Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
What's the story with these ads on Slashdot? Check out our new blog post to find out. ×

Comment Re:The Power of the State. (Score 0) 240

There is no such thing as a 'creator', the only thing you can expect in a system that is set up by humans is to agree to a set of rules.

If these rules are followed by the institution that is the government, then individual rights are protected, since government does not take steps to oppress the individuals.

If these rules are not followed by the institution that is the government, then the individual rights are abused by the collective that set up that institution.

Rights do not exist between 2 individuals or between an individual and a business because there is no legal framework, within which one individual can legally abuse and oppress the rights of another individual. There is no legal framework that makes it possible for a company to oppress an individual.

All interactions between individuals and companies can be governed by a completely separate codex, we describe it as the criminal codex, where actions that are taken by an individual or a company against another individual or a company are considered criminal.

One individual murdering another individual does not fall under the purview of an 'oppressed right to life', that is nonsense, since legally both individual have the same rights and have no legal authority over each other. A case of murder falls under a section of the criminal law.

We do not need government at all and if we skip the entire step of having a government then the entire concept of rights stops being relevant, since there is no higher authority than an individual but we will have to set up some form of criminal law and criminal justice system but this has nothing to do with rights.

A right to own and operate private property is the lack of authority of a government to steal that property, which is why 'no action is required' to ensure that the right is not abused.

Ownership and operation of private property cannot be considered 'a right' where it comes to interaction between 2 individuals, since to 'provide' such a right somebody would have to enforce it. Instead we can agree on a set of criminal laws that punish theft and damage to private property, possibly some fines in case of property damage / theft and harsher punishment that will have to be doled out in case of murder and such.

In order to maintain a criminal justice system no government is required and it is a separate discussion, but I am going to say that for a person who is supposedly pro-individual freedom you are displaying a certain lack of understanding of the reality and of meanings of these concepts.

Comment Re:The Power of the State. (Score 0) 240

Wrong, a right is a protection against government oppression. This protection requires a working Constitution. Government oppression happens when government is not bound by any rules, a Constitutional government is a government that is bound by rules. Unfortunately those rules can be bent and broken and then people lose their rights because government finds ways to get around those rules or just completely remove them.

The reason why rights are protections against government oppression is specifically because government cannot be punished for oppressing an individual. There is nobody to punish, no government official will be punished for the system oppressing the individual, which means that if you want rights to exist, you have to set up the government in such a way that it is given only very specific authorities under specific circumstances to limit individual freedoms but under all other circumstances such authorities cannot exist.

This is what the USA was premised upon, since it was created artificially as an attempt to provide individual rights, which did not exist prior to that time in any place on this planet, which is what made USA unique.

Unfortunately the rules were bent and broken and not because of a Monarch or a dictator, but because the mob destroyed individual rights in its desire to provide itself with entitlements at the expense of rights of others provided enough political capital for the politicians who were and are willing to use the mob to get into power and stay in power.

A right is a protection against government oppression guaranteed by the Constitution and the rules set up to limit government power. As to your right to keep arms and to protect your freedoms, that is only an extension of what I am talking about.

A right doesn't require anything from an INDIVIDUAL, but a right requires the COLLECTIVE to abide by the rules. Once the collective STOPS abiding by the rules you can attempt and use individual action to enforce your rights, but you will fail at that most likely since by that time the power of the collective grows much beyond your ability to defend your rights.

Comment The Power of the State. (Score 0, Insightful) 240

The Power of the State is absolute. What else is there to talk about here except for the complete lack of individual human rights?

A right is protection against government oppression, this is a case of government oppressing a 14 year old child all while using 'think of the children' rhetoric for its own political purposes.

Comment Re:Story title is nonsense (Score 1) 156

If I were to hire a PR firm, I sure wouldn't want to be supervising everything they do. If I was going to do that, I'd just do my own PR.

If you indeed did that, you may not want to look *too* surprised when your company name is excoriated in the press due to something dumb on the PR firm's part.

