Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:I never "install" OS'es on existing machines (Score 1) 240 240

While its not terrible, I've Windows 10 to run slower than Vista on my hardware. Granted, its older (3ghz Xeon quad-core with 4GB of DDR2), but the machine was quite responsive under Vista. Under 10 it runs fine, but will start to slow down with far fewer apps open compared to Vista.

Still, I like the system better and will likely continue to use it until I upgrade that machine (which won't be that long anyways).

Comment Re:I never "install" OS'es on existing machines (Score 1) 240 240

You're living in a fantasy world. An in-place upgrade might not work out well (though honestly, that's mostly something that was true back in the Windows 98 days that people just still cling to), but if you get a machine with a Windows OS already on it the FIRST thing you should do if you have media is to wipe it clean and reinstall it. Manufacturer's bloatware is terrible.

A clean MS Windows install from scratch typically works about as well as the the OS is ever going to - it's pretty much downhill from there.

Comment Re:Or... just hear me out here... (Score 1) 1029 1029

No, it wouldn't. Birdshot is INTENDED to be fired into the air - at - you guessed it: birds. Completely different situation versus a bullet. Anybody who has hunted upland birds or waterfowl in an area with many hunters has been pelted by falling shot before. By the time it comes back down its not going fast enough to hurt anything.

Comment Re:Right to Privacy in One's Backyard? (Score 1) 1029 1029

It says he shot it down with a shotgun. Unlike a bullet from a rifle or handgun, most small-diameter shotgun loads (ie, "birdshot") are designed to be fired into the air at flying targets - either birds or clay pigeons (skeet). Their mass is low enough that it doesn't hurt anything when it comes back down. I've been pelted by shot from other hunters while out hunting and while a bit disconcerting, it doesn't even sting.

Comment Re:The irony (Score 1) 294 294

What is considered "fit" isn't so simple as a longer neck or stronger muscles.

Technology and social structure are PART of evolution. As a matter of fact it seems that such things outweigh almost any of the other "natural" advantages a species might have.

At the end of the day, we squabble, and we can be short sighted, but the human race is the most evolved and complex species to ever walk this planet. From an evolutionary standpoint we're crowding everything else out. Honestly I don't think most species will survive long-term unless they are of use to us - either as pets, food, or work animals.

Comment Re:and the beer is really good (Score 2) 528 528

There's no shortage of pretty good beer in the US (heck I make my own). The problem is that only a small percentage of people actually want it. Anything beyond Budweiser or Coors Light is considered "weird tasting". That's changing, but for the most part people are drinking that "mass marketed barley water" by choice, not out of lack of options.

Comment Re:The kneejerk anti-Stallman guys are out in forc (Score 1) 216 216

That doesn't mean they are all literate on the command line or that they understand a lot of the stuff that goes on behind the scenes, but I daresay most of them understand the difference between open source vs. proprietary.

Don't confuse knowing the difference with caring about it. I've using Linux since the late 1990's. I have a CS degree and am a programmer for a living. I understand very well the "free in beer vs free as in speech" argument.

HOWEVER, most people really only care about the "zero cost" definition of free. And when it comes to open source most only care about the source actually being available, not whether its under the GPL or not.

"Libre" as it is applied by the zealots is a concept that only a very small subset of computer users care about - even if they understand it. You're not going to get them outraged by explaining it.

Consider the opposite: lets say Ubuntu listed software as "Free", but when you clicked install it prompted you for payment credentials for $5, with the justification being that you're free to modify the source and do as you wish, but the software has a monetary cost. THEN you'd see outrage because it'd be stepping on the definition of free that people actually care about.

Comment Re:Eliminate all tax withholding (Score 1) 413 413

Yes, I pay taxes. My salary doesn't come from THOSE taxes though (income taxes). It comes from different taxes - namely, property taxes.

So I guess you could say I shouldn't be billed property taxes. Ok - what about someone who works where I do but lives in a different jurisdiction (very common)? That jurisdiction isn't going to give up THEIR revenue because he works for a different one, and it wouldn't be fair to the other employee that they still have to pay property taxes while I don't because I live in the same jurisdiction where I work.

Or consider someone who is renting - they're not paying property taxes anyways - but his landlord certainly is, and you can bet it's folded into his monthly bill. Why should I get to own a house tax free whilst he's having to foot his landlord's taxes as part of the payment?

I know, I know. We could hire someone to figure out all these exceptions and such, and then straighten it all out. Make sure that Federal government employees don't pay Federal income taxes but still pay state, and state employees pay federal but not state. And local government employees pay both but no property tax *IF* they're living in the same jurisdiction they work in.

Congratulations - you just rehired those recently laid off IRS employees that you thought weren't needed under this new "simple" system.

Comment Re:More ambiguous fees (Score 1) 413 413

Trust me it's really popular to call new sources of revenue (or old ones renamed and raised) as "fees" rather than taxes. That way politicians get to proclaim in their campaigns that they've never voted to raise "taxes". Sure your bill is higher, but it's the "fees", not more taxes.

Comment Re:Eliminate all tax withholding (Score 1) 413 413

By making it not taxable, they could be causing an employee to drop into a lower tax bracket overall.

"Lower tax brackets" (or rather, their effect on taxes) are a persistent myth.

There are tax brackets, but you're only taxed at the higher rate for overage from the previous tax bracket.

http://blog.taxact.com/how-tax...

Comment Re:Eliminate all tax withholding (Score 1) 413 413

You do realize there's all sorts of levels of "government" right?

I work for a local (county) government myself. My salary is mostly funded by the county's main source of income: property taxes (with a bit extra from sales taxes).

Income tax goes to the federal and state government. Why would I not pay taxes to those entities when my salary isn't being funded by it?

Or if you go to state employees - why withhold the federal government's taxes when their salary is funded mostly by state income taxes (and vice versa)?

If I had a nickel for every time some internet genius thought there was some simple fix to all of government's problems I'd be rich enough to all ALL of our taxes.

If you think the system is working, ask someone who's waiting for a prompt.

Working...