Forgot your password?

Comment: What a WEIRD argument! (Score 1) 268

by Sloppy (#46824663) Attached to: Supreme Court OKs Stop and Search Based On Anonymous 911 Tips

The bizarreness of Thomas' justification is pretty over-the-top. He's saying that an anonymous call creates probable cause because its not anonymous? The progression of that argument would be the government can authorize itself to search anything. A cop could just call 911, non-anonymously and even give his name, to create the tip that authorizes himself to search. Wouldn't that trigger the newly-created exception and make it legal?

Maybe there's some way that 911 calls could circumvent the 4th, but a not-really-anonymous anonymous call angle? WTF.

Comment: Re:$100k today the equivalent of $80k in 2004 (Score 1) 172

by Loki_1929 (#46821379) Attached to: Tech People Making $100k a Year On the Rise, Again

Much of that is due to the capital flight toward safety (at one point, even turning US Treasuries into slightly negative-value investments). So long as people with wealth are willing to park it in US Dollars, you won't see any major shifts in the currency. However, provide a viable alternative and I think you'll begin to see some rapid shifts that won't make anyone holding assets denominated in US Dollars very happy. And that could trigger some truly catastrophic investor and sovereign panic as people and banks (including national banks/treasuries) start dumping those assets for anything and everything else to avoid being wiped out by a hyperinflated Dollar.

Obviously this requires some sort of replacement reserve currency. It can't happen until there's something else considered as or more safe. The Euro would have been the best contender had it not been for Europe's debt crisis and hard hits during the downturn. God help us all if precious metals ever fit the bill from large scale institutional investors' perspectives, because those are a known-workable entity. It's merely a matter of perception of safety.

Comment: Re:$100k today the equivalent of $80k in 2004 (Score 1) 172

by Loki_1929 (#46821347) Attached to: Tech People Making $100k a Year On the Rise, Again

I'd prefer a money supply pegged to population change + 1/100th of 1% by constitutional amendment. Some economists and Federal Reserve supporters will argue that such a thing ties the hands of those "managing the economy". I would argue that limiting the power of those who proclaim to understand how to manage an economy of the size and scale of any modern industrialized nation can only result in improvement. If the stagflation of the 70s and 80s, the boom of the mid to late 90s, the bust at the tail end of the 90s, the boom of the 2000s (sparked in large part by a shift of investor capital into the housing securities markets combined with absurdly low interest rates), and the worst bust since the Great Depression haven't convinced you that perhaps no human being on Earth can actually do the job the Fed is supposed to do (we've had a couple of the world's best prospects during those periods), then just look back to the Great Depression and the boom/bust/boom cycle that preceded it.

Better yet, look at the US Dollar's value obliteration. That 6-figure salary we're talking about? About the same buying power as $4,000 when the Federal Reserve was founded. So yes, take that power away, abandon this absurd idea that human beings are capable of "managing" a modern industrialized country's economy, and stabilize the value of the currency so that the salary I have today buys the same stuff tomorrow and will actually buy more when I get a "raise".

Comment: Re:im seriously supposed to believe this?! (Score 1) 287

by meta-monkey (#46817187) Attached to: In the US, Rich Now Work Longer Hours Than the Poor

I wouldn't necessarily say "succeeded at rigging the game." More likely, they've made better use of data they have available to optimally schedule workers. I can't blame's not Wal-Mart's responsibility to make sure you can work a second job.

The game is indeed rigged, but in this one instance I don't think it was intentional.

Comment: Re:SCOTUS (Score 4, Insightful) 301

Yup. The problem here is not that the people do not have a means to control their government it is that the vast majority of them do not give a shit. We have become a nation of people that will wait till the cops arrive while being bludgeoned to death. We will vote which ever party promises us the most free stuff. We value the illusion of safety over freedom. the news anchor is our one true God.

We have exactly the government we deserve.

SOME people in this country have exactly the government they deserve. Those of us who faithfully follow the process, campaign for better ideas, and get nowhere because we're surrounded by masses of apathetic, incompetent idiots do not have the government we deserve. Significant power and authority returning to the individual states would help with that (not solve it by any means, but help).

Comment: Re:Nothing to do with hole size (Score 1) 397

by MachineShedFred (#46808063) Attached to: In a Hole, Golf Courses Experiment With 15-inch Holes

Golf, for me, isn't so much about the act of playing the game, but who I'm playing it with.

If you aren't having a good time, try different golfing partners. Don't take it so seriously.

And use a bright fucking orange ball that is way easier to find in the weeds, because you can't miss it in the sky while it's flying. That's a great way to knock some strokes off the score, and time off the clock.

How much net work could a network work, if a network could net work?