Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Wishful Thinking (Score 3, Insightful) 69

As horrible as nuclear weapons are, and as ideal as a world without them would be, this is wishful thinking at its best. The level of trust and cooperation required for everyone to give up nuclear weapons is in large part simply impossible given the current state of human and world affairs. We've certainly not managed to eliminate war or armed conflict. All we've done is limit its scope and size.

And speaking of that, it's in large part due to nuclear weapons that there have been no major wars in the past 70 years. The most we've seen were proxy wars that were limited in scope, and while many of those were horrible, they pale in comparison to the two World Wars, or really any of the major power conflicts that preceded them. The world with nuclear-armed major powers is paradoxically MORE peaceful than the world before it was. Prior to the nuclear age, it's difficult to go more than 20-30 years without two or more major powers going to war. The presence of nuclear weapons was the final thing that made "Total War" too costly a concept for rational actors to even consider it.

Reduce their number and scope? Sure, by all means. Get rid of them entirely? That's quite a different thing.

No major wars in the past 70 years? Wtf have you been smoking? We've been in a proxy war with Russia since basically the end of WWII. We've invaded practically every country in the middle east, South America and most of Asia. Millions of people are dead. Basically the entire middle east is at war with us in one way or another as we speak. The only difference between now and WWII is the iron grip our leaders now have on the message our media feeds us. We are in the middle of a world war right now, and have been this entire time.

After memorial day I read an article about how Obama was celebrating the first memorial day without "boots on the ground" in 7 years or something. Meanwhile we've got special forces in every country in the middle east, bombers flying daily missions, drones bombing weddings. Just how gullible are we?!?!

Comment An aid or a barrier? (Score 4, Insightful) 110

"it's troubling that close to half of all respondents (49%) said their department occasionally or frequently initiates IT projects with little or no direct involvement of IT."

That's typically because many IT departments rarely add value to what other departments are trying to accomplish. A good IT department's role is to facilitate and support the activities of other departments. Their job should be to ask "how can I help you accomplish your tasks?" The problem is that too many IT departments think their primary task is to control the network and IT resources without much regard paid to what other departments are trying to accomplish with those resources. IT too often thinks of itself as an end rather than a means. So it should surprise no one that many departments in many companies regard IT as a barrier to be worked around rather than a partner ready and willing to help.

Comment Re:One quote from the article that is nice... (Score 1) 148

The singularities (they are not blackholes) have a diameter smaller than the width of the nucleus of an atom. So, even if they were created, survived more than a trillionth of a second without evaporating, or any of the other improbabilities that come along with this... the statistical likelihood of them colliding with any particle at all is basically 0. If it were possible, every star in the universe would have collapsed into a black hole seconds after forming.

When they building a accelerator around the event horizon of a blackhole and start testing stuff that hasn't happened since the birth of the universe, let me know. I'll worry then.

Comment Re:Seems reasonable (Score 1) 119

The hard part is indeed establishing what the right level of security is and how to evaluate companies against that. At least over here, the exclusions for burglary are pretty clear cut: leaving your door or a window open, and for insuring more valuable stuff there are often extra provisions like requiring "x" star locks and bolt, or a class "y" safe or class "z" alarm system and so on. With IT security, it's not just about what stuff you have installed and what systems you have left open or not; IT security is about people and process, as much or more than it is about systems.

It's fairly simple and done in just about every other industry. The insurance companies will come up with standards. Then 3rd party "Security experts" will pop up offering certification. "We're Security level blackwatch plaid certified! We get a $20k discount on our policy!" etc... Microsoft finds a bug and doesn't patch it? It's hard for your local bank to sue them... but the entire insurance industry?

This is a good thing.

Comment Re:Get rid of it (Score 4, Informative) 389

Obama has promised again and again to safeguard our liberties. Now he has morphed into George Bush. What did I miss?

You missed the meeting he had with the NSA the day he took officer where they showed him their file on him.

A free society can not exist in conjunction with a government that has unfettered power. That's what the NSA has done, unchained itself from the restrictions of the constitution. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. If the NSA isn't blackmailing the president, they will eventually. It is quite literally inevitable.

Comment Re: Flamebait title (Score 1) 392

The difference here is, who's driving the car. And can the owner claim that he had a reasonable expectation that the car would include such a basic safety feature. The equivalent would be to design a car that didn't have breaks at all and claim that's an extended feature or something... that's perfectly safe if you never go over 5mph and only drive in a farm field right?

An auto-driving car, should also auto-break. The driver would reasonable expect that, and there's no easy way for the drive to know that it wouldn't... especially when the car CAN do it if you pay them more money.

I think that the thousands of scam artists that are out there right now frantically trying to find cheap deals on these Volvos will quickly get Volvo to make the feature standard soon as Volvo ends up paying for their retirement.

Comment Did they already fix this? (Score 1) 248

Did Apple already fix this? I immediately tried to crash every phone of every coworker who has an iPhone within earshot of me and it didn't work. Much to my disappointment. I'm now having to save face by harassing them with Pictures of Steve Job's license plateless car parked in multiple handicapped spots.

Comment No, not everybody wants or can afford every option (Score 1) 392

It's open for debate, but my view is everybody DOES want every feature they can have.