Here's a clue: When you hire a PR firm, you do it to get ideas out of them, and to have them do the grunt-work of buying ads, setting up and running booths at shows, order/buy cheap swag on your behalf for your TAMs and reps to give away, and crap like that. Once you hire them, you had damned well better approve everything they do that interacts with anyone outside of your company. You approve the swag, you approve the sales pitches, you approve the ads, you approve the schmoozing of bloggers and journalists so that shit like this does not happen.

It's your company, your brand, your reputation.

Otherwise, Microsoft can point the finger all they want, but they're the beneficiary of the shill-job, so they get to eat the blame when it's discovered.

Comment Re:What About Nutrition? (Score 4, Interesting) 119

More importantly when will the marijuana growers start using this tech? Washington and Colorado need DIRT CHEAP weed, because it's grown without dirt!

Funny thing (from an Oregonian's point-of-view): marijuana growing is actually an industry where experimentation with hydroponics and efficiency is usually bleeding-edge. Back when it was still illegal, you wanted the efficiency so that your power consumption was low enough to not alert anyone to those high-intensity full-spectrum lights in your basement/apartment/whatever for 18-19 hours a day. The clandestine nature of the task also demanded that you be as efficient with as much of the hydroponics as possible.

Now that the stuff is legal, a lot of folks have taken this experience and knowledge to ramp things up to an industrial level, where you still have to be efficient. For instance, a new grow farm was looking to establish themselves in the countryside near my in-laws on the Washington peninsula, and the neighbors' biggest worry was that it would lower the water table too much (believe it or not, most of the Pacific Northwest does have a dry season for a couple of months during the summer, so well water is considered a rather precious commodity, even out here). Anyway, the farm had to demonstrate the efficiencies they had in place in order to persuade said neighbors that yes, the new greenhouses won't dry up their wells... and they even showed the improvements they were working on to make things even more efficient (note that it also saves them money overall as well.)

Comment Re:What About Nutrition? (Score 1) 119

Trade Secrets and such, I suspect (but then, "nutrients" does sound a lot more palatable than "highly diluted poop".)

I find that if arable land is the big issue, you could just as easily convert some floor in an office building, or even use the rooftops (though you'd have to figure in temperature and evaporation - but on the plus side you get rain and free sunlight during most of the growing day).

It's not like going underground is the only solution towards getting more arable land to work with. It's a good one, but not the only one...

Comment Re:Good excuse... (Score 2) 156

Good news: The Board of Directors doesn't shift very often (if at all - it's kind of glacial at best), and those members are usually among those in the dock when a company is accused of something bad.

Either way, the current management will eat the FTC fines (if any), and if the activity was criminal, I'm pretty sure the authorities can locate and drag in the former CxO's for the time period in question... while fining the current company if there are financial repercussions.

So no, it's not as if a company can get out of something by shuffling the business card titles.

Comment Re:Marketplace Justice (Score 1) 108

So, let's summarize: In order to maybe(!) be able to clearly near an entire credit card number and expiration date clearly, over a baby monitor**, someone has to be in your street or neighbor's yard for hours on end (if not days) holding an antenna in full view of any and all neighbors, listening intently, and hoping that the numbers are enunciated loudly and clearly enough, all while standing close enough to the baby's crib (where the mic is). Oh... and our burglar would have to know that the victim family has XYZ brand of baby monitor, and know when it'll be on, and know how to exploit it, *spend* time exploiting it, and...

Have you any idea how fucking dumb and contrived that scenario is? Seriously, do you?

I mean, dude, if I'm going to steal credit card numbers? I think that an anonymizing VPN account and an hour on some small business owner's poorly-constructed eStore front will get me far more useful information for far less exposure, dontchathink?

Comment Re:Wait for it... (Score 1) 118

The 'researchers' had to specifically and literally disable the default security protections on their machine in order to have that happen.

Otherwise, it would have popped up a window refusing to run the application at all, instead demanding that you go into System Preferences to allow that specific application.

