Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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: Be Careful What You Wish For (Score -1, Troll) 611

by PapayaSF (#49139835) Attached to: FCC Approves Net Neutrality Rules

I predict that all of you net neutrality supporters are in for a nasty surprise. Your hatred of Comcast and fear of what it might do has lead to the biggest restrictions on freedom since the Patriot Act, which at least had the excuse of 3,000 dead people.

But what’s the excuse here? Ooh, Comcast might charge Netflix more money? There might be “fast lanes” that cost more? Do you think George Soros spent $196 million on NN because he’s worried about Netflix? Of course not. You don’t need 300+ pages of regulations for just that. This whole thing is a Trojan Horse so that the government can get it’s fingers deeper into the internet. As soon as the regulations are available, search them for terms like “hate speech” and "disparate impact." This will be a mass of restrictions, requirements, taxes, subsidies, and pay-offs to favored groups. I'm sure trial lawyers will be happy, because there will no doubt be lots of new things they can sue about. I’m sure the FCC will administer this with all the fairness that the IRS has brought to regulating political advocacy non-profits.

And now that the regulations have changed, the NSA will have a freer hand with wiretaps.

Get ready for a shitstorm once Silicon Valley finds out what’s really in this.

+ - FCC votes along party lines to regulate entire Internet

Submitted by jbdigriz
jbdigriz (8030) writes "In a stunning power grab, the FCC has extended Title II, not just to the loosely and flexibly defined "broadband" market, but to the Internet as a whole, wired and wireless, including even interconnects, making ISPs common carriers of telecom services, with the possible exception of dial-up providers (dunno, haven't seen the order yet). The commission voted also to override state law in NC and TN to remove restrictions on community broadband. Ars Technica has more info here. Lawyers, start filing. I'm sure the upshot will not be enshrinement of incumbents, of course. Or "openness" as defined by Fairness Committees of "Stake Holders." Right, suckers."

Comment: Re:Communism doesn't work for humans. (Score 1) 138

by PapayaSF (#49057359) Attached to: Apple Hiring Automotive Experts

Fantasy, unless it's well and thoroughly regulated. Capitalism when free incentivizes monopolization and centralization of power and eliminates competition.

Nonsense. Look at the history of most monopolies: they got that way due to deals with government bodies that prevented competition. See the Bell System, railroads in the 19th century, municipal cable franchises, etc. There are cases of monopolies achieved through purely technological means: for years Alcoa had a monopoly on the only cost-effective means of producing aluminum, but even then they were kept in check because manufacturers could often substitute other materials.

The creative destruction of capitalism makes it hard for even giant players to stay on top. Remember 15 years ago, when Microsoft was king? For years now, Apple has made more from iPhones alone than Microsoft makes from everything. 50 years ago people worried that GM and US Steel would grow too big.

Finally, regulation has downsides, and is often used by big players to squelch small ones. See regulatory capture.

Comment: Re:Can't eat what you don't grow (Score 4, Insightful) 690

by PapayaSF (#49015139) Attached to: Free-As-In-Beer Electricity In Greece?

Care to explain why Cuba is a failure when health care and education are on a much higher level (and much cheaper) than in the USA albeit being under a boycott and other sanctions from the USA the last 70 years?

I always love it when defenders of Cuba portray the US boycott as a negative for Cuba. Have you forgotten that you are the one claiming that capitalism exploits people, and that communism is more efficient and fair? So what if we're not exploiting Cuba with our evil capitalist free trade? That should be a good thing for them, according to leftist economic theory, and allow them to become richer, right? But the fact is, in the 1950s, Cuba had the highest per capita income in Latin America. Now it has the lowest. If you want to blame that on the fact that we aren't practicing capitalism with Cuba, go right ahead!

As for their supposedly wonderful health care and education systems, according to what? Cuban government statistics? LOL.

Comment: Re:Good Grief (Score 2) 120

I sort-of lust after a Mac Book, but my ThinkPad is substantial enough that I don't worry about breaking it just by looking at it

Don't worry about that. The "unibodies" of MacBooks (both Pro and Air) are CNC machined out of solid billets of aluminum. They are quite robust, despite their thickness.

Where I complain about excessive thinness is in cellphones. I wish Apple would stop making iPhones thinner, and just use any extra space for the battery.

Comment: Re:Ken Goffman is a huckster and charlatan (Score 2, Insightful) 76

by PapayaSF (#48948771) Attached to: R.U. Sirius Co-Authors New Book On Transhumanism

you are morally bankrupt . nothing else need be said.

