Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Insurance (Score 4, Informative) 146

by Rei (#48898643) Attached to: Calif. DMV Back-Pedals On Commercial-Plate Mandate For Ride-Share Drivers

That falls into statistically normal usage. Being a commercial driver absolutely does not. Statistically, a commercial driver drives way more than a noncommercial driver, and they're much more likely to be sued, and for more money. It's absurd to argue that they should be able to drive on insurance rates calculated for statistical norms of noncommercial drivers. If you allow that sort of ignoring of statistics then you might as well get rid of all statistical tables period and charge every last person the same rate for all types of insurance.

Comment: Insurance (Score 4, Insightful) 146

by Rei (#48898577) Attached to: Calif. DMV Back-Pedals On Commercial-Plate Mandate For Ride-Share Drivers

Why, exactly, should Uber drivers get to drive passengers using regular non-commercial drivers' insurance? Commercial insurance costs more because people who drive people around for a living are much more likely to cost the insurance companies more money. If you're letting them drive on non-commercial licenses than that means that regular drivers are subsidizing Uber-drivers.

Comment: Re:Not a fan (Score 2) 285

by bws111 (#48893175) Attached to: Government Recommends Cars With Smarter Brakes

Which do you think is more likely to occur - injury to your family from incorrect braking by an automated system in strange outlier conditions, or injury to your family from incorrect braking when some texting jackass doesn't notice that traffic has slowed or stopped? Your logic is similar to people who argue against seat belt use because in some possible but very unlikely situations it could cause a problem, while ignoring the fact that the vast majority of the time it helps.

Comment: Re:Well that suprised me ... (Score 1) 506

I always found it quite amusing that it's much easier to immigrate to US as a relative (and I don't mean someone really close like a spouse or a child, but e.g. parents?) than it is as a skilled worker. Of all the countries that I've looked into, US is the only one like that. All others (of interest to me) had shorter immigration tracks through work than through family.

Comment: Re:Yeah! (Score 1) 506

Hi, another libertarian-turned-liberal through life experience here. Well, not liberal, in truth, I prefer the term "left libertarian" as well - but hardly anyone in US knows what it is, and many people think it's like hot snow.

And the philosophy you describe is pretty much exactly what I came to espouse, as well. Freedom and minimum intervention as a foundation, but I've come to recognize that the degree of intervention that's necessary for a functioning society in practice is way more than most traditionalist libertarians consider their limit.

Also 100% in agreement on GOP needing to go libertarian if we are to see any true inter-party competition moving the society in the right direction. And I think this will happen sooner rather than later. They can try to cheat the demographic shifts for a while (with gerrymandering, voter ID laws and such), but those still give only a brief respite, and the clock is ticking. They'll have to go libertarian or yield the system to Democrats in its entirety. In fact, barring any tectonic changes in GOP platform, 2004 shall remain the last year this country had a Republican president for a long, long time.

And you can already see signs of the coming fracturing in the party. Sure, GOP "libertarians" are still insanely conservative, but the difference between a guy like Bush or Romney, and Rubio or Paul, is quite impressive. A few more electoral cycles and they will grudgingly accept that their "small government" platform contradicts their messaging on social issues - if only pragmatically, just to get more votes.

Or maybe we'll actually make electoral reform happen first, and then there will be more parties. I can't really call any specific one my own, but of all the small parties out there, the Modern Whigs approach and platform appeals to me most.

Comment: Re:You see that too? (Score 1) 506

You can, if the benefits aren't instant, but rather kick in gradually as you work and pay taxes (possibly the faster, the more taxes you pay - hell, why not even let people dial their own rate above the certain required minimum).

In fact, it would probably make all the social programs solvent again, at least so long as the rest of the world still has people left in it (who have enough money for a ticket, but you could hand out loans for that, too). ~

Utility is when you have one telephone, luxury is when you have two, opulence is when you have three -- and paradise is when you have none. -- Doug Larson