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


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment Re:Why would Disney do this? (Score 1) 251

> Is there no end to the evil caused by liberals?

> If they're not trying to destroy the economy by introducing socialism, they're trying to destroy society by seeking the maximisation of profit!

Uh, you apparently have forgotten a few things. An ecomony is merely a system made possible by the ongoing exchange of something of value. This system tends to be made more flexible through monetary units. If anything, that Liberal you seem to dislike would rather minimize profit by the few to allow for more redistribution of wealth to the many.

Comment Re:Why would Disney do this? (Score 1) 251

> If I buy a loaf of bread for $1, who gains and who loses? I lose $1 and gain a loaf of bread. The baker gains $1 and loses a load of bread.

You have failed to make reference to the key part in my two statements, profit. There is a "finite" amount of money in the economy at any given time. This is much like energy and its place within the universe. Energy and money can only move around. There is no way that everyone and every company can take profit since this would need for more money to exist than what actually exists.

As for your baker...
The baker has a true cost associated with getting that loaf to the market and through its sell that must be covered by his or her pricing. The true cost is more complex than materials and labor. He or she also likely has a desire to earn a profit. In an ideal market, the baker would sell the loaf at cost-plus-profit with the pricing in line with the customer's buying power. If his total overhead is $1, he makes no profit on a loaf sold at $1. If, on the other hand, his cost is $0.50, he's earned quite the profit.

Let's say his cost rises and/or the customer can no longer pay $1 for a loaf of bread. Let's also say he is too attached to the profit of 50 cents on the dollar he's had to-date. So, what does the baker do? He finds a way to cut his costs. Sometimes this achieved through improvements in efficiencies that that doesn't impact others. Now, I'd argue that all change has impact. He could skimp or otherwise change the recipe in such a way that lowers quality. Who loses to allow the baker to gain? The customer. Let's say he choses to cut bakery staff to reduce costs so that he can gain. Who loses? The workers and anyone dependent on the workers' income lose. The society also loses, because the workers have less or no money to spend. Society might also lose further by having to pay for social safety net services to be used by the workers until the income can be replaced. Let's say the baker raises the price of the loaf to protect his profit. Who loses here? The customer and quite possibly society again. Let's say the baker choses to not pay his suppliers, landlord, and/or for utilties to reduce his costs. Who loses? The company that has been shorted loses, and their employees might lose in time due to the company's drop in revenue.

Gains and losses aren't always measurable in currency. Lowering product and service quality to maintain or increase gain also has a corresponding loss. Examples of correlated gain and loss are available through out our economy at all levels and life in general. Some gains by one are so great that the burden of a corresponding loss is felt by many. I don't want to step on another to get ahead. A person or company that is gaining more than they are losing are stepping on someone to get ahead.

Comment Re:Browser ends and a site begins? (Score 2) 302

I block ads, because they lessen too much the user experience. Early on, ads weren't a nuisance, really, because we were only subjected to mostly static banner ads. Ads have evolved to be much more active employing animation, video, and/or audio. They have also gotten larger and incorporate other nuisance-causing tactics like page-over and content-shifting mechanisms to increase impressions. The videos in particular, especially the auto-run videos are the most annoying to me and resource demanding. Ads using audio are the runner-up. I am often listening to music through the computer as I work at the computer, so the audio interferes with this. No, I am not listing to ad-supported streaming services. I actually buy CDs and listen to the ripped MP3s I've created from them.

I wish we'd move away from the free, ad-supported, and data-sharing business model and find a way for the content and services to be pay-access-only without subscriptions. Yes, I do realize that this means many sites and services, especially those catering to a niche, will be lost. I do know that some are subsidized by revenue earned elsewhere. In the end, I may decide the loss isn't worth the improvement in user experience gained through the removal of ads or at least the pull-back of ads. Society is already paying indirectly for all this "free" stuff, because we are paying for something that funds the marketing budgets that are buying the ad space.

Comment Re:Why would Disney do this? (Score 4, Insightful) 251

That often is my gripe. Too many companies and executives aren't satisfied with making a reasonable profit and keeping good people employed. Instead, they want to pursue unreasonable profit and goals with a shortsighted mindset and no concern for how such a business strategy is to affect their employees and society as a whole.

We all can't profit. One's gain is only made possible by another's loss.

