Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Most taxes are legalized theft (Score 1) 234

by RoLi (#47924569) Attached to: New Global Plan Would Crack Down On Corporate Tax Avoidance

You'd end up in a shit hole of a society in which things like roads and schools don't work and don't get funded.

Isn't the US the country where the public schools are so bad that people pay twice for schooling (once for public via taxes and the second one for private schools) to give their children a chance for education?

Basically you made the GP's point by mentioning the school-system.

Comment: Re:Most taxes are legalized theft (Score 1) 234

by RoLi (#47924541) Attached to: New Global Plan Would Crack Down On Corporate Tax Avoidance


But the stupid sheep don't realize it. Lower taxes would bring lower prices AND higher salaries - in effect that what politicians promise every election, but the sheep think that politicians are some kind of magic shamans who generate wealth by touching it. (which is called the "multiplier effect" - some people are actually dumb enough to believe it)

Also the billionaires spend huge amounts of money on "charity" to keep the sheep as dumb as they are. (Think of Bill Gates' "Common Core" or the the George Soros NGOs)

Comment: Re:Shortest version (Score 1) 326

by RoLi (#47850491) Attached to: Stallman Does Slides -- and Brevity -- For TEDx

The proper word for what RMS advocates is not free. It's public. He wants software to be strictly a public endevour, like a public park, or a public school.

Wrong. I can't change the "public park" according to my private wishes.

If you really want to call some software public, then it must be proprietary software because the government can send people to Microsoft or Apple any time and request them to spy on users, let them hack into computers, etc. - The Windows or iOS ecosystem is in that way just like a public park.

Free software is much more private than that because it is not controlled by a corporation which can be forced to do the government's bidding.

Note, there's nothing wrong with having public parks or schools. I take exception to the idea that we should have *only* public land and public schools.

In fact there is a lot wrong for public schools, and they are one of the things the state should immediately get out of. (and public schools among central banking was one of the planks in the communist manifesto, BTW.) But that is another topic altogether.

Comment: Re:LibreOffice (Score 5, Interesting) 190

by RoLi (#47746689) Attached to: Munich Council Say Talk of LiMux Demise Is Greatly Exaggerated

Yes, there are still many small problems, but it really pays off filing a bugreport (with example file) - they have a much better management of bugs than most opensource projects and the chances are good that you will be able to get a fix in a few weeks. I have very good experience with that.

Comment: Re:The problem of Microsoft (Score 4, Interesting) 337

by RoLi (#47645659) Attached to: Microsoft Surface Drowning?

I doubt there are that many people outside of the stereotypical Slashdot demographic who view Microsoft the way you are describing them. Most people I know of know Microsoft as simply the company who makes the software they are familiar with.

Well, the problem is that Microsoft no longer makes software they are familiar with!

The ribbon-interface for Office was already alienating their users, although in the end it was accepted - but Windows 8 is just one step too far - a LOT of users are fed up. Apple is profiting from that, but also Android and maybe soon Steambox.

Comment: Re:Chinese telecom billionaire (Score 1) 322

by RoLi (#47628411) Attached to: With Chinese Investment, Nicaraguan Passage Could Dwarf Panama Canal

"my definition"? Huh?

The general definition is a centralized economy, i.e. no private property.

Of course that causes so much starvation and misery that even Stalin did not go "all communist" and just *had* to allow a black private market (and also private gardens).

But the Cambodian communists really believed in communism - and they really realized it - of course the whole thing collapsed after a few years.

Comment: Re:think big, plan for future (Score 0) 322

by RoLi (#47625719) Attached to: With Chinese Investment, Nicaraguan Passage Could Dwarf Panama Canal

"Spending money" is easy. Building something useful with it not so much.

If you want to build something in the US, you have to pay for the corruption (the Americans have even a catchy well-sounding name for corruption: "Affirmative Action" and they also have a system in place to protect it from criticism - just try to criticize it and you will see the system in action). The US has given over half a billion(!) dollars for the Obamacare Website to an AA-company - and even then the website didn't work. Obviously they are so corrupt that even with half a billion they couldn't pay a million (probably less) for a real company to do the actual work. They had to have it all. That is how inefficient things are in the US.

No way the US could build the Panama canal or go to the Moon today. That capability is long gone. It has truly become the Brazil of the North.

Comment: Re:Chinese telecom billionaire (Score 3, Interesting) 322

by RoLi (#47625591) Attached to: With Chinese Investment, Nicaraguan Passage Could Dwarf Panama Canal

*every* communist country had enormous differences in wealth between their citicens. Compare the members of the Soviet nomenclature (who had even special shops with Western goods) with the Gulag-slave. (More than 10% of the population were Gulag-inhabitants, so we are talking about a large segment of the population here.)

A little known-fact was that the income differences in East Germany were about the same as in West Germany - but only when you assume that the people had equal rights which of course they hadn't. When you take all the privileges/penalties into account the differences were much greater than anybody in the West can even imagine.

Comment: Re:Dinosaurs went obsolete (Score 1) 138

by RoLi (#47597615) Attached to: Study: Dinosaurs "Shrank" Regularly To Become Birds

Put a t-Rex into a forest with a pride of hungry lions. How long do you think the Rex would last?

Interesting question, the answer would obviously depend on whether the T-Rex would find enough food. Maybe the T-Rex could hunt elephants? Also new research hints that T-Rex may have been more of a scavanger than a hunter, so maybe T-Rex just follows the lions and chases them away everytime they kill a gazelle? On the other hand, a T-Rex probably weights more than a pack of lions, therefore it would have to snatch away the prey of several lion packs.

So probably you are right and the T-Rex would starve.

Comment: Re:Smile (Score 0) 138

by RoLi (#47597589) Attached to: Study: Dinosaurs "Shrank" Regularly To Become Birds

Wait, I've been told that evolution "stopped" 10,000 years ago and that is why human intelligence is exactly the same for everybody except for dissidents who are stupid, stupid, stupid.

I'd really be interested what kind of supernatural force made evolution "stop" for humans but allowed it for dinosaurs and all other non-humans. Also why - and how - does this supernatural force make an exception to the exception for dissidents and makes only them stupid, while everybody else is exactly equal?

Basically we have evolution which says that genes exist and that different populations have different traits. Then we have the unexplained exception for human intelligence, which is designed (uh?) to be exactly the same for everybody - which means that in some way evolution was suspended for the human brain which is designed (uh?) to be exactly equal for everybody, regardless of any genes - but not for the non-brainy parts, which are still dependent on genes. But then again we have the exception to the exception for dissidents who are all stupid and not equal at all. Hmmm....

Kind of hard to understand what makes evolution happen only in some cases, maybe somebody can clear this one up.

Remember: use logout to logout.