Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Are you kidding (Score 2) 778

by Rob the Bold (#46766523) Attached to: Study Finds US Is an Oligarchy, Not a Democracy

I have no sympathy. In fact, many of you cheered it as a sign of greatness and freedom that America was doing this. Your allies, however, were fucking appalled. Let

Let me finish that sentence for you:

Option 1: "Let me just say that I laugh at your situation, secure in my knowledge that nothing like that can happen where I live."

Option 2: "Let me see this as a warning that despite rule of law, foundational documents, and all the trappings of representative government, this could still happen here. I will be especially on guard against those that try to subvert my country."

Comment: Re:Overseas comment (Score 2) 383

by Rob the Bold (#46757237) Attached to: Slashdot Asks: How Do You Pay Your Taxes?

I like the UK system - if you're an employee and you're happy with the tax your employer has withheld on your behalf, you don't have to do anything. You get a statement at the end of the year telling you how much you've been paid and how much tax has been withheld - if you think they've got it wrong, or you want to claim deductions, you file a tax return saying so.

We could do this in the US. By could I mean, if we changed tax regulations -- the system is mostly in place already. Wage income is deducted "pay-as-you-go" here, too. All of my interest, dividends and gains were already reported (but not deducted) by the entities that paid them. The IRS could have just sent me a bill for that with what they already know. Most of the data I put on my 1040 is redundant for the IRS. The biggest impediment -- other than changing the law -- would be that not claiming all your deductions could result in paying far more than you really should owe, especially if you have a mortgage, give to charity, or need to report other such deductions.

Comment: Re:base it around my OS (Score 1) 383

by Rob the Bold (#46757061) Attached to: Slashdot Asks: How Do You Pay Your Taxes?

. . . at some point you're clicking quickly because you just want to get shit done and accidentally upgrade yourself to a $120 tax package. After that, you literally cannot back out or restart.

You can, but it requires human intervention from customer service and takes a few hours. Obviously, this would be a problem if it happened at the last minute

Comment: Re:Tax Act vs Turbo Tax (Score 3, Interesting) 383

by Rob the Bold (#46757031) Attached to: Slashdot Asks: How Do You Pay Your Taxes?

Although I am moving more and more to Linux I am GOING to keep at least one Windows machine around just to run Tax Act if nothing else!

Tax Cut (H&R Block) online works with Linux browsers. Turbo Tax online complains but works anyway. And Tax Act online at least let me start without any warnings. There really seems to be little difference in the online versions of these services vs the installable Windows program, FWIW to you. I replaced my Mom's XP with Ubuntu and switched her over from Turbo Tax for Windows to Turbo Tax Online. Except for the (apparently bogus) warning when first starting, it worked fine, and she didn't really notice a difference in the experience from last year.

The paranoid might be concerned about filling out their taxes online, but the truly paranoid would note that an installable program could just as easily "phone home" with your tax info, anyway.

Comment: H&R Block online (Score 4, Informative) 383

by Rob the Bold (#46756907) Attached to: Slashdot Asks: How Do You Pay Your Taxes?

I used H&R Block online. Unlike Intuit's offering, it doesn't complain that I'm using Linux. (Turbo Tax seems to work anyway after ignoring the warning, though.)

My financial life is pretty simple, though: I didn't buy or sell a house, didn't buy or sell stocks outside of a retirement account mutual fund, and didn't move from one state to another.

Trading stocks and funds in a non-retirement account used to be a huge PITA at tax time. Good news on this year's 1040 is that you can consolidate all your capital gains (or losses) by short and long term and avoid entering a line for every single trade. This quite literally saved hours of work.

Comment: Re:rennet (Score 1) 64

by Rob the Bold (#46367439) Attached to: Ancient Chinese Mummies Discovered In Cheesy Afterlife

The comment I made on the top of the thread was not innocent. It is one of the "best" preserved secrets in the industry and people are actually socked by it. I only found it out when I went vegan. As a side anecdote , I once asked my sister if she knew how cheese was made, and she told me milk and cream...sure...ignorance is a bliss. Thing is, it turns it out standard cheese is neither vegetarian nor hallal

True -- ignorance is bliss. "Standard" cheese in the US is often labeled as containing "enzymes" without any description of the origin. So you never really know . . .

