Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment This may backfire (Score 2) 20

Kickstarter is already providing the tools to connect innovators with investors, datamining investor information in order to target them personally like that may backfire and rather than entice them to invest more it may turn them against the very concept. Everybody needs a some degree of control over their actions and choices, stop pushing people, they are not your puppets.

Comment Sergey Brin needs a reminder (Score 4, Insightful) 345

By the way, what a horrendous summary.

Sergey Brin needs to remind himself what country he escaped as a child and stop helping American versions of the FSB from growing their powers. Of-course he hasn't been through a TSA experience himself and I am sure his and his family privacy are safe from Google's data mining operation, but he should not kid himself, he is on a special list of persons of interest, USA powers that be are certainly paying close attention to high profile targets like Brin and other influential and wealthy individuals. Does he really want to increase their powers? It would be a grave error on his part because private property rights are quite transient in the United Socialist States of Republicans (and Democrats).
Keeping all private information on line, where it can be data mined by Google and the NSA is profitable for Google but it also grows the power of the state and people should think really hard about letting the state have all that power.

Comment Re:and people go out with people based on race too (Score 2) 293

I have seen companies go bankrupt because of insane lawsuits that made 0 sense, where an ex employee maintained contact with a client and offered the client to gamble (literally) with his money, the client provided the ex-employee with 200,000, which was lost and the company was sued for this amount because it was the last entity where this ex-employee worked and the guy who lost the money was awarded it back from the company and the company went bankrupt, and this is one of many cases where liability of the company extended beyond any reason and the jury saw it fit to award insane non-existing damages that the company was absolutely not responsible for.

I saw many situations where companies were destroyed by insane anti-business laws and court decisions. I know of people who went to jail (owners / management) because they would not cooperate with insane government demands against the clients of the company.

You may want to think hard, when was the last time an ex-employee was sued by a company for leaving?

Now compare it to this: when was the last time a company was sued for firing somebody?

Now think about that and shut up.

Comment Re:and people go out with people based on race too (Score 2) 293

Wait wait wait, never mind 'rights', you are saying that companies have 'fewer responsibilities', are you serious? Even a little bit serious?

A company that hires employees and has clients and is bound by various government regulations has fewer responsibilities than an individual who is not a company? Oh boy, I see where the problem here is, you have such a case of tunnel vision on this, it's not going to get any better any time soon.

Actually it is the case that people are losing rights as they start running businesses. As an individual you are free to discriminate as much as you like, it's not a government regulated offence.

As a business if you discriminate you are absolutely liable legally. You are liable when you hire people. You are liable when you fire people. You are liable when you build a product.

You are liable by the very fact that you are perceived to have more money than a non-company, you are sued simply because you are seeing as somebody that has money, nothing else matters and in such cases the courts are very receiving to the individuals and are very negative towards the businesses, they always see a business as a source of cash and an individual for some reason is always somebody that should get some of that cash. The anti-business environment is such that hiring people in USA is the worst possible thing you can do as a business, it's the worst idea at this point.

Comment easy enough (Score 0) 155

all you have to do is call cops on an unsuspecting victim at night, especially if the person in question has guns in the house and may use them to attempt and protect himself from some sort of an attack. At this point cops in the US are militarised enough and are fucked in the head just enough to attack and shoot first and ask questions later, so that's a way to do it if you are into that kind of a thing.

Comment Re:Yes yes yes (Score 1) 405

Reagan-era innovation called, "supply-side economics"

- first of all it has nothing to do with 'innovation' during Reagan era, supply side is the only real economics and it made USA into the first rate producer of cheap, high quality goods in the 19th century, turned an country that used to be an afterthought to Europe into the largest producer and creditor nation.

USA lost that status in the last 40 years for the exact opposite reasons, those reasons being that USA SUPPLIES NOTHING except for ungodly amounts of paper currency. USA supplies nothing specifically because worker productivity per worker is negative, instead USA lives off of the supplies that are brought from other countries and those supplies are vendor financed. The only people that are confused here are those who can't understand the simplest of things: productive workers produce and USA doesn't produce anything.