It's like cutting the brake lines on a Toyota, then showing a video of it running into something while claiming that the car company has a serious brake design problem. :/

Comment Re:Economics isnt science. (Score 0) 153

Are you for real? First you are talking about the Fed fucking up the economy, (which is correct), then you bring up Marx, who had 0 understanding of economics but had a pretty good jealousy complex, using him to bash CAPITALISM? Maybe Free Market even?

Ha! Government creating the Federal reserve bank, the ability to print fiat money, ability to manipulate interest rates is the exact opposite of free market capitalism, so how the heck in 2 paragraphs you create such a gigantic dichotomy and try to pass it as a coherent whole?

Great Depression was started by the Federal reserve printing fiat to help UK to get rid of its bad debt to France. The market used the fake money to blow up huge bubbles in farming stock, then the market corrected itself, the bubble imploded. Then Hoover and then FDR took that recession and turned it into the Great Depression by printing much more money, by creating government programs and policies that should have never existed in the first place. The only thing that took USA economy OUT of depression was the END of the WWII, when government consumption fell by 60% and taxes fell by 30%.

The 1971 default on the gold dollar by Nixon happened as a result of the bubble that was inflated by the government spending of the 50s and 60s. The following stagflation pushed women into the workforce, so that they could supplement the income that was lost due to the men paying higher taxes. The falling currency value (inflation due to money printing) pushed production out of the USA from 1970s, this in turn pushed for more money printing by the government and market manipulation.

The Fed holds 0% interest rates for the last 7 years, this is the only thing that keeps the FAKE economy sort of spinning. USA cannot actually afford 1% interest rate, never mind 10% or near 22% that Paul Volcker had to push towards in 1981 to stabilise the economy.

The payments debt at 0.13% are a staggering what, 350 Billion a year? What about 1% interest payment? At 18.37 TRILLION USD 1% interest rate is almost as unmanageable, forget 10%, 21%??? You can shut down the country.

You are looking at all of this and you are talking about Marx? MARX?

Well, the only thing I may ever agree with Marx is the need to abolish State in the first place, but that means no taxes, no Federal, no State taxes, no Federal, no State departments, no services, no Federal, no State checks either. I can agree with that.

Comment Main street economists are charlatans (Score 1, Informative) 153

Charlatans, that the so called 'main street economists' are will not go away with their nonsensical ideas about the need to 'guide' the economy in any way and their ways of 'guiding' the economy is what leads to the economic collapse. Of-course the economists are just mouthpieces of the government and of the Federal reserve, whose entire job is to justify the actions that politicians want to take anyway, actions that promise re-election rather than actions that promise a sound economy and a sound society.

A sound economy relies on the invisible hand of the market forces, directing scarce resources and re-allocating mis-allocated resources (and resources do get mis-allocated all the time, but in a free market economy the mis-allocation leads to lack of profits that eventually leads to ceasing of that particular activity and for a great reason n - resources that are mis-allocated hurt the economy).

Government routinely pushes policy designed to help politicians to get votes and not policy that makes any economic sense at all.

Money cannot be printed by government or pseudo-government agencies on the whim of a politician, who is promising 'free stuff'. Taxes on income and wealth are destructive to the economy because they reduce scarce savings and prevent economic activity from taking place. Government doesn't actually have anything of any value on its own, everything it doles out it has to take away first, and government doesn't "ask" for your taxes, government has guns.

Government economic policy is economic policy of a highway robber and the main stream economists are active cheerleaders to this highway robbery.

If actual empirical math model is created and it is used to forecast what will happen based on the money allocation, it may lead to a huge clash between the forces of evil (governments) and forces of science, and I don't think in that battle forces of science will win, because the mob chooses the evil, since the evil promises something for nothing.

Bernie Sanders is a force for evil, but so is Clinton, so is any politician who promises to do something for nothing, to take away from somebody to give to somebody else.

"Don't tell me I'm burning the candle at both ends -- tell me where to get more wax!!"