Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

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: Re:Zoloft is a 1000 times worse (Score 1) 186

by RyoShin (#49497691) Attached to: Acetaminophen Reduces Both Pain and Pleasure, Study Finds

If I may ask, when did you begin running? Was it before you tried the anti-depressants, while trying them, or after you stopped? At any point did you take a long hiatus from running, either before you started anti-depressants and then picked it up after you started, or stopped and started while on the same anti-depressant?

(I deal with depression, currently on Celexa and Welbutrin; I've tried Zoloft in the past with same effects as GP, and most recently had a go with Venlaxflexin. I'm curious in drug-free possibilities, but boy do I hate running.)

Comment: Re:Holding the nose again? (Score 1) 676

by RyoShin (#49473379) Attached to: Hillary Clinton Declares 2016 Democratic Presidential Bid

By W. Warren, do you mean Elizabeth Warren? (I can't find anything relevant for "W. Warren") In a recent interview with NPR, Elizabeth Warren unequivocally said she would not run for President:

But you don't want to run, still?

I do not.

This doesn't mean she won't throw her name in in the next 16 months, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I would love to see her run, too, but she is also a good force in Congress and I don't want to see that get more lopsided with her absence...

Comment: Re:Abraham Lincoln's quote on internet truth (Score 1) 126

by RyoShin (#49448675) Attached to: Amazon Sues To Block Fake Reviews

I've always wondered why sites like Amazon and NewEgg haven't adopted some sort of "Adjusted Score", which discards the 1s and 5s and scores only on a three-star scale. This means that those who try to game the system will do 4s and 2s, but that's why you allow the user to decide which score to search/match on (or just show both.)

"Weighted" scores would also be nice, measuring from a rep system (based on visitor feedback of previous reviews for someone, plus the time they've been on the site, plus if they purchased the product from the site and how long they've had it when the review was made) and the amount of words in the review (with a ceiling; grammar/punctuation would be a better measure of clarity, though much harder to score). So a score of 3 from a long time user with a history of good reviews and the review has 200 words would be considered a much better recommendation than a score of 5 from a newish user with 10 words.

None of this stops gamed reviews, of course, but it does change the rules of the game in favor of Amazon and regular customers since those who want to put up fake reviews will have to work harder for it.

Comment: Re:Countries can demand fair taxes (Score 1) 312

by RyoShin (#49442947) Attached to: Google, Apple and Microsoft Squirm As Global Tax Schemes Scrutinized

Huh, a very interesting thought. Since you wouldn't break even on the deductions (to my knowledge), I never thought that they would be something that could increase spending.

If the tax rate for companies did go to 0%, though, it would have to be balanced in some way by increasing taxes on citizens. Ideally this means much higher taxes for much higher brackets, and raising the taxes on dividends etc.; for all this, how the companies pay people would change, so that larger pot of money might have to be put towards the employees rather than being some new surplus to hoard. That pot might not grow too large in the end, but you do give something more to think about in any case.

Comment: Re:Countries can demand fair taxes (Score 1) 312

by RyoShin (#49442725) Attached to: Google, Apple and Microsoft Squirm As Global Tax Schemes Scrutinized

Which is all well and good, but you and I are not taxed on our "net income". It doesn't matter how many bills we have to pay or how large our debt is, we are taxed based on the amount that our employer pays us. In general, I can't deduct food, electricity, or car payments. (The super rich can hire accountants to skirt around a lot of stuff and senators to make laws exempting them from the rest, sure.)

So, if we are going to tax corporations (and I'm not convinced we should, but that comes with other caveats), why should they get to play the net income game when the citizen (whom the government should primarily be working at the behest of) can't?

Comment: Re:Actually, I think that's a great idea (Score 1) 312

by RyoShin (#49434243) Attached to: Google, Apple and Microsoft Squirm As Global Tax Schemes Scrutinized

Agreed in full. I've been thinking more about this lately, and I don't know why we tax corporations, outside of double-dipping. The government is supposed to be by/for the people, and so paying for the government should be the onus of the people; similarly, the government should listen to the people and not the corporations, so taking away taxes for corps can undo that stupid Citizens United ruling (I think.)

But, while a lot of people will support removing taxes for corporations, many will fight tooth and nail to keep from raising taxes on the rich, namely the dividends/gains you mention but also very high brackets. Unless you want the deficit to expand faster, you have to do the latter at the same time as you do the former.

Comment: Re:Crossed lines (Score 0) 166

by RyoShin (#49419903) Attached to: The Arrival of Man-Made Earthquakes

If 3.0 quakes are increasing, I would assume that higher rated ones are also increasing, or the amount of quakes might cause enough build up in certain areas for devastating quakes.

