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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Maybe in a different country (Score 1) 498

by RKThoadan (#49224209) Attached to: Mental Health Experts Seek To Block the Paths To Suicide

> There's a big difference between promoting gun safety at home, and putting it into law.

Tell that to Florida, who wrote a law forbidding doctors from even asking if people have guns at home, much less recommending that they keep them secure.

Comment: Re:Literally? (Score 1) 645

by RKThoadan (#48999399) Attached to: Does Showing a Horrific Video Serve a Legitimate Journalistic Purpose?

This is a tough one. You are using a somewhat narrow definition of "working for" to mean a defined financial arrangement between an employer and employee. That's not the only way to read that phrase. I can accurately say that I am working for my family, in the sense that my goal is to provide for them. You can certainly be "working for" a cause as well. If we accept that part of ISIS goal is driving a wedge between Muslims and the rest of us then Fox is definitely working for them. If someone is unintentionally furthering my nefarious plans to take over the world I might say something like "They are working for me. They just don't know it!" and then engage in some maniacal laughter.

Comment: Re:Close, but be careful (Score 1) 839

by RKThoadan (#48160141) Attached to: Bill Gates: Piketty's Attack on Income Inequality Is Right

Why do you think consumption taxes are inherently progressive? It may be possible to make them that way, but I don't see how that is an inherent aspect.

The poor and middle classes generally have to spend the vast majority of their income and invest very little. All that is generally "consumption" the rich may seem to consume more, but as a percentage of their income it's far less than others. You can attempt to fix this by making food and other staples not subject to taxation and with luxury taxes, but that adds complications and you've pointed out the other dangers. I suspect any attempt to create progressive consumption taxes will be easily gamed. I'm open to the idea if it can be made to work, but taxing wealth has a big advantage of being relatively simple and much harder to game.

Comment: Re:obamacare says "no way" (Score 2) 288

by RKThoadan (#46805795) Attached to: $42,000 Prosthetic Hand Outperformed By $50 3D Printed Hand

> regulate the medical industry like the criminals they are

I got a bit of a chuckle out of this. The Medical industry is rather intensively regulated, and durable medical equipment (the category this stuff falls into) has among the most stringent requirements and an awful lot of red-tape to cut through.It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does add a good chunk to the cost of these, and DME companies are generally doing very well.

Of course, all that regulation does is give you something your insurance might consider paying for, they probably can't legally pay for non-regulated equipment even if they want to. When you get things cheap enough that we can afford them without insurance, cool stuff can happen.

Comment: Re:Lobbying aside (Score 2) 423

by RKThoadan (#46759569) Attached to: Intuit, Maker of Turbotax, Lobbies Against Simplified Tax Filings

Just a note: Depending on how well your employer games the system you may be loaning it to your employer more than you are to the government. Your employer "withholds" it when it pays you, but it's not cutting a check to the govt for that withheld portion immediately. Smaller employers may even get away with just paying the withholding taxes on their annual corporate taxes. I know my state govt is way more insistent about getting it's tax withholding promptly than the fed is.

Comment: Re:So how many of them are actually qualified (Score 2) 214

But it's truly hilarious when we find their not-entirely-terrible ideas (ACA/Obamacare) and try to implement them. Their insanity forces them to immediately become against it. I'm not sure how many good ideas they have, but as soon as a "liberal" tries to implement it they turn against it completely.

Comment: Re:This idea is really BS (Score 2) 277

While I'm not necessarily all that impressed by this, your specific criticism doesn't seem to be valid. It appears that n accounts are pre-created with null information and assigned out as needed. When those are about to get used up another n are created. There would appear to be a possible attack on a new account by creating lots of dummy accounts to have a big chunk of the password space under your control, but that seems like a pretty uncommon circumstance.

What I like about it is that it seems to protect stupid users from themselves. All the salt in the world doesn't do much for people who just use "password" for their password. It will still fall in the blink of an eye. We often seem to have the opinion that they deserve it for choosing a poor password, but it's still a compromised account.

The threat model is very limited to "attacker got the password hashes", but that is a common threat currently. If you're going to pick one, that's not a bad choice. It's biggest issue may be if tomorrows threat model is significantly different.

Comment: Re:Ouya's killer app....where is it? (Score 1) 107

by RKThoadan (#46576111) Attached to: Ouya Dropping 'Free-to-Play' Requirement

I'm only using it for DVD rips stored on my home NAS, so I've got no idea what it can do beyond that. I'm not much of an A/V guy and don't even know what x264 is. It's got USB ports, so if it's a keyboard with a USB receiver it will probably work.

For what it's worth I find the controller to be perfectly fine. Trying to use the touchscreen is a pain, but I haven't come across any times that was necessary since they got an official OUYA version of XBMC out there. It would have been nice if there was a quick guide to putting the batteries in. It took me a while to figure out the funky magnetic attached faceplates, but having a battery in each of the handgrips gives it a nice balance.

If a thing's worth having, it's worth cheating for. -- W.C. Fields