Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Fuck so-called religious "freedom" (Score 1) 1080

by dywolf (#49379507) Attached to: Apple's Tim Cook Calls Out "Religious Freedom" Laws As Discriminatory

The baker in entering the public marketplace gives up certain rights.
A business operating in the public marketplace must do business with the public, all of the public.

Also: homesexuality is not a value any more than skin color is a value.

but then we covered this before: you don't know what you're talking about.


Amazon Launches 'Home Services' For Repair, Installation, and Other Work 118

Posted by Soulskill
from the remember-when-they-sold-books dept.
An anonymous reader writes: Amazon has quietly rolled out a new business called "Home Services," which aims to be a middleman between customers and all sorts of contracted services. It includes things like appliance repair, home cleaning, installation/assembly of products in your car or home, tutoring (academic and musical), and even performance art. Amazon makes money on this by taking a cut of the total price — between 10 and 20 percent. Since everything is geolocated, they have many more options available in big cities than in small rural communities. One of Amazon's goals is to help standardize the price for various services, so there aren't any surprises when the bill comes due.

Comment: Re:I'm all for abolishing the IRS (Score 1) 318

by jcr (#49374655) Attached to: Sign Up At Before Crooks Do It For You

I'm trying to come up with a good argument that taxing production is more easily made progressive than taxing consumption, but now I'm not sure that's right.

That's because it isn't right. If someone's spending a million bucks a year, they get taxed on a million bucks a year. If they're earning a million bucks a year and living like a monk, then the funds they've earned aren't out there competing with yours for goods and services. A miser is an ideal neighbor.


Comment: Re:Wrong Focus (Score 4, Informative) 123

by jcr (#49365325) Attached to: SpaceX's New Combustion Technologies

As it happens, back in the '80s I worked at a company (Commonwealth Scientific) that built ion-beam guns based on the Kaufman duoplasmatron, which was the basis of the mercury-vapor thrusters that NASA had developed in the 1960s. The company was trying to make the aperture of the guns as wide as possible, and the difficulties included neutralizing the ion beam on the way out, keeping the plasma inside the gun stable, and keeping the beam density even. Basically, the bigger the gun, the harder it was to make it run steadily. When I was there, they had 8" apertures and were working on scaling them up to 12" apertures.


Comment: Re:Do It, it worked in AZ (Score 1) 884

by dywolf (#49363189) Attached to: Gen Con Threatens To Leave Indianapolis Over Religious Freedom Bill

You really need to learn some definitions and concepts.

City buses are called "public transportation" because they are typically operated by the local government, ie, public. not because the public at large may use them.
as an extension of government, city buses cannot discriminate under Title III (3) of the CRA of 1964, which "Prohibited state and municipal governments from denying access to public facilities on grounds of race, color, religion or national origin.", this really though is just an extension of the already extent Equal Protection Clause, simply being spelled out specifically.

A cab company may be privately owned, but it is still considered a "public accommodation" because it is a entity that does business with the public in exchange for money. And such public accommodations ARE ALSO prohibited from discrimination, but under a different section of the law, Title II (2). this was hte game changed, this was new. This prohibited private business from hiding behind the cloak of being a private entity in order to enable discrimination. This is the part of hte law that says "if you do business with the public, you do business with ALL of it, and cannot discriminate".

Seriously, read about the fucking law:

Comment: Re:Do It, it worked in AZ (Score 1) 884

by dywolf (#49363171) Attached to: Gen Con Threatens To Leave Indianapolis Over Religious Freedom Bill

at what point during the purchases of the cake was the person also offered for sale?
Oh thats right, you dont know what youre talking about.

you speak in hyperbole and irrational stupidity, instead logic and fact.
and you have roughly the intelligence of a high schooler, which explains the insistence on using stupid libertarian logic.

Comment: Re:Do It, it worked in AZ (Score 1) 884

by dywolf (#49363163) Attached to: Gen Con Threatens To Leave Indianapolis Over Religious Freedom Bill

Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title II: Outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion or national origin in hotels, motels, restaurants, theaters, and all other public accommodations engaged in interstate commerce; exempted private clubs without defining the term "private".

Like the man said: you don't know what you're talking about.

"Now this is a totally brain damaged algorithm. Gag me with a smurfette." -- P. Buhr, Computer Science 354