Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Unless you can give everyone birth control.... (Score 1) 190

You do realise that one of the main reasons people in third world countries have many children, is that they know that there is a very high infant mortality rate, coupled with the fact that ones children are the only social security they will have in later life, as children will assist in growing food, and look after their parents when they themselves become adults.

If you know that 4 out of 5 babies die before they are 5 years old, (often due to malaria, as it hits children a lot harder than adults) then aiming for 10 children will mean that hopefully 2 survive to look after you when you get old.

A lot of work has been done in the last 2 to 3 decades to educate africans about birth-control, and they know about it, but still choose to have large families because of the high infant mortality. Access to condoms, (both male and female) is pretty widespread due to HIV/AIDS awareness programmes.

If you knew that 80% of any money/assets you saved for retirement had a very good chance of disappearing in a puff of smoke, you'd save a heck of a lot more than you do now.

Comment Re:Universal service. (Score 1) 601

I'm not American, nor do I live in the US, but I currently live in a 1st world country, and have lived in a 3rd world country.

While it's true that there are those who live in rural locations because the want the peace and tranquility etc, there are those who live there because they "need" to. When I say "need", I mean you can't run a big farm or mine in the middle of the city. Amazingly, the work these people do, affects you directly.

If a farmer (both 1st and 3rd world) has decent communications and internet access, it makes an amazing difference to the efficiency and profitability of his farm. This in turn allows him to reduce his costs, and therefore the final cost (to you) of his produce, be that wheat for the bread that you eat, or the steak for your barbeque.

A small contribution on your part, (multiplied by everyone else in the country), means that improved infrastructure can be provided to those living out in the sticks. (provided of course, that the money is used correctly, and not abused, either by governments, or corporations)

This in turn will provide benefits to you. You may not see the benefits immediately but believe me, they will trickle down eventually.

Not all who live in rural areas are selfish pricks.

Submission + - Borat anthem played to Kazakh gold medallist (bbc.co.uk) 1

cybernanga writes: The medal ceremony at a Kuwaiti shooting event provoked bemusement and red faces when the wrong anthem was played to Kazakh gold medallist Maria Dmitrienko.

Following a mix up with an internet download, the winner had to listen to a spoof anthem written for the film Borat.

Comment Re:Data wants to be free - arts and music need to (Score 1) 192

Thanks for replying.

Not into the public domain, but they must release them.

Just trying to understand your point here so bear with me (I'm a bit thick). If you say they don't have to be released into the public domain, then I assume you are ok with them marketing and selling the tracks, and thereby hopefully for them) making a profit. How long after the artists death do you suggest that they have to have released them by?

I ask because as far as I know, they haven't stated that they will never release them, and I assume they are waiting until they feel the market conditions are right for them to achieve the maximum return on their investment.

Comment Re:Data wants to be free - arts and music need to (Score 1) 192

You can not seriously keep unpublished works of an artist locked away after his death, as they are of common interest.

Just to argue a point:

If an artist creates and records 20 songs, they are free to decide that they would like to release 10 of them today, and the other 10 in five years time, their logic being that they don't want to flood the market with new tracks, as that would affect demand, price & revenue.

They are also free to sell the rights to the extra 10 songs to a third party. Additionally they can make it a conditional sale, that prevents the purchaser from releasing them before a particular date.

Now if the original artist dies before the agreed upon release date, are you suggesting that the new owner MUST forfeit any chance to profit from their investment, and immediately release the songs into the public domain? If you are, do you realise that that would likely prevent artists from selling the rights to their future catalogs, as far fewer investors would take the risk, if their investment was likely to simply disappear, if the artist died.

Comment Re:Why? It sucked. (Score 1) 469

I'm on the same plan, it's brilliant.

Compared to the other providers, not having to worry about hitting a data cap is such a relief. I don't phone much, so I'll probably never run out of minutes, 2000 sms's is about 10 times what I need, but the data that is simply amazing!

I have a Mac Mini installed in my car, and I can tether, without worry. If passengers want to download they can just go ahead, I can run google maps etc. I spend a lot of time in the car, and it really makes a difference.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Given the choice between accomplishing something and just lying around, I'd rather lie around. No contest." -- Eric Clapton

Working...