Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Corporations have no social responsibility. (Score 1) 87

I genuinely don't understand why slashdots downvote mafia attacked my former post as troll. Unless I miss my guess I have a fair couple of stalkers that just downvote every post I make, and then pepper my comments with bottish AC replies about Trump and No Kings. :|

Anyway, to your point, if you haven't seen it, I offer for your amusement something relative to your comment from the great Trevor Moore:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Comment Re: Why does THE STATE have to pay for all this? (Score 1) 225

Any plane will only be given takeoff clearance, if all the costs required to guide it safely to its destination have been paid for.

Anyone who takes off without that clearance gets forced to land by air defense and will be forced to pay for all the costs involving that. Nobody will risk that.

Anyone who lies about the payment of the costs to get that clearance gets docked with these costs and a punitive fine after that. People who risk that will pay later or lose their license to operate an aircraft.

And all of a sudden, all the air traffic safety expenses are paid in full, before the plane took off in the first place, so no plane is ever in the air without air traffic safety.

Comment Re:Why does THE STATE have to pay for all this? (Score 1) 225

If air traffic is a benefit to you, you can pay for air traffic.

I don't pay for your air traffic because you find it too expensive to pay for your air traffic all by yourself.

You can always choose a different mode of transport for you and your package. You chose air traffic, because you wanted that package tomorrow, not next week. You chose air traffic, because you chose to spend your vacation 1000's of miles away. You choose, you enjoy the benefits, you pay the costs. End of story.

Comment Re:Why does THE STATE have to pay for all this? (Score 1) 225

Of course we can attribute the ENTIRE cost structure of air transport to actual users of air transport. We can and we must do that.

If people decide to NOT transport themselves or their things by air they should NOT pay for others that do. Yes, services increase in price. But taxes will go down.

Yes, and we fully, absolutely, vehemently expect all the people who choose a mode of transport to pay for the cost of their chosen mode of transport.

And that includes taxing people for driving on public roads and excluding any and all road building and road maintenance costs from all other taxes. If that makes suburbian asphalt deserts unsustainable, too bad.

Comment Re:Why does THE STATE have to pay for all this? (Score 1) 225

And THAT is the correct interpretation.

The government collects a tax explicitly earmarked for air traffic and air safety from air passengers and air package deliveries. And then it lumps these taxes together with all other taxes and doesn't pay it out to the thing it was explicitly earmarked for.

That is corruption and a failed state. It is defrauding the tax payers.

Comment Re:Why does THE STATE have to pay for all this? (Score 1) 225

I want air passenges and air cargo recipients to pay for air transport. John who receives the package will pay for the cost of transport. Steve who does not receive the package does not pay for the cost of transport.

Cost of transport includes everything that is needed to make the transport safe.

Comment Re:How Stupid (Score 3, Informative) 157

Ok, you're crazy. :)

Not really, I guess, but you don't understand how things are manufactured at scale.

There's a minimum number of sales of a product that have to be made in order for the overall production line to be profitable. In some cases that minimum number can be made slightly smaller by increasing the per-unit price of the finished product, but there's also a limit to how much people will pay for something.

"Economy of scale" is a real thing, and some expenses are fixed whether you make lots or a few units. If there's a lack of sales and you're just making a few units, those expenses can kill the entire line.

Comment Re:Corporations have no social responsibility. (Score 1, Troll) 87

Honestly, the problem was Co. v. Riggs (203 U.S. 243 (1906)) that established corporations be treated legally like people.

The moment this happened it was the beginning of the exoneration of c-suites from the consequences of their actions. I suspect that if these individuals' freedom and wealth were liable for the consequences of their choices, the subsequent century would have played out rather differently.

Comment Re:if they made sense you wouldn't need bribery (Score 0) 299

Dipshit alert.
If you want to go to that granularity, there's no Black culture nor Asian culture, etc.

Literally, if there is a society of people that's a) uniformly a single ethnic group and b) collectively acts in ways that are identifiable and predictable to the group, it would be Scandinavians.

I'd recommend you read something by Geert Hofstede, if you can read.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Comment Unsurprising (Score -1, Troll) 32

Who do you believe of two amoral organizations?

Rockstar: giant corp, obviously has a vested interest in painting the employees as shits
Union: ALSO a profit-driven organization just from another direction. Has a vested interest in showing the employees were sainted victims of corporate fascists.

Answer: neither, I simply don't give a shit and would happily see both Rockstar collapse and all of their organizing workers immediately unemployed.

Comment Re:Nothing should be pre installed (Score 1) 40

He said "chosen at the setup screen".

They could easily have two options: "Install everything from the get-go (RECOMMENDED)" blinking and flashing and a tiny option in text-only link below that, labeled "Manual install" (everyone hates everything manual). And the user would need to type in a CAPTCHA and click a big "I know what I am doing" checkbox to have the phone accept the "manual install" variant.

And "manual install" comes with nothing but Settings and App Store. I mean nothing. Not even the "phone" and "camera" apps. No thing.

That would be absolute bliss.

And phone makers will never never never do that, because all these devices are sold as data vacuums first and usable devices second. Try buying ANY non-smart TV nowadays. Try it, look for a non-smart TV. Set your budget to the moon, if you must, but there will not be ONE model that is not hoovering your data.

Slashdot Top Deals

We don't know one millionth of one percent about anything.

Working...