Just copy and paste my past comments as responses in the future threads.

In fact why bother making any comments ever again by any of the supposed sides in any of the future threads at all?

Here is a list of our questions, here is a list of your answers and here it is again in reverse.

This is excellent, we are now automating everything, from insightful while irrelevant in the bigger schema of things comments to your average trololo style threads.

Oh, beyond that, I should have read the stupid story linked from TFS.

The idiot author is making a number of straw arguments, one of the arguments is about Friedrich Hayek and that statement is just as ridiculous as the rest of his ideas.

Friedrich Hayek would not have seen BTC as real money, but he would have approved of people's desire to try different competing currencies, so he would have been on the side of people trying different things, including BTCs, but he could not see BTCs as real money, for Hayek real money had to have intrinsic value, which the author of that nonsense article doesn't understand.

That kind of thinking will only ensure that there are 0 females in software development companies.

Same person, backup account.

SS, Medicare, Medicaid, FHA, EPA, FDIC, IRS, Fed, dep't of energy, dep't of education, dep't of interior, dep't of commerce, dep't of labour, so called 'defence' department, dep't of agriculture. Let's just start with those, every single one a failure, every single one a huge waste of resources and inevitably leading towards destruction of the USA economy in the long run, and we are at the end of that long run.

read and weep, you are only 100% wrong and you just bathe in your ignorance. The ONLY reason AT&T was a monopoly for all this time was because gov't gave it that power and destroyed 3000 of its competitors.

If you have 1% of integrity left, you'll reply with an apology for being an ignorant fuck while being so sure of yourself.

There is a summary? Let me put it this way, there are more than 2 letters in the header of this story, even that is too much. What they should do is just use pictures of kittens, then the story will grab attention. Whatever the story is, add kittens and remove the nonsense about the story and it becomes the perfect story.

Here is how this /. story should have started:

Kittens.
(pictures of kittens)
CUTE KITTENS
(a youtube lolcat video)
Kitty cat. Discuss.

Yes, and these people are all around us.

  Here is a comment I left on the Bill Gates story, follow the thread to see who a tiny portion of these folks are.

The reality of-course is that they are the cardboard cutouts from Rand's stories, except they are not even 2 dimensional, they only one 1 dimension, it's called hate, jealousy, greed to other people's productivity.

Will this do? Look up the words "Net Worth". Let's look at this one too, why not? Net worth, look it up and shut up.

By approaching the design and implementation of the system from POV of a designer/developer, I was able to offer a number of solutions to the retail chain in question, which they could not even imagine. So right now this chain has software that does things in a way that is not normally done by other retail management solutions because it wasn't a manager of the chain that proposed the technical solutions to his problems, it was a designer / developer that offered a different, more efficient approach to handling business and the retail agreed and is benefiting from it, it's a competitive advantage they have against others.

When designing systems for my clients I first listen to what they are trying to convey but then I always take a trip to their locations, departments, stores, whatever it is and I just ask to be allowed to be there, to see what they are doing. Some operations are quite intricate, so I have to sit in with a user and have him/her guide me through the processes, sometimes it's enough just to observe what the operations are like to understand problems.

For example when I started building my retail chain management systems, my background in telecom / banking / insurance / manufacturing / utilities did NOT prepare me for what I observed in retail, in fact it was counter-intuitive and seemed wrong on its face. When an execute order comes to a bank, everything is done in the proper sequence, the transactionality is ensured, etc. In retail that's not the case at all. An order arrives to a store, the boxes can be checked for the products quickly and then pushed to the floor, where the items are placed on the shelves immediately and then they can be sold right away.... but the order may not be in the system yet, so this means the products are NOT in the electronic system and they can already be sold.

This means you have to be able to handle negative amounts of products, as an example, all the way from the cash registers to the accounting systems and your systems have to be able to deal with all of these weird situations, weird from POV of somebody who is used to strict transactionality in terms of processes.

