Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:I just unplug my landline phone (Score 1) 210

So, why do you waste money on the phone?

It provides a convenient phone number to provide to people who require one but to whom you don't want to talk, e.g. charitable organizations that will pester you to increase your donation. Turn the ringer off, give it an answering machine or similar service, and let people leave messages which you pick up later.

(It may also work better for speakerphone calls than a mobile phone.)

Comment Re:I just want the new Nexus. (Score 5, Insightful) 222

The only real feature of note was Apple Pay, which might finally make NFC payments take off in the US. It's been a technology that should have hit it big a couple of years ago, but has never seen much consumer buy-in for some reason.

It's pretty straightforward, to my mind. With the exception of all but the most staggering technological advancements, widespread adoption of new technology typically requires:

  1. a sound implementation,
  2. a robust support infrastructure, and
  3. an effective marketing campaign.

Geeks, for a variety of reasons, tend to respect the first, grok the second, and abhor the third. I personally believe it's what drives our perpetual cycle of incredulity on this subject--because we so detest the last part of this equation, we refuse to see its importance in getting all those squishy, distracted, emotional bags of water to adopt cool new stuff.

NFC has never had the effective marketing campaign in the US, and only kinda had the support infrastructure. The iPhone has incredible inertia on the marketing front, and Apple have clearly done the legwork on building a good starting lineup of financial institutions and retailers for Apple Pay. It remains to be seen whether this'll be sufficient to make NFC catch on, but it's easily the closest we've come to covering all three of the bases above.

Comment Re:Worse than that... (Score 1) 770

"Rejects empirical data" is another way of saying "taking it on faith", i.e. the Austrian school is a religion by another name.

Oh I feel your pain. I've had to put up with those damned mathematical religionists taking it on faith that not all primes are odd, when time after time my experiment taking a random sample of one thousand of the first billion primes has kept showing them all to be odd.

And I've had to put up with those damned geographers claiming they've seen triangles with three right angles when it's been mathematically proven that the sum of the angles in a triangle is 180 degrees! "Empirical evidence" indeed!

Comment Re:Who profits from West slowing down? (Score 1) 770

what is far from settled, is whether the humanity's impact is anything to speak of

The only way it's "far from settled" is to play willfully ignorant and deny the fact that humanity is not a trivial force on this planet.

Arctic ice should've disappeared this summer — instead, it has grown.

Don't go citing the Daily Fail as if they had credibility.

The profits of fossil fuel corporations are not endangered by the "green" moves at all

I see you don't think long term.

But for the government folks — those, who are sincerely convinced, they know better than their subjects — this is a perfect way to expand their control.

Oh the paranoia! Please, cite some more credibility-free sources, would you?

Comment Re:Worse than that... (Score 1) 770

Another possibility is that the "well-reasoned logical argument" wasn't actually well-reasoned. For example, I've seen a perversion of the Austrian School axiom

And, of course, an axiom is just a starting point; if the axioms are inconsistent with each other, or with reality, the conclusions drawn from the axioms could be bogus, no matter how air-tight the reasoning.

Comment Re:Who profits from West slowing down? (Score 5, Insightful) 770

though there are still perfectly valid debates in almost any other branch of science (dieting, economics, pedagogy, biology, and even computers — you name it — it is all in flux),

Sure, sure...

the science of climate is "settled" and anybody doubting the line pushed by the governments must also believe, the Earth is flat.

Utter nonsense. What's settled is that the climate is changing at the hands of man, what's open to debate is what the impact on us will be in the short and long term. The "consensus" is the same as the "consensus" that supports the modern understanding of evolution - it is a refinement and agreement across the field on the gross mechanism for something, and all the arguments lie in the details.

Kudos for tossing in the pinch of anti-government paranoia, it has to be that and not the desire for massively profitable fossil fuel corporations to defend said profits.

Comment Re:Bah humbug censorship (Score 1) 307

Consider also that the technicalities of a backup are beyond most non-technical consumers. Which is the group most people, including celebrities, fall in to.

They wouldn't be if the phone wasn't a deliberately arcane restricted POS.

Because some other type of phone would require you to understand the technicalities of a backup? Sounds like the kind of phone most non-technical consumers wouldn't use.

Or because, with some other type of phone, the technicalities of a backup would be simple enough for non-technical consumers to use?

Comment Re: Misleading Headline (Score 1) 246

That's a regressive tax. Poor people spend more of their income on "stuff", so end up paying more tax (proportionally) than the rich, who use tier money in other ways (stock, shares etc).

You say "regressive tax" as though that is somehow morally wrong and shocks the conscience of the Universe. You might choose a cutoff that income tax starts on all income above a basic subsistence rate, but there is no absolute moral authority stating "regressive tax bad, progressive tax good." Besides, many low income people currently pay no income taxes at all. Even if they paid a pittance and had some skin in the game they might start taking a much greater interest in how their tax monies were being spent -- which would be a Good Thing.

Comment Re:Misleading Headline (Score 2) 246

A flat income tax with no deductions? Seriously? You know that'd benefit the rich. Right now, a lot of poor people pay no income tax. I pay no income tax. I just have to worry about self-employment tax (equivalent to FICA taxes for employed persons) and that's it. I don't earn enough to pay income tax, and I don't think I ever have. Came close while in college given my grants.

A flat tax that somehow benefits the rich? Wow, how did you arrive at that?

Let me see here. Under a flat tax I make X dollars and pay Y tax on them where Y = some% of X.
Another person makes 2X dollars and pays 2Y in taxes.
Uncle Money Bags makes 100X dollars (I hope I'm in his will) and pays 100Y in taxes.

You know, that really sounds very fair to me -- although truly fair would be that everybody pays the same amount of tax each year because everybody benefits the same from roads, schools and other provided services.

Anything else is punitive from envious people who hate that someone else had more than they do.

People are weird that way. Take the social experiment where the researcher offers you $50, which you can take or refuse. But there's a condition: If you take the $50 then I get $100. But if you take nothing then I get nothing either. While you'd think that it's a no-brainer that you now have $50 that you didn't have before, you'd be amazed how many people will refuse to take their money because someone else "unfairly" is getting more in the process. And that attitude carries over into other areas.

Comment Re:well... (Score 1) 246

Microsoft employs >40K employees in the Seattle Metro area, while the other 3.6M residents (literally the 99%) get screwed.

So tell me, if Microsoft left and took the 40k jobs with them, they would then NOT get tax breaks in Seattle.

How would the other 99% of the Seattle residents be better off?

Would they somehow be less screwed?

How dare you attempt Logic on Slashdot?

Slashdot Top Deals

egrep -n '^[a-z].*\(' $ | sort -t':' +2.0

Working...