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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Safest it's ever been (Score 1) 82

There is an interesting disconnect in that article. At the beginning of it, it talks about a drop in the total number of hives from the 1940s to "today" (2012, it amounts to a 50% drop). Then it talks about the fact that we appear to be losing 33% of our hives over each winter. How can that be if there was only a 50% drop total from the 1940s to now?

The answer being that beekeepers replace the majority (if not all) of those lost hives each summer. If you want to track this you need to look at how many hives we lose year to year, not from September to May. I want to know how many fewer hives there were last May, not how many fewer than last September.

Comment Re: Vietnam (Score 2) 282

I was not sure where to put this, so I chose here. All of the problems in Vietnam resulted from the fact that the decision had been made to fight the Soviet Union in a series of proxy wars designed to cost them more than they could afford. That decision in itself was a good one, the dangers of fighting the Soviet Union directly were too great to risk. The problem was that the decision makers in Washington did not fight in Vietnam with the intention of winning that engagement. They decided to continue that proxy war indefinitely. If they had fought Vietnam with the intention of winning, it would likely have been over in 1968 or sooner. This strategy was complicated by their belief that they could control what information about the war came out (causing them to think they could lie about what was going on and not get caught).

Comment Re:Also, who does not separate drive control? (Score 1) 191

But he is not trying to prevent people with physical access to the car from messing with it. He is suggesting that we should prevent people WITHOUT physical access to the car from being able to hack it. The only way to solve the problem of people with physical access to the car being able to hack it is to either not put computer chips in the car, or make those chips completely read only (which has its own problems).

Comment Re:Not just wearables but the basic cell phone too (Score 1) 202

People who buy a Swiss watch are not buying it to tell the time. They are buying it as a subtle way of telling people that they are rich enough to afford spending money on something just for appearance. Of course "wearables" are taking some of the air out of that market, a significant percentage (probably the majority) of the people buying "wearables" are doing so for the same reason.

Comment Re:Great Economy? (Score 1) 293

No, I have experience working with small businesses which were unable to compete because they could not afford to pay someone to fill out the paperwork necessary to comply with regulations. It costs money to comply with regulations...even when those regulations only insist that a company follow practices it would have followed any way because once there are regulations you have to DOCUMENT that you have followed them.

As to anti competitive practices those that are not a result of government regulation or only possible in the presence of government regulation, will be fixed by a free market in due time.
Of course there is another mistake you make, since you think that government regulation is by definition a good thing, you believe that those who wish to see government regulations minimized want to see all government regulations and laws eliminated.

Somehow you seem to think that people are evil when they run private corporations and good when they work for government bureaucracies.

Comment Re:Great Economy? (Score 1) 293

Your example countries have MUCH smaller populations AND I am not convinced that they truly are less corrupt. Perhaps it is just the value of corrupting the government is less.

More importantly, you and I disagree on one basic point. You believe that regulations allow small companies to compete with large companies. I believe that it is regulations which allow large companies to suppress competition from small companies. In addition, you believe that the words "law" and "regulation" are interchangeable, which allows you to suggest that those who want limited government regulation are anarchists.

Comment Re:Great Economy? (Score 1) 293

We have too many regulations now and you want more. You live in a fantasy world where it is possible to have regulations which are free from regulatory capture. The very fact that we need regulations of any sort demonstrates that this is the case. The largest enemy of getting "strong effective regulations, free from bad regulations created by regulatory capture..." is human nature/

However, even if it were possible to have such regulations regulations always favor larger, established businesses. A larger business can more easily absorb the cost of complying with the paperwork necessary to demonstrate that one is in compliance with the law, which is why, big business always comes around to supporting more regulation in their industry.

Comment Re:Great Economy? (Score 1) 293

Well, first, I am not arguing for no regulation. I am arguing for LESS regulation. My question is, do you really believe that the little guy has a chance with the level of rules that are currently in place? Even if the regulations were not corrupt, complying with them costs money which can more easily be adsorbed by the large, established players.

Comment Re:Great Economy? (Score 1) 293

So, you think that they should have increased the deficit by even more than the $1 trillion they did in Obama's first year? I would argue that it was the fact that the Democrats increased the deficit from less then $500 billion to over $1.4 trillion is all the explanation we need for the soft recovery we have seen.

Do you suffer painful elimination? -- Don Knuth, "Structured Programming with Gotos"

Working...