The companies with their profits are showing inflation, not productivity. Current profits are based solely on the ability of the Federal reserve bank to create inflation via money printing and their ability to print money is actually infinite, but not their ability to do anything positive for the economy. Every newly created dollar (electronic or otherwise) only undermines USA economy specifically because it has nothing to do with any productivity whatsoever, it is not a reflection of productive output, it is only the indicator that USA economy is dying and it will choke on the dollar vomit that the Fed is producing.

USA corporations that are catering to the foreign consumers are showing some real gains, but be careful buying into them as well, as their gains will very likely be stolen from them by the government once the inevitable real collapse (dollar this time) wipes out the remaining economy in the States and then we will see just what USA government and the mob are capable of when they decide to confiscate every last penny from anybody who is still actively producing something, anything.

Good luck to you.

Comment Re:Yes yes yes (Score 1) 405

I don't care one way or another what you derive from this, given your position I am not sure you can actually derive anything from a conversation that doesn't go your way.

I have seen pretty much anything you can imagine, from multiple immigrations to wars and collapses of countries, I can say with absolute certainty that nothing compares to the risk of running a business with employees and clients, with money and years of life on the line.

I don't need any links to any lists, in my life I rely on my own experiences and knowledge and make my own decisions, so if you want to talk to me, you will have to actually have meaningful additions to the conversation that you make on your own without cheat sheets.

Comment Re:Not the first amendment. (Score 1) 742

Banks foreclosing, etc., all of this is based on government participating in the market, destroying lending standards and propping up failing business models with money that is stolen from the individuals (taxpayers). None of this is normal behaviour under free market conditions, these situations are created by government "trying to help".

Banking is government regulated.
Power is government regulated.
Health care is government regulated.
Insurance is government regulated.
Food industry is government regulated.
Money is obviously government regulated.

Find me something that is not government regulated beyond computer software and other systems (and even many of these are regulated by the government) and then lets talk about free markets and how somehow without government regulations, taxes, inflation and generally control companies 'tax people' in an actual competitive environment.

Comment Re:Yes yes yes (Score 1) 405

You don't know what risk is until you take put all of your money on the line and then hire somebody in an anti-business environment to work for you, in a system that sees every employer as a potential cash cow to be stolen from, to be sued for every transgression even of the people that have nothing to do with the business in the first place. You have 0 understanding of real risk, you are thinking very small and insignificant.

Once you have employees that can sue you, clients that can sue you, government that can sue you, all of your money on the line, even your personal freedom on the line, all because you are now an employer, then you will start gaining a slim sliver of understanding of what risk actually is. You are a child in this, you know nothing until you actually do it. You have nothing to compare to. People do risky things every day, immigration is risky, life is a risky thing. However starting a business in an anti-business system is about as risky for all layers of your life as it gets.

Comment Re:Yes yes yes (Score 2) 405

Capital is valued much more than labour because there is a huge lack of capital in the face of labour that has no capital and no skills that are useful enough to be combined with any available capital in a profitable manner, that is why.

Capital is not always valued more than labour, however the system that we are in set up the government that is destroying capital formation with inflation, rules and taxes and because the capital is being destroyed and the formation of capital is disincentivised with all the inflation there is a huge shortage of capital, so the real interest rates are so high that new businesses cannot afford to borrow at that cost of money and the existing businesses are engaged into the asset bubble creation with the fake money supplied by the Federal reserve.

So instead of building new businesses we are supporting the failing existing business models that are not providing utility that would reflect positively on the huge trade imbalances.

As to risk, you don't know what risk is until you started your own business (or maybe went to war).

Comment Re:Not the first amendment. (Score 1) 742

Obviously. Rights are protections against government abuse, persecution, theft and murder, not against other individuals or businesses.

Government is the only entity that has legal ability to fine, imprison or even murder an individual, companies cannot do that (of-course under a contract fines are possible between 2 parties that agree to a contract).

Inalienable rights are the rights of the individual not to be stolen from and destroyed by the collective, where the collective is the organisation with legal privileges actually to steal from you (taxes, inflation, regulations) and destroy you (imprison you, murder you).

Comment and people go out with people based on race too (Score 2, Insightful) 293

So what, in many cases people choose mates and friends based on their race preferences.

Many clients choose which businesses they will deal with based on the origin business owner (some prefer to frequent or to avoid Indian or Middle Eastern or Asian establishments for example).