Yes, you have to observe people working IRL or you'll have a bunch of preconceived notions that may be totally wrong and your systems won't handle them at all.

I am of an opinion that no amount of anything is worth destruction of individual freedom. I am of an opinion that government must not even exist, much less that it should commit armed robbery and steal people's money to fund anything at all, at this point even defense is not a valid excuse as governments are most of the time the aggressors that kill people, not other independent individuals.

So a case where a few pixels on the screen are incorrectly calculated is one thing and nobody cares, but what about a mistake of calculating actually valuable units, like precise measurements used in avionics, power plants, energy distribution systems, voting points, monetary amounts, health monitoring data and such?

Do we then need multiple cores running the same code and taking a vote between them or do we end up with math co-processors aimed at lower error rates with larger transistor sizes and also lower frequencies?

When will the cost of fixing and/or getting around errors outweigh the benefit of a smaller transistor size and a cheaper part?

I guess one answer is: have different chips for different purposes at higher cost and different spec.

Hans Christian Andersen did not tell a fairy tale to little children, he told a political story about a system of lies and a whistle-blower but in his story the kid did not end up prosecuted. Guess what, Andersen wasn't familiar with the modern American Empire.

But are any of your 'best programmer' friends employed? Google says they are not. If you say they are it is your word vs Google's word and since Google can control what of you exists or does not exist on the Internet Google wins by default. Resistance is futile and you will be assimilated into the Googleorg.

As I said in the next story, Amazon is aiming squarely at excellence, it's aiming at lowering prices for the consumers, at increasing quality of service, it's aiming at beating the old guard in their game by changing what the game actually is and this hurts egos and bottom lines of the uncompetitive interests and this does not put bribes into the pockets of the politicians.

Only governments create monopolies, excellent businesses like Standard Oil, Alcoa Aluminium, IBM, Microsoft, Amazon, they create products that people use and pay for, they push prices down and they wipe the road with the competition. Then the small, jealous, uncompetitive combine efforts and money to buy power from the obvious sources - government. They are not interested in the best outcome for the customers, clients, consumers, they are interested in preserving the status quo. The mob, which you are part of, likes to vandalise and push down those, who are better at what they do, so the mob cheers. At the end the economy suffers because everybody (including the mob) ends up with worse services, higher prices, even bigger and a more corrupt government and the wheels of progress get some some sand thrown into the gears and the entire system becomes less efficient as a total.

There are no monopolies but what governments create. What you call a monopoly is the most efficient economy of scale and it provides the best product at the best service.

More than that, Amazon REDUCES monopoly power!

That's right, but it's something you don't see, because it's not something you even understand. Normal B&M retailers have huge monetary incentives in keeping the status quo in terms of the supplier lines because the largest suppliers are also powerful economies of scale but they are also pushed down by various 'anti-monopoly' laws, but they find ways to bribe politicians and to give kickbacks to the retailers to keep a huge stock of only THEIR products on the shelves, ensuring that smaller suppliers with different choices don't make it to the market.

Notice, that this has nothing to do with what Amazon does, Amazon will NOT prevent you from selling your product, Amazon doesn't have limited shelf space in the virtual world, but B&M stores do have LIMITED shelf space.

By pushing into the virtual, Amazon allows everybody who wants to sell and has something to sell, to sell. This provides the widest variety of products, it increases competition among suppliers by allowing more and more suppliers to enter the field.

Amazon is one of the best and cheapest distribution systems in the entire world, they commoditise distribution business, they are doing for real life products what Internet has done for text and binary files (books, music, movies, games, etc.)

Amazon must not be pushed down by governments, if they can't compete eventually against somebody else, they'll lose their position, but it will ONLY happen if the customers see value in some other proposals. No monopoly exists without gov't intervention and no economy of scale stays on top if it can be outcompeted by a more flexible player.

So you are on the wrong side of this, most likely due to government supplied 'education'.