AM (#13578545)
"alternative facts" ;). At least those err, factual inaccuracies didn't have anything to do with formal government policy.

As for the wall, he's making steps to that at least; whether they'll work on a practical matter is of course something else. Can't accuse him from not following up on his promises, anyway.

Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by jondubois on Monday February 06, 2017 @05:35AM (#13578241)
He said he will impose a tax on Mexican imports and use the proceeds to pay for the wall - That sounds on track.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by _delirium on Monday February 06, 2017 @05:50AM (#13578316)
A 20% import tariff was floated, but was fairly quickly walked back after a cold reception from the Texas GOP delegation and strong opposition from the Texas Association of Business (Texas does a lot of import/export business with Mexico). Now they're looking into unspecified other mechanisms.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by celticninja on Monday February 06, 2017 @08:47AM (#13579328)
You understand that the tax will be passed on to US consumers via higher prices right?
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by coldtea on Tuesday February 07, 2017 @04:10AM (#13588144)
You understand that this is no rule of nature, right?

It's not like Mexico is the only source of some goods. Or that they can't make concessions (and assume the extra hit on their own margins) if their sales drop. Or tens of other factors and outcomes.

Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by celticninja on Tuesday February 07, 2017 @02:40PM (#13592012)
I do understand that, however it seems unlikely at the moment that they will choose that option.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by vacri on Monday February 06, 2017 @06:11AM (#13578418)
Well, it's not making Mexicans pay for it, but Americans.

As for his other promises, I'm also not sure how he's going to manage to massively increase the defense forces while basically halving taxes.

Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by Buge on Monday February 06, 2017 @04:21AM (#13577867)
Being true to your word doesn't mean you have to immediately send out an order with no planning, preparation, or consultation.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by coldtea on Monday February 06, 2017 @05:08AM (#13578117)
It does if you want to give a loud example of a new policy, to be able to scale it down afterwards, and thus has both your extremist supporters happy (because at least you did what you could) and the activists against you happy (because you "caved in" and took somethings back).
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by JumpCrisscross on Monday February 06, 2017 @04:10AM (#13577802)
> I can respect someone who does what he says he'll do

The point of a leader is to do what's right, not what's popular. Short-circuiting our republic into a direct democracy defeats its purpose.

Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by Cthulhu_ on Monday February 06, 2017 @06:44AM (#13578557)
Then the US should overhaul its voting system completely; when you have just two parties, and when the head-of-state is a person (instead of a commission or a government without a clear leader), you will inevitably end up in a popularity contest, a contest of personalities. "What's right" is much harder to get people to vote for.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by Ensorceled on Monday February 06, 2017 @05:45AM (#13578288)
Trump lost the popular vote. The Republic is the only reason he can do this at all.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by solipsism on Monday February 06, 2017 @04:26AM (#13577909)
I don't agree with Trump on a lot of things but I can respect a politician who does what he says he'll do

Like release his taxes? Your memory seems selective.

Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by tzmudzin on Monday February 06, 2017 @04:10AM (#13577800)
> I don't agree with Trump on a lot of things but I can respect someone who does what he says he'll do.

Adolf Hitler was also keeping his promise of eliminating the Jewish "problem" or the lack of the living space for the Germans. Does this increase your respect to him?

Of course this is overblown, and Trump is not Hitler. But we should learn our lessons rather than repeat the errors of the past.

Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by lucasverra on Monday February 06, 2017 @04:23AM (#13577875)
Good ol' Godwin's law, I've missed you
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by tzmudzin on Monday February 06, 2017 @06:57AM (#13578633)
So should we forget the Holocaust and WWII because of Godwin?

Please note I've been very careful to put things into perspective here...

Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by scottmf on Monday February 06, 2017 @08:24AM (#13579173)
>If you're thoughtful about it and show some real awareness of history, go ahead and refer to Hitler when you talk about Trump. Or any other politician

-Mike Godwin

Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by User23 on Monday February 06, 2017 @03:48PM (#13583733)
The only time I've seen this is in well thought out articles demonstrating that Trump is absolutely nothing like Hitler. Here is a good example: https://regiehammblog.wordpress.com/2017/02/01/this-hitler-n...

Anyone reading this who feels a powerful urge to jump in and demonstrate their confirmation bias in a reply is invited to stop, take a deep breath, and think about it first.

Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by JCzynski on Monday February 06, 2017 @04:19AM (#13577860)
Most politicians do in fact do what they say they will. It's not actually rare.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by mememachine on Monday February 06, 2017 @04:52AM (#13578031)
Thats really not very true
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by hmate9 on Monday February 06, 2017 @07:59AM (#13579017)
I am not sure why you are downvoted, regardless of whether you agree with the travel ban or not, his supporters, the people who voted for him wanted this.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by thrillgore on Monday February 06, 2017 @09:55AM (#13579913)
The more they keep protecting, the more we're trapped within.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by 0xC0DECAFE2020 on Monday February 06, 2017 @04:15AM (#13577837)
Says it all that you make a good point and are still getting down voted. This industry is very nervous about something and it's my belief it has more to do with what's coming next.
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by chvid on Monday February 06, 2017 @06:36AM (#13578523)
What would that be (that is coming next)?
Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by powertower on Monday February 06, 2017 @05:13AM (#13578146)
This is just virtue signaling against Trump by those that don't know they are being played.

None of these people and companies (and media outlets) said anything when Obama was doing much worse, such as blowing up entire countries.

Yet Trump puts into effect a temporary travel correction from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, half of which are an open death sentence destination for Americans right now, and here we see the establishment latching on to a story, removing the facts, playing with the numbers, etc, all to accomplish its anti-Trump goals.

This is dirty politics being dressed up as morals and values.

Re:Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies by scottmf on Monday February 06, 2017 @08:28AM (#13579195)
>Temporary travel correction

That's some talented doublespeak.