Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Re-what? (Score 2) 139

Regulating re-shipping or breaking re-shipping? I use a mail forwarder because I live in Panama. There are many things I can buy online that are simply not available locally, from my wife's designer shoes for her tiny feet whose size no store ever carries stock, to the latest computer parts for me. They all get shipped to my mail-forwarder in Miami (took all of 15 minutes to set up an account), and it all gets re-shipped to me. Takes about a week to clear customs, etc, and it's expensive as hell since we're talking air freight, 10-50% duty on CIF depending on what I buy, and inflated handling fees. But in my income bracket it's not such a big deal because the alternative is not having it at all - it's cheaper than flying to the US and staying in a hotel and bringing stuff back myself (something I used to do long before re-shipping was invented).

The point I am making is that re-shipping has valid, legitimate uses and it creates jobs. Customs Panama is happy they get revenue on stuff I buy. The airline is happy. The freight forwarding company is happy. And the store is happy. However sometimes existing regulations and policies make it difficult. Sometimes an online store won't take my credit card because it's not emitted by a US bank. All foreigners must be money launderers, right? Sometimes my mail forwarder is in someone's database and they simply refuse to ship (Apple is famous for this. OMG heaven forbid I buy a super secret tech iPod made in China and ship it to my mail forwarder, no, I must wait 10 months for them to decide to sell it outside the US and pay an extra $400 mark-up to the local retailer for the privilege of having it in his store for a day or two). Screaming for regulation is only going to make it even more difficult for legitimate people like me to get legitimate goods delivered to far away places.

What you need to do is to go after credit card fraud. THAT is the problem, but banks don't want to talk about it. It's easier for them just to pay some losses as a cost of doing business and only go after the really big fraudsters. And often these fraudsters are getting the credit card info DIRECTLY from the databases of the banks themselves, either by hacking the software or hacking the people (ahh those corruptible humans). Fix the problem at its source, don't try to make it harder for people to practice international shopping.

Comment Re:Not needed (Score 2) 86

You cannot accuse much less convict people for something they haven't done yet. Once you do that, we're at despotism and there's nothing stopping them from convicting you or me for whatever reason. The laws have already been pushed too far. Why do you think it's time to abandon them? How likely are you to die in a "terror" event?

Comment Re:Hypocrisy (Score 1) 258

2015 years ago.

Lol. First of all, I was rounding the number because the ex act number of claimed years is irrelevant to the point that I was making, which is that there's no evidence that any of the supposed miraculous claims occurred. Do you obviously believe I am so stupid I don't know what year we're living in, or what the Gregorian calendar is supposedly based on? Really, are you that dense?

Secondly, if you had any clue as to how the timeline was actually derived back when the church was trying to calculate it, you'd know that the probable estimated birth date of Jesus is not in fact AD 1, but closer to AD 4-7. So not only is your logic of latching on to a rounded year figure dumb as fuck, you're also ignorant of the actual historical estimates of the guy you hold, without any evidence, to be the son of God.

Comment Re:Hypocrisy (Score 2) 258

2.18 billion is 10 decimal digits and you think God is a cat smiling and vanishing or whatever?

The number of people believing something to be true has no bearing on whether or not it actually is true.

The biblical claims of godhood/Jesus' supernatural origins and actions are without any historical or scientific evidence, so there's no reason whatsoever for a rational minded individual to take them as anything but fables and allegory, just like any other old myths.

This is not to say one cannot appreciate the teachings of the supposed character of Jesus, but again, just because you have 2 billion people believing that 2000 years ago the supernatural invisible ruler of the universe fathered himself from a virgin and then schemed to have himself executed as a sacrificial gift to himself to save us from the sin he himself implemented to begin with, does not mean any of this is true, empirical, or logical.

Talent does what it can. Genius does what it must. You do what you get paid to do.