Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:You can't be fucking serious. (Score 1) 559

However, that 1 dollar a week thing... isn't it exactly what people here and elsewhere asked for? Like, for so long?

Close, but not quite. Quantity is relevant here. What people were asking for was the ability to pay the amount that the site would have received for the advertising in exchange for ad-free access, not 50 times that amount. It's doubtful that Wired even gets $1/year in advertising revenues from an average non-ad-blocking visitor, never mind $1/week. Paying $52/year just for access to a handful of Wired articles would be unreasonable for all but the most devoted readers.

Comment Re:$52/yr is a lot for a subscription (Score 1) 559

Would you be ok with a company monitoring your browsing habits like that? Such that they know if you bought something already.

The problem is that they're tracking you too closely already. If they just showed the same selection of ads to every visitor then the odds of repeatedly seeing ads for something you already bought wouldn't be very high. Instead, they track you just enough to know that you were interested in the product at one time, without also noting that you already purchased the item and thus are no longer in the market. Rather than adding more tracking, the issue could be resolved by doing less, or at least allowing the obsolete tracking data to expire from the ad profile after a reasonable time (days, not months).

Comment Re:Taking CO2 from the atmosphere?? (Score 1) 142

Really? What's your end to end solution achievable with today's technology at a price that populations and governments will accept, and which doesn't immediately make transportation people and governments already own useless?

As important as both the issues you raise are (and the deforestation one may be the more achievable), the reality of it is that "that's it, no more fossil fuel" without a reasonable alternative will never happen, even if it kills us, because without a reasonable alternative, many of us will likely die anyhow.

Comment Re:What a bunch of jerks (Score 1) 459

Of course a vast majority of private companies are willing to throw money at any conservative group who will take it if it will get them taxed and / or regulated less. Both sides of the economic political spectrum have their major backers and there is a shit ton of money in the right's

That's not really true. Big companies always hedge their bets by contributing to both sides. The large ones actually like more regulation because it stifles the competition and helps them retain their market share. Corporations like being partners with government, and avoid candidates that eschew corporate influence in crafting regulation. Commerce of every kind is so heavily regulated these days, that companies lobby for specific forms of regulation that provide them a competitive edge. They rarely if ever lobby to reduce regulation. And they already have so many tax loopholes in the thousands of pages of tax code they just hire accountants to avoid taxation, using foreign subsidiaries if necessary.

Comment Re:Better transistors? (Score 2) 333

People may have restated it in many silly ways, but what they actually mean is "Computers become twice as good every 18 months or so." Whether it's multiple cores, or faster clock speeds, or better RAM throughput, that's still what it amounts to: twice as good computers.

I think that's pretty much failed, then, for general purpose computers. At one time, I actually used to upgrade about every 18 months, and would see a really nice boost in performance. That's not so much the case anymore, it takes more like 3-4 years.

Comment Gold Standard, Liberty Rating (Score 1) 459

One of the most successful things that Free-Staters and local NH libertarians have done is to produce the Gold Standard a voting guide that is handed out every week to every member of the NH House and Senate, before floor votes. To produce the doc, a small army of volunteers reads and grades all the incoming legislation according to a standardized scale. The most important pro- or anti-liberty legislation is debated on a private list, and once we have solid bullet-points to clarify our position, we produce the doc. We then grade the legislators on their votes, and produce an annual legislative report card. We are the only group, other than the (R) and (D) parties, to produce a consistent voting recommendation for years on end. At first lots of legislators ignored us. Then we started targeting the lowest-ranked legislators in elections, and got some of the worst eliminated; and donated money to the best rated. Now some hate us, but all respect us.

Comment Re:Why? (Score 1) 459

Glen Aldrich is a carpenter with no more than a high school diploma.

I think having regular citizen legislators, with not much financial gain to be had from the job, is an excellent way to run a state house. It means you are more likely to get people involved for the right reasons, instead of career politicians looking for money and power.

I concur, and note that the first Free-Stater elected to the NH House was also a carpenter (technically, a contractor). Here's his victory speech; it's quite telling.

Comment Re:Why? (Score 1) 459

And I personally believe that they should spend as much time reviewing old laws for relevance, modification and possible repeal as they do making new ones.

So do I, but not even full-time legislatures do that.

Actually up until 2 years ago, NH had a standing House Committee whose whole purpose was to find unconstitutional laws, and submit them for elimination or alteration to be Constitutional. That changed when the Speaker of the House changed. But another nifty thing about NH: the entire government, from Governor to lowly State Rep, is up for re-election each and every 2 years :)

Comment Full Circle (Score 1) 459

I first heard about the Free State Project from a slashdot story in October 2003, when they announced that New Hampshire was the target state. At the time I was on a 1-year work contract in Australia, and all I knew was that when I returned to the USA, I did not want to return to the high taxes, high population density and (comparatively) bad air quality of the Bay Area. As a libertarian myself, it was a no-brainer, especially after I read the "101 Reasons to choose New Hampshire" document (which has subsequently been turned into a video documentary). So I went back to California just long enough to make arrangements. I moved to NH in June 2005, making me mover #107.

In the time I have been here, some 1,900 other "early movers" have also come. We have gone from electing a few Free-Staters to local city councils and planning boards, to our first State Representative, to now having some two dozen Free-Stater State Reps, and having pulled many of the existing State Reps and Senators (especially the Republican ones) in a much more libertarian direction. I will never forget the ex-Marine State Rep who in 2006 told me he would "never, ever in his life" allow "legal dope", to that same Rep now voting for full marijuana legalization every single time it comes up. We were the first state to pass same-sex marriage via a legislative process (not popular referendum). We passed medical marijuana. We have no adult seat belt law, no helmet law, open carry and shall-issue concealed carry (and are likely to pass constitutional carry next session). We have eliminated all state knife laws, absolutely rejected Real-ID ("and any de-facto national identity system that may follow therefrom"), forbidden the State to use automated license plate scanners, and passed a law affirming a defendant's right to explain Nullification to the jury.

We don't need all 20,000 to show up. Another 4-5K people, if they do the same things as the first 2K, and NH will bear very little resemblance to the police-states/welfare-states of the rest of the USA... and much more resemblance to the society described in the New Hampshire Constitution, which is summed up well by Article 10:

Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Don't talk to me about disclaimers! I invented disclaimers!" -- The Censored Hacker

Working...