Oh right, I'm "morally bankrupt " because I don't take people seriously when they froth at the mouth and throw terms like "fascist" and "racist" and "sexist" at anyone they disagree with. On the other hand, I'm not an Anonymous Coward making absurd and unsubstantiated charges. Anyone who reads just the linked interviews should be able to see that you don't know what you're talking about. I doubt if anyone who knows R.U. thinks he's any of those things. I don't know what your problem is, but in this discussion you're just a troll. If you don't like transhumanism, fine, lots of people don't. There's even a section of the book called "Criticisms of Transhumanism," which is online here. I doubt you can cite anything in the book that any sane person would call "fascist" or "racist" or "sexist."

Comment: Re:Ken Goffman is a huckster and charlatan (Score 2) 76

by PapayaSF (#48948137) Attached to: R.U. Sirius Co-Authors New Book On Transhumanism

in fact, Goffman is an ardent supporter of several self defined "neo reactionary fascist" transhumanists... he makes constant support and mention of these people, and they are "race realists" and HBD creeps.

AFAIK this is completely untrue. R.U. is an acquaintance of mine, I've read some of his work, and this is simply false. He actually leans to the left. Of course, any editor who covers wide-ranging topics is going to mention and even publish people they don't entirely agree with. That's how magazine publishing and "encyclopedias" work. But you are spewing bullshit when you say he's an "ardent supporter" of any of that. [Citation needed], dude.

Comment: Re:Ken Goffman is a huckster and charlatan (Score 1) 76

by PapayaSF (#48948083) Attached to: R.U. Sirius Co-Authors New Book On Transhumanism

In particular he more than makes the case that the bones of "transhumanism" are in fact : fascist, plutocratic elitist, sexist, racist and overwhelmingly adolescent

Maybe it's just me, but whenever I hear anyone or anything called "fascist," sexist," and "racist" all at once, I think it tells me more about the person using those words than it does about whatever they are talking about.

Comment: Re:Ken Goffman is a huckster and charlatan (Score 2) 76

by PapayaSF (#48948067) Attached to: R.U. Sirius Co-Authors New Book On Transhumanism

Wow, that's quite a rant, dude.

his boosterism for the truly evil transhumanist technocrats who oppose democracy and who cheer-lead for general mechanization and dehumanization

OK, I just read the two linked interviews, and I'm just not seeing this. At all. Neither of the authors seem to be cheerleading for evil and dehumanization. They both seem to be fairly positive about transhumanism, but mention flaws and potential downsides. I am acquainted with R.U., and he's not at all a "technocrat," and that comes through in those two interviews.

Comment: Re:What exactly is Transhumanism ? (Score 2) 76

by PapayaSF (#48947927) Attached to: R.U. Sirius Co-Authors New Book On Transhumanism

I was looking for practical, real-world things I can do right now to enhance my life through science and technology.

That doesn't look like it was the point of the book. It looks like an overview of the field, not a how-to guide.

Instead, I got very thin treatments of many subjects

I don't think that's fair. According to Amazon, the book covers 90+ topics in 288 pages. I don't see how they could be in-depth about any of them.

important subjects left out (like the 19th Century Russian Cosmism movement (precursor to transhumanism))

The Cosmism entry is on page 52.

Comment: Re: Wow... Just "no". (Score 1) 204

by PapayaSF (#48869857) Attached to: Sends Personal Data To Over a Dozen Tracking Websites

The Heritage Foundation proposal did include an individual mandate, but that's like saying your bedroom ceiling is based on the Sistine Chapel because they both are covered in paint. The Heritage proposal was for minimal, catastrophic insurance, what used to be called "major medical." That's the sort of insurance people used to be able to buy for maybe $50/month. But the ACA larded everything up with countless mandates (birth control, etc.), so that even minimal insurance is now expensive. And then, in one of many ironies, deductibles are now so high that many people avoid going to the doctor. Remember when the ACA was needed to ban "junk insurance policies," which were defined as policies with high deductibles? Down the memory hole!

I said years ago, before this monstrosity came online, that it would not work as claimed, and in fact might never work. I believe that prediction still holds. They've stopped talking about the problems with the backend, but AFAIK they have not yet fixed them, and are still doing things manually or with estimates. It will also be interesting this tax season, when millions of people find that their tax bill is higher than they thought it would be, thanks to the ACA.

fortune: cpu time/usefulness ratio too high -- core dumped.