Comment Re:Browser ends and a site begins? (Score 2) 302

I did run for a long time at with a similar solution. I did this up until I installed an ad-blocker for the first time back over the summer. I used the HOSTS file to point a long list of domains to a Linux box on my network that served a page through Apache via the 404 error. The error occured, because the ad's URL was never valid when applied to my server. The page used JavaScript to match the iFrame's parent's background color and showed "AD BLOCKED". While this didn't work for all ads, it did for many and improved my experience.

Comment Re:Awwww thats so cute (Score 1) 302

It doesn't matter if Yahoo is or isn't a big player. They aren't the only player looking for methods to combat ad-blocking, and moves like this will be made by others in time. Even if this specific approach hasn't been thought of by anyone else, the press is sharing the concept with the world more and more with each new article.

Comment Re:This is an easy answer (Score 1) 164

Measuring true cost isn't always easy. I suppose measuring true value is hard as well. Think long-term cost and value. Labor is just part of the cost. Quality of work can be a cost when it is low and convey value when it is high. I can go on and on about aspects like this that should be measured and considered sufficiently by a business when they are planning staffing strategies. I will say that a business that sees an employee as nothing more than a dispensible warm body acting as a means to revenue and, thus, profit should expect said employee to care less even when not caring goes against his or her nature.

Comment Re:Look at the bean counters for your answer (Score 1) 164

My company does bill me out at something like $149/hr as for out-of-scope work. This rate is meant to cover the costs of the back-end people and processes that supposedly support my role. There are standard rates that apply to other resources. I bet never more than 1/5 of the billed rate is being paid entirely to the one person doing the work requested by the customer.

I do understand that contractors are paid high hourly rates. I suppose much of this is meant to cover the risk of down-time and that customers must pay for this to avoid the cost of having a regular employee. Some of the rates are also to cover the contractor's travel by car costs and other incidentals.

Comment Re:If you don't like the textbooks, (Score 1) 337

How do you propose society manage the kids that don't have parents or guardians that care enough to get the kid into and kept in one of the many private schools that would exist and fit the kid's educational needs? Are you going to step in to help these kids? Probably not. How would you manage the kid's need to get to and from school even when the private school that fits is located across town? Are you going to give these kids a ride to their school? Probably not.

A public school system can and certainly does generally remove many of the burdens of educating our children. It can also accomplish this at real cost, not cost-plus-profit. It seems to me that the private sector normally operates with earning a profit as the highest priority. There are and will always be many kids that come into the world that would have to go it alone if not for society providing assistance through programs paid for by someone else. It doesn't matter if it tax-derived or private dollars or paid for through higher prices charged to those that can pay. These kids and those that got lucky at birth all are society's future. I believe it is in society's best interest to do what society can to prepare every kid, within reason, for said future.

So, let's say government does get out of the business of running schools and needs to only focus on regulating all of the existing and new private schools. Might it just be possible that the cost of regulation could be pretty high? A government-run public school system doesn't need the same level of oversight and regulating given that the system likely is as it specifies. Consequently, the cost of the self-oversight and self-regulation would be lower. In your system, the tax payer is still paying for the education of every kid through scholorships[I read vouchers] and also paying to regulate where they hadn't needed before. Government probably is also still funding much of the transportation costs since someone must pay to get the kids to and from school.

Again, I believe it is in society's best interest to do what society can to prepare every kid, within reason, for the future. I believe the better prepared a kid is, the less likely the kid is to be burden to society down the road. Burdens of all types cost money and, in many cases, more than what society would pay through the public school system. Just consider the costs associated with policing, prosecution, and imprisoning.

Comment Re:If you don't like the textbooks, (Score 1) 337

You seem to be responding to something for which I didn't advocate. I believe parents should be expected to and to actually raise their kids. This is separate from the approach, whatever it happens to be, taken in a school setting to educate a kid. Parents can still contribute to the kid's learning even when we have a public school system, and they should since there is so much to know about life that can never be covered completely in any State-defined curriculum.

Comment Re:If you don't like the textbooks, (Score 2) 337

A problem with your approach is that a parent can only employ your so-called solution for his or her own kids. He or she can't also send someone else's kids to a private school. Yet, these other kids are also to be a part of society's future and, potentially, shaping it in a significant way. So, the better approach is to address situations such as this textbook one in Texas so that the majority of kids learn what's right and real and not just the few that, purely by chance, were born into a situation that supported the attending of a private school.

I have a theory that it's impossible to prove anything, but I can't prove it.