People must be able to discriminate however they see fit and I am talking about people in their individual lives and I am also talking about businesses obviously.

Yes, it should be possible to discriminate based on race, absolutely. Race, age, sex, any form of discrimination must be absolutely legal (and by the way it is unconstitutional, illegal for the federal government to regulate businesses and the entire concept of interstate commerce does not allow government to regulate business, it is only there to prevent individual States from erecting barriers of entry, which are still all there, so the federal government is not doing what it's job is and instead it constantly harasses businesses for no reason whatsoever).

Now, government must not be able to discriminate against anybody based on age, race, sex, ethnicity but that is also constantly happening for example with the war on drugs, with the so called 'war on terrorism', with every war that government runs.

Government must not be able to discriminate because it destroys the rule of law, destroys the free market (which is already destroyed in USA of-course) and eventually destroys the economy and thus the society. Government must be forced to treat people equally regardless of their natural characteristics, individuals must not be forced into anything.

If you will not accept government forcing you to marry any particular person or to frequent any particular business then it is inconsistent for you to be cheering for the government forcing a business to either hire or to serve any particular person. Cheering for it is the real discrimination and helps the government to grow its gigantic poisonous tentacles that end up stealing and murdering everything on their path.

Comment Re:Yes yes yes (Score 1) 405

I am absolutely correct, worker productivity is productive output, not inflated value of assets and various dollar related bubbles that these graphs are actually showing, which is coincidentally why they all start in early 1970s, after Nixon's default on the dollar, when USA took the world off of the gold standard.

The world used to be on the gold standard before 1971, which prevented gigantic bubbles that we are living through now. USA was (is still) the reserve currency that foreign national banks hold as 'reserves', however that literally meant that the foreigners had gold reserves in those dollars (that's what the gold standard promised). As Nixon defaulted on the dollar, the world was taken off of the gold standard and that started gigantic inflation mania that we have experienced since.

USA productive output is negative, which is why USA cannot pay for its own consumption, which is subsidised by the very people that produce the stuff that Americans consume (Chinese and the like). USA has been running a 500Billion USD/year trade deficit for over 2 decades now, there is nothing at all productive about an economy that does not pay for imports with its own exports, this the destruction of productivity I am talking about and what the pundits that push nonsensical propaganda about 'rising USA productivity' are actually talking about is inflation and the related to the inflation rising cost of living, rising prices that do not reflect productivity, in fact they reflect destruction of the economy.

Comment Re:Mega Rant (Score 2) 405

How tired I am of you and your nonsense on the Great Depression and the false reasons behind it that you believe in and the actual facts that you cannot get through your thick skull. The Great Depression was not caused by oversupply of anything, it was caused by the Federal reserve bank of America buying up bad UK debt from France and creating giant inflation in the process, which inflated the stock market bubble, which was not sustainable because bubbles are not sustainable. The recession that resulted from the burst of the bubble would have been dealt with swiftly, just like the depression of 1921, if the government stayed away, but instead Hoover and later FDR stepped in and turned the recession into the depression (which by the way only had about 25% unemployment, which is actually no worse than what USA is experiencing today) and many of the 'solutions' of the idiots that believe in nonsensical Keynesian garbage was to print more money by government to DESTROY PRODUCTS that farmers created, they literally destroyed food, ploughed it into the ground rather than allowing the absolutely necessary reduction of prices that would have absolutely helped the people of that era and prevented any unnecessary suffering.

The government, that you fucking love so much, took farming output and literally ploughed it into the fucking ground so that the prices wouldn't drop, you unimaginable unintelligent creep.

THE HUMAN DEMAND IS INFINITE. The ability to satisfy the demand is limited by productivity of the humans that have those demands and that is why 600 meter yachts are not selling for 10 dollars and that is why people do not have their own 787s and space ships, because the human productivity today is minuscule on the grand scale of things, which prevents most humans from owning such items (where those items are even present in existence to be owned).

Again, human demand is infinite and thus the opportunities to satisfy the human demand are also infinite.

Stop replying to my comments, you never add anything to the discussion beyond complete waste of time.

Slashdot Top Deals

With your bare hands?!?

Working...