Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:$100k today the equivalent of $80k in 2004 (Score 1) 191

by Arker (#46818355) Attached to: Tech People Making $100k a Year On the Rise, Again
"You would prefer a fixed money supply?"

Not a fixed supply per se, but one that cannot be routinely manipulated to siphon peoples savings into the pockets of the well-connected and already super wealthy would certainly be nice.

The bimetallic standard, for example, did not result in a fixed money supply. New gold and silver are still being mined, after all. But unlike paper money, the expansion was somewhat limited, it takes time, and effort (and money!) to mine precious metals. Supply and demand moderated the expansion as well - when expansion was more desirable the price of the precious metals rose, encouraging mining, and when it was less desirable the price came down, discouraging the same activities.

With fiat money we lost all of those safeguards. The only limitation on inflation is political, not physical or material. And the outcome of that is as predictable as it is tragic - the powerful gain massively (and are happy to send a tiny portion of their windfall out as 'campaign contributions' to those who enable it, of course) while the common people are each 'only' losing a few cents here, a few cents there, not enough to really motivate an effective pushback.

Which means financial collapse is in our future and approaching at a gallop.

Comment: Re:THis is why I hide behind (Score 1) 231

by Arker (#46818139) Attached to: Intentional Backdoor In Consumer Routers Found
"a second router... My ISP provides the cable modem/router and I hang my own router/wi-fi hub off that..."

That's a really bad idea. Unless you have actually set that modem/router to bridge mode first, you'll be double-NAT'd and the best thing I can say about that is sometimes it works. Best case it's unnecessary latency, worst case it's a huge PITA to troubleshoot. And what do you gain? The compromised hardware is still there and all your packets still have to pass through it.

Comment: Re:Generating your own electricity .. (Score 1) 440

by Arker (#46811853) Attached to: Oklahoma Moves To Discourage Solar and Wind Power
" Well, actually, I use <ecode>, because <code> appears not to honor line breaks and <ecode> appears not to honor indentation, and, for code, the latter sucks less than the former."

Exactly the sort of Hobsons choice that you should NOT have to face, frankly. Text is text. It's absurd that 'designers' have so much trouble dealing with it.

Now that aside, notice you are talking about explicitly tagging your text, which I am not doing. I am only using the posting mode default setting, I rarely insert tags and when I do I switch posting modes.

"Neither of them appear to provide me with any advantages if I'm just posting text."

They are far from perfect but they do indeed suck a little less. I used to use the 'plain text' as my default but there are several cases where that mode will strip and/or add tags in a pseudo-random fashion and it pissed me off one time too many.

If I type in I dont necessarily want that to converted into a link, for instance. Relatively minor.

If I type:

     a    b
x    4    5
y    3    2
z    1    8

Then I MUST use code or slashdot will simply destroy the entire paragraph. The amount of time I had to spend to make that short snippet of *text* display properly just now is significant and absurd. But if I were posting in any mode other than 'code' it would not have been an absurdly difficulty task to accomplish a simple and obvious result, it would have actually been IMPOSSIBLE.

ALSO I cannot even mention a tag (<tt> for example but there are many others) without switching to code. If I try to say "<tt> sucks" for instance I must do this with 'code' set - otherwise the tag does not appear, it is parsed and changes font for the rest of the post! Absurd.

Again, there should be no problem reading the text. If there is a problem reading the text, then local browser settings need to be corrected. While what slashdot is doing here is certainly not what I would call sane or recommend, it is in fact workable and that one stalker I have attracted is rather more insane for refusing to choose a readable <tt> font.

Comment: Re:Generating your own electricity .. (Score 1) 440

by Arker (#46811595) Attached to: Oklahoma Moves To Discourage Solar and Wind Power
Actually I was not intending to make any point at all. I still have a recent journal entry up if you want to read it.

The TLDR is I chose the 'code' option after testing the available options and finding it sucks less. As an unintended side-effect of this my posts get wrapped in 'tt' tags which suggest a monospace font. I am fine with that suggestion, although it was not in intentional. If anyone finds this unreadable they only need to go to their browser settings and select a readable font for 'tt' text which they should have done already anyhow.

Comment: Re:Generating your own electricity .. (Score 1) 440

by Arker (#46811515) Attached to: Oklahoma Moves To Discourage Solar and Wind Power
You know, about 35 years ago now, we invented something called the world wide web. This was an infrastructure which allows documents in a semantic markup language to be delivered all around the world on demand, and for the recipient of the document to see them in whatever form makes the most sense on their equipment.

It's still in use, and you are on it. If the form you are seeing on your screen is displeasing, you can simply change it. Really. A thing called browser settings. You should find out what browser you are using, and investigate the options. It will have a facility that allows you to ensure that all fonts displayed on your screen meet with your approval, all you have to do is use it.

Comment: Re:Generating your own electricity .. (Score 1) 440

by Arker (#46810681) Attached to: Oklahoma Moves To Discourage Solar and Wind Power
There are fixed costs as well as scaling costs involved. IF as appears to be implied here the utilities involved bill only for the latter - the actual electricity used, then generating your own electricity could expose the error in their billing system. Let's say you are generating as much as you use, and are billed only for usage with a net-metering system, so your bill is... $0.

Well, that would actually be unfair, if it's happening, because obviously they still have fixed costs involved in servicing you, laying and maintaining lines, etc and you really are not paying 'your fair share' in that case. Generally I thought utilities actually split these charges out separately, which avoids that problem entirely - fixed costs are reflected in fixed items on your bill, separate from usage.

If they are billing only for usage, then what they must actually be doing is figuring in a tiny little increase in their rates to cover the fixed costs in aggregate already - it is inconceivable that they simply are not billing for it in any way of course.

So now, they would like - not to start itemized billing for fixed costs (and ever so slightly reduce their rates in the process) - no. Much better to simply charge punitive rates to small generators that they would really rather not have to deal with in the first place, hmm?

Comment: Re:US Revelations vs. Confronting Putin (Score 2) 168

"The first thing that comes to mind is we wouldn't have even heard of this video if it didn't go according to script."

And this drivel gets +5 insightful?

It was a live call-in show. Yes, they have these things in Russia, and more amazingly, their President has the cajones to go on one and take callers. The Soviet Union fell a long, long time ago you know.

Snowdens question was the first gambit in a line of attack that leads to parsing essentially the same lie the NSA still tries. They actually collect everything, and stick it in a database, but they arent really supposed to pull it back out without a reason, so since most of the stuff in the database never gets looked at by a human, they want to say they arent *really* collecting it all. They only want to admit to collecting the stuff they admit to going back and looking at later, and say it's not mass surveillance, it's targeted. But that's just not how the technology works.

If you want to be able to come back in 6 months and pick out a single call to listen to, you have to record ALL the calls and keep them stored for some time in order to enable this. And maybe there is one call in there that winds up being of use in a criminal investigation, great. Along with 200 that are useful for blackmail or extortion? Do we think the intelligence agents who have access to this information are angels who could never consider doing anything wrong, or incompetents who could work there every day for years but never find a way to get away with anything?

There has been a little distress selling on the stock exchange. -- Thomas W. Lamont, October 29, 1929 (Black Tuesday)