Regardless, her particular warning is just a CYA. "What, you didn't get earthquake insurance? Well, don't come crying to the government for help, we told you to!"

Comment: Re:Can there be any question ... (Score 1) 587

by RyoShin (#49419039) Attached to: Hugo Awards Turn (Even More) Political

In 200 years, history classes in the Middle East and Africa will discuss the 16-Year Federal Furlough, when America split into a large number of tribes/clans along ideological lines after the federal government failed to pass a spending budget for two years and the effects started taking their toll on every-day citizens...

Comment: Crossed lines (Score 4, Interesting) 166

by RyoShin (#49418963) Attached to: The Arrival of Man-Made Earthquakes

(However, many earthquake-insurance policies in the state exclude coverage for induced earthquakes.)

So, if the insurance company can prove the quakes were man-made, they don't have to pay out. But if they can prove it, that goes against claims by many in the state and oil industry. The oil industry would likely try to hound/silence/sue the insurance company.

If they deny a claim with loose evidence that it's man-made, the claimant could (theoretically) prove it was a natural occurrence. Because proving such is to the benefit of the oil industry, they would jump at the chance to "help", and perhaps have the state "investigate" the insurance company for fraud or questionable practices or something.

It seems to me that, despite whatever exclusions the insurance company has, they will likely pay out for any and all earthquake claims with the oil industry helping them cover that pay out behind the scenes in order to keep any proof or claims of "induced" earthquakes out of the public eye.

Comment: Re:for those outside the states... (Score 1) 246

by RyoShin (#49418307) Attached to: Watching a "Swatting" Slowly Unfold

began to take the form of whatever our politicians fever-dreamed the nature of crime to be.

I agree with most of what you said except this. I don't believe that most our politicians give a rat's patoot one way or the other about crime, except whatever crime happens to them. Instead, they fever-dreamed whatever stats would convince voters that there are massive crime epidemics everywhere, created policies would be easy to play to the voters, and then appear "tough on crime" (as you mentioned) and use that as a stick to beat down any opponent who dare mumbled "well, wait, this isn't actually helping us, and we have huge recidivism, and it's costing us a lot of mon-*THWACK*".

Most of these politicians are at least moderately smart, in the same way that an actor is smart: They are able to play whatever part they feel they need to play to maintain their power and prestige.

Comment: Re:I wonder (Score 1) 258

by RyoShin (#49417153) Attached to: A Robo-Car Just Drove Across the Country

For instance, we currently lack a nationwide network of stations that offer full-service for your trucks. It's certainly doable, but so far as I know it's not currently in place, and that's one of the simpler problems to address.

As I've thought about the problem of fuel for automated trucks, my mind turns to mid-air refueling: A plane stays aloft while another plane hooks up to it and adds more fuel. The other plane can go back to the ground and load up again, keeping the desired plane in flight for as long as refueling planes get to it.

Could the same thing be possible for trucks? Have a tanker (also automated) come in behind a truck, have a nozzle hooked up, and fuel it while driving. The tanker can then drive back to a refuel area specifically set up for them to reload. You could even have fuel lanes added to long, mostly-empty stretches of highway, where the truck being fueled can slow down without bothering traffic and the tankers can easily enter/exit to loop around.

Another possibility is that, without the need of a driver, the entire cab can be turned into a giant fuel tank. Not without its own problems, but something to consider.

the only things stopping me from stealing them being a trucker and my sense of what's right.

If someone is a thief, their sense of what is right is already out, so that just leaves the trucker as the only problem. A gun or a steel pipe can take care of that. Perhaps the thought of (potentially) hurting a human is a deterrent, but there non-violent ways to get the driver out of the picture. I imagine insurance for drivers is quite a bit, so companies will be happy to be rid of that cost as well. Various deterrents and anti-theft devices can be put in place, and without a proper cab (see above) the content would have to be unloaded on the spot, making it easy for a company that gets an alarm to call the local PD.

The weigh station one is easy, the trucks just have RFID tags that give the information as it passes through a weigh station or will automatically connect the officer at the station with whoever is monitoring the trucks through the cab. It can even have a basic LCD screen on either side to allow 'face to face' communication. The remote monitor can then instruct the cab to move into a designated space; if no one can be contacted, the cab can automatically go into a space until contact can be established or a representative can physically arrive.

There might be a standard (or five) created to allow the station to direct the cab itself, given proper credentials, without interaction from the trucking company. (This goes into things like encryption etc., but doable.)

You scratch my tape, and I'll scratch yours.

Working...