Not really. If I've got a pickup I use for hauling dirt at work in sketchy neighborhoods I'm going to want a pretty minimal feature set. No point in having a fancy touch screen or satellite radio. If you are buying a car for your mom you might not want that 400HP turbocharged engine but you might want it for yourself along with that fancy rear spoiler wing. Different people have different needs and wants. Similarly many features cost significant cash and adding them can often put the cost of the vehicle out of reach for those of lesser means even if they desire.

Different ranges will cater to different markets (more revenue), but not necessarily more profit.

I think you may not fully understand the economics at work. My apologies if what I'm about to outline is already known to you. I'm a certified accountant and have done some of this work in my day job. This is an over-simplification but more features = more cost to the manufacturer = higher price to customer.

Margins are usually higher with more features but every vehicle has a minimum required profit margin which is typically called a hurdle rate by finance folks. As a general practice the auto maker won't make the car unless they can get at least the hurdle rate margin for it. (the exact rate is arbitrarily chosen but is indexed for the risk of the investment) They also have fixed costs (tooling, assembly lines, salaries, engineering costs, etc) that they need to recoup and which don't change whether they sell 1 vehicle or 1 million vehicles. If they only sell fully pimped out vehicles they are leaving profit on the table because they will have to amortize those fixed costs over fewer vehicles. Even though the might make less margin on the less optioned out vehicle, their unit costs will fall because they sell more of them and can spread their fixed costs over more vehicles.

It's more complex than this but companies maximize profit when when marginal revenue = marginal cost. That is the additional revenue gained from selling one more car just equals the additional cost of selling that one more car. By offering vehicles with fewer options at a lower price point they push out to the point where marginal cost hockey sticks up from over production and increases profit to the manufacturer. Wikipedia has a good article on what is going on.

No. Most cars aren't works of art, because art is one of the few "industries" where uniqueness is key. Save for some limited-edition, luxury cars, that point is moot. Extras rarely value a car, age and exclusivity do.

Has nothing to do with cars being (or not) works of art. People don't (usually) demand that their car be truly unique but they do demand that they be personalized to a significant degree. People choose different paint colors, different engines, different wheels, etc. Car customization is a multi-billion dollar industry both at the OEM and aftermarket levels. I work in the industry and I can assure you that people do not want exactly the same vehicle as the next guy and many are willing to pay to get it. Companies that do not accommodate this to some degree are leaving money on the table. The US manufacturers tend to offer more options and the Japanese less with the Europeans somewhere in between. Even Tesla offers several power trains, trim packages and other options - roughly on par with what you see from the Japanese automakers for certain vehicles.

Comment I've worked directly with doctors (Score 0) 119

Doctors are terrible businesspeople.

Really? I know quite a few and am married to one and many of them are quite good at business. Many are terrible and/or disinterested but your brush is a little to broad. If doctors in general were terrible at business in general then they would lose money and there is very little evidence of that occurring on a widespread basis.

I work in the patient refunds department for a very large insurer and it's absolutely out of control.

Ahh, so you only see the problem cases but lack the larger perspective of seeing all the things that happen correctly.

It often takes them 4 years to notice a payment which wasn't even for them.

Ahh, I see you are confusing what the doctor does (administer medicine and oversee the business) with what their accounting staff does. Doctors typically have a large staff to administer a rather ludicrously large paperwork burden. The fact that some payments get lost between the cracks should surprise no one. I'm an accountant (among other things) and I can assure you that it is not terrible difficult in a busy organization for a payment to get mishandled. I also have worked in healthcare systems and doctors offices and have a pretty good appreciation for what goes on there. It's not nearly as easy as you seem to think it is.

It's bad when they do their own books but it's still bad when you let them hire their own office staff.

Sounds like you have never tried to run a business yourself. Might give it a go before you start throwing stones at others.

Comment Re:Court Rules in Favor of Patent Reform (Score 1) 87

At some point, the trolls will collect enough tolls that we'll finally have to do something about the ridiculous patents that are granted.

Remember, the trolls are legally in the right, which makes it not a problem with bad ethics on the part of the trolls, but bad ethics on the part of our legal system or patent system.

That's what they said about lawyers and politicians, and look what happened.

Comment Re:DoB, SSN & Filing Status?? (Score 2) 85

Better yet, those same agencies are 100% supportive of fining private enterprise for the same thing... But they believe they are simply innocent victims of outside attacks and shouldn't be held responsible.

But this wasn't even an "attack" they used the form as it was intended to be used and just guessed at the inputs. That's like putting a combination lock on your safe that only has 1 digit, setting it to "1" then, after your customers Jewelry is stolen claiming there's nothing to can do to stop a determined Global criminal organizations that employ master safe crackers.

Comment Options (Score 3, Insightful) 392

No matter how old it is, I still can't fathom the "extra" scheme applied to the automotive industry.

It's rather simple so let me break it down for you. 1) Not everybody wants, needs or can afford every feature. 2) Automakers can sell more cars if they offer them at a range of prices. 3) People like to customize their vehicles because having something a little unique is valued. 4) If people weren't willing to pay extra for options then they would quickly not be offered. 5) Bundling options keeps complexity down to a manageable level and if done right improves profits for the manufacturer.

Why can't all cars be more like a Model S and ship with the most relevant technological developments "out of the box"

If people start gravitating with their dollars towards that business model then that is what will happen. I think it is unlikely but stranger things have happened. However remember that you are talking about a $100,000 luxury car so the rules are quite a bit different than for the market for a minivan or pickup that costs 1/3 of the price of the Tesla.

Slashdot Top Deals

One way to make your old car run better is to look up the price of a new model.

Working...