Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Cry Me A River (Score 1) 571

by Smidge204 (#47415473) Attached to: Normal Humans Effectively Excluded From Developing Software

Normal humans are excluded from a lot of things.

1. Olympic Gold Medal
2. 5x Jeopardy Champion
3. Professional Concert Pianist
4. Bolshoi Ballet
5. Supermodel

Our technologically advanced society will not fall into ruin if nobody ever becomes a 5-time Jeopardy Champion ever gain...

On the other hand, guru-level engineers are considerably more important.

Comment: Re:How about a sign (Score 1) 578

by Smidge204 (#47367719) Attached to: Unintended Consequences For Traffic Safety Feature

For traffic lights that are really long, and I'm familiar with, I will often turn my engine off since I know I'm going to be going nowhere for >1min. The timer on the crosswalk sign gives me plenty of warning so I can start the engine and be ready to go.

Of course, this is hardly any different from just looking at the traffic light for the opposing direction - most of the time you can see it change to yellow, then red, and you know a few beats later your way will turn green. Drive the same route for more than a few days (e.g. your typical commute) and nearly anyone will know how the lights behave throughout the day and be able to predict them.

Comment: Re:No Question the Drive is His, No 5th Amend. Iss (Score 1) 560

by Smidge204 (#47325849) Attached to: Mass. Supreme Court Says Defendant Can Be Compelled To Decrypt Data

Even if the hard drive isn't yours, or it hasn't been established that it's yours, if they know you have the password for whatever reason they can compel you to give it up. Failure to do so would at least be obstruction, or perhaps as bad as aiding and abetting.

Provided they also have probable cause to think there's evidence on that device of course.

Comment: Re:Democrats voted (Score 1) 932

by Smidge204 (#47216325) Attached to: House Majority Leader Defeated In Primary

In a perfect world, there would be no primaries at all because there would be no rigidly defined political parties as such... but I suppose it really is too much to ask that a candidate be considered on the weight of his individual ideas and actions rather than a postfix next to his name on a ballot.

But the next best thing would be to have each party solely responsible for nominating their own candidates, without outside influence. At least in that respect we could get someone who best represents their party, rather than the WORST representative.

Campaign financing is a whole other ball of wax...

Comment: Re:Democrats voted (Score 1) 932

by Smidge204 (#47215395) Attached to: House Majority Leader Defeated In Primary

Voters end up with the exact same number of choices in the general election: two.

Not really, no. There is almost always more than two candidates for any particular office. The only exceptions I've personally encountered were lesser thought about elected officials like judges and public works.

But I think the parent's comment about "fewer choices" still applies: You are choosing the least bad instead of the best, so the real choice is diminished. Giant douche, or turd sandwich?

Comment: Re:Democrats voted (Score 1) 932

by Smidge204 (#47215195) Attached to: House Majority Leader Defeated In Primary

It's a primary election, not a general election. Nobody is being elected into power here. The primary election is only to choose who the candidate will be that will run for office for that particular party.

If you want your political party to win, and you have open primaries, to group together to force the opponent party to select the LEAST desirable candidate, thus increasing your own candidate's chance of winning.

That's not democracy, that's gaming the system - and we all lose in the race to the bottom.

Comment: Re:remove limited liability from owners (Score 1) 307

by Smidge204 (#47181701) Attached to: GM Names and Fires Engineers Involved In Faulty Ignition Switch

Why not? You benefit from that partial ownership, you should share in the responsibility proportionally.

Having thousands of owners screaming at you, as well as being financially culpable, would be good cause for the people in charge to actually be careful about what they do.

Comment: Re:Eliminates all jobs earning less than 15 USD/ho (Score 1) 1040

by Smidge204 (#47163069) Attached to: Seattle Approves $15 Per Hour Minimum Wage

Not true. If every restaurant closed their doors, people would cook their own food. If every landscaping company folded, people would mow their own lawns.

Hahahaha... oh wow.

Yeah, assuming that everyone is willing any able to do their own cooking and yardwork (Ha!) who's going to do property maintenance for non-residential properties? Going to take turns at the office to see who's turn it is to trim the hedges that week?

Comment: Re:Eliminates all jobs earning less than 15 USD/ho (Score 1) 1040

by Smidge204 (#47163055) Attached to: Seattle Approves $15 Per Hour Minimum Wage

I think you're reading a bit too deeply into the words and missing the overall point... there are jobs that need to be done regardless of their cost.

Fine, bagging groceries is a poor example. What about janitorial work? Someone needs to do the basic maintenance of a public or commercial building.

Comment: Re:Eliminates all jobs earning less than 15 USD/ho (Score 2, Insightful) 1040

by Smidge204 (#47153705) Attached to: Seattle Approves $15 Per Hour Minimum Wage

Imagine the minimum wage is $100/hour. There's a massive number of job which simply do not produce that much wealth per hour - they cannot exist, because to offer that job to someone is to lose money. All those jobs disappear.

Setting aside the stupidity of $100/hr minimum wage... (I mean, why not $1,000,000/hr right?)

The jobs that people do for under $15/hr still need to be done. Not every job produces wealth. Nobody gets rich by having clean floors, or mowed lawns, or bagged groceries. However, these are examples of tasks that arguable have to be done by someone, and the cost of not having them done can, at least in some cases, be argued to be greater than $15/hr.

The same applies to jobs that "do not produce that much wealth" - they still need to be done. Either you pay someone $15/hr to flip burgers, or you stop selling burgers and go out of business. Don't want to go out of business? Pay the $15/hr and increase your prices by the ten cents or whatever it averages out to be. What a goddamn stupid argument you're making.

I'd rather pay an extra buck for a trip to the local fast food place than have my tax dollars end up subsidizing the employees through food stamps and housing because they're barely paid enough to afford the same food they cook all day.

Comment: Re:Even higher! (Score 1) 1040

by Smidge204 (#47153629) Attached to: Seattle Approves $15 Per Hour Minimum Wage

The way to implement the experiment is to abolish the minimum wage entirely, and then leave it abolished since it will achieve the natural price for labor value.

We already tried slavery, feudalism, indentured servitude, company towns/stores, debt bondage, wage slavery... these are the labor systems that arise when you don't enforce paying laborers enough to keep them independent of their employer... aka "a living wage."

Maybe the problem is you don't understand what "living wage" really means.

Comment: Re:Raise the Price (Score 1) 462

by Smidge204 (#47082269) Attached to: Fiat Chrysler CEO: Please Don't Buy Our Electric Car

The Volt's drivetrain, for example, reportedly costs about $6k per vehicle. Why? It's a heck of a lot simpler than a gasoline drivetrain, with a tenth as many moving parts and less raw materials costs.

This statement makes no sense in light of the fact that the Volt's drivetrain includes a four cylinder gasoline engine.

I'm not convinced it's simpler in the transmission either. You still have three clutches, a planetery and a differential.

And yes, the engine can and will provide mechanical power directly to wheels

if conditions are right.

Advertising is a valuable economic factor because it is the cheapest way of selling goods, particularly if the goods are worthless. -- Sinclair Lewis