It really is eye-opening to make some of the foods you usually buy in processed form yourself, from scratch. Cheese, tofu, sauerkraut, beer, whatever. Even just reading a copy of "The Joy of Cooking" is enlightening, since it describes -- in detail -- the process of producing all kinds of things you never thought much about because they were readily available at the supermarket.

Comment: Re:There won't BE any "general acceptance" (Score 1) 921

by Rob the Bold (#46360421) Attached to: Woman Attacked In San Francisco Bar For Wearing Google Glass

Not really. An automated CCTV system is accepted because we know why it's there. It's for liability reasons. It's to protect the businesses/properties in question. Most of us know that these images will never even be seen by a real person let alone posted to YouTube or worse.

That's kinda what I'm trying to say about our assumptions and reactions. We make an assumption that recording is anonymous and un-monitored simply because the human operator isn't visible. While it's possible that no one's watching a security camera, and also possible that no one will ever look at the recording unless something happens that needs to be reviewed, that's not necessarily so. It just seems that way because we're not watching the watcher. "Ignorance is bliss," as the saying goes. A CCTV operator could be following your every move as you walk around Macy's or chat up that attractive number at the local watering hole. Probably not happening, but we have no way of knowing either way.

Comment: Re:There won't BE any "general acceptance" (Score 4, Insightful) 921

by Rob the Bold (#46357553) Attached to: Woman Attacked In San Francisco Bar For Wearing Google Glass

People don't like being recorded, or even the possibility of being recorded, without their express permission. That's not going to change, therefore there isn't going to be any "general acceptance" of technology like this.

Seems people don't like being recorded by individuals they can actually see in the flesh, and just accept the recording of themselves by whoever mounts a camera on the ceiling or wall anywhere. And I don't think it's just the tacit acceptance of being monitored and recorded as a condition of darkening someone's door: I suspect that the average person would be far more uncomfortable with a mall cop pointing a camera at them in person vs. monitoring them from a back office with an array of pannable cameras as they moved about the premises. Even though the net result is the same, it's the apparent human element that I suspect makes Average Joe uncomfortable.

Comment: Re:Freebreeze to the rescue (Score 3, Informative) 124

by Rob the Bold (#46356757) Attached to: Pine Forest Vapor Particles Can Limit Climate Change

You must be new here, or don't you remember the whole Aerosols are bad for Ozone and contribute to global warming form the 80's and 90s.

An aerosol is "a colloid of fine solid particles or liquid droplets, in air or another gas". The particular aeorsol (CFCs) referred to by parent is explained by a sibling post, so no need to repeat here. Point is, that an aerosol can be almost anything gaseous or that can be made fine enough to behave sort of "gas like", including dust, VOCs, smoke, etc. That's how the term is used in TFA: terpenes -- not CFCs -- are the substances "dissolved" in air.

Comment: Re:Ronald Reagan was right! (Score 1) 124

by Rob the Bold (#46356601) Attached to: Pine Forest Vapor Particles Can Limit Climate Change

"Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do." Terpenes are a well known component of aerosol away from cities, and studied since many years. Nothing new in the headline, after all...

Yes, these are the terpenes that Reagan and James Watt (Reagan's Secretary of the Interior, not the inventor) were referring to. While they were sorta correct that you can't eliminate all the VOCs that contribute to smog by curtailing their emission by human activities, it was presented in the "complete solution or nothing at all" sort of fallacy. The whole thing got widely ridiculed -- albeit for the wrong reasons, even though it deserved it -- and Reagan distanced himself, throwing Watt under the bus. Or at least that's how I remember it. Memory might be kind of hazy, mostly due to all the smog back then.

Comment: What does the economist say? (Score 5, Informative) 491

by Rob the Bold (#46345535) Attached to: Do We Really Have a Shortage of STEM Workers?

The economist says there's never a shortage, just a shortage at a given price. E.g., Robert R. Prechter, Jr: "In a free market, shortages are impossible; there is only a price. Rubies and Picassos are scarce, but there's never a shortage of them. You can buy all you want any day of the week. Just pay the price." You can have all you want if you're willing to pay more.

Mathematics deals exclusively with the relations of concepts to each other without consideration of their relation to experience. -- Albert Einstein

Working...