Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 25% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY25". ×

Comment Re:Because 2016 elections... (Score 1) 328

I wasn't huge on stock investing, but I did pretty well. The few horrible choices I made was Sun Microsystems and Lucent. I thought of all my choices, Lucent was the hands down safest bet. They were a spin-off of Bell Labs with some of the smartest people in the business. They OWNED the market for Fiber Optic -- and heck, AT&T was a shoe-in for a captive market. The got rid of the fat, and had nothing but muscle.

When their stock tanked, I asked someone at Lucent years later what was wrong. He replied; "management." If it was Carly at the helm during that period -- well, I detect a pattern. It might show savvy if she were a corporate pillager and rented Lucent's property back to them, but if she was TRYING to make them successful? My disrespect for her has grown. Can't the Republicans find a greedy bastard with an IQ? Do they all HAVE to be lipstick on a pig? I digress...

It seems AT&T will be using that twisted pair crap in U=verse and all their other data systems until we have people on Mars. They've got a few million miles of the stuff so -- no need for fiber. Everyone else looking at a new installation; fiber. But AT&T will just multiplex that copper crap and hope nobody demands too much bandwidth. I'm sure for a few larger customers they've done fiber.

Anyway, I bought Apple at $19 per share around the time Steve Jobs came back (after learning his lessons at NeXT), and sold everything August 2008 when the Reserve Requirement went to zero. Sure I should have held onto it, but all the other stock took a beating that too many were surprised by.

Comment Re:Yes - known for years. (Score 1) 435

My MacBook Pro 13" can display a max resolution of 3360 x 2100. It's kind of useless to switch to this resolution (you'll need a 3rd party utility to do so -- I use SwitchRez X, but you can also do it via the terminal if you are handy). I suppose it's useful if you plug in an external monitor. I think they've updated this model. The top end 15" could probably be much higher than that -- but again, why? You'd need a magnifying glass to make that useful.

The latest MacBook Pro at about $1800 has these specs;
2.9GHz dual-core Intel Core i5
Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz
8GB 1866MHz LPDDR3 memory
512GB PCIe-based flash storage1
Intel Iris Graphics 6100
Built-in battery (10 hours)2
Force Touch trackpad

If you max out at $2500, well you get;
2.5GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
Turbo Boost up to 3.7GHz
16GB 1600MHz memory
512GB PCIe-based flash storage1
Intel Iris Pro Graphics
AMD Radeon R9 M370X with 2GB GDDR5 memory
Built-in battery (9 hours)2
Force Touch trackpad

BTW the PCIe-based flash storage is faster than almost any RAID. Up to 4X the normal flash storage on the 512 GB models.

The battery specs are accurate, not sure about the competitors.

So while the Macs aren't the cheapest bang for the buck around - they tend to be more than just their specs. They remove the bottlenecks, whisper quiet, stable.

Though if I had the money, I'd go for the discrete graphics card. And I can't wait for the new OS, as Yosemite seems to not be as stable as Mavericks.

As far as TCO, I don't NEED to buy a lot of utilities, anti spyware and the like, or remove shovel-ware buried in my system. The average Windows user may spend less up front, but they seem miserable with a hybrid OS 8, trojan horses hijacking their system (my mother went through various apps like Kaspersky and never got her system working right).

But I'm not preaching -- I don't care. Use what you want. There are robust PCs but you pay for them -- so then you are left with the OS.

Comment Re:He's got company (Score 1) 442

The Spaniards got into Florida and much of the SouthWest -- but that wasn't where most of the Indian population was.

The English foothold in the North East would never have happened without spreading disease.

The remaining populations were wiped out by Genocide that would make Hitler blush.

Comment Re:He's got company (Score 1) 442

Most Native Americans were wiped out by Yellow Fever, Measles, Chicken Pox, Small Pox and other diseases the Europeans brought;
Same could be said for how the Conquistadors conquered the Aztecs and Mayans. Not military tactics or steel, just dirty, dirty bodies and the immune systems of the Europeans who didn't understand hygiene.

My opinion is that if the Indians had been less cultured, clean and understood medicine a little less, they would have kept the riff-raff from gaining a foothold. To get some perspective, the Indian cities in North America had higher populations than Europe. About 100 million in America vs. 50 million in all of Europe. It's believed that burning trees from Indian populations may have caused the little ice age in Europe -- so there might be karma at play.

It's ironic I'm getting answers from some Yahoo, and they didn't link to Slashdot for the answer.

Comment Re:Trump makes sense again? (Score 0) 442

You understand the Roads and the need for some kind of road building agency because you probably have driven a car.

You MIGHT understand the need for the NRC, because they make sure someone doesn't cut corners and blow you up -- or maybe you think industry would just do that.

Is there waste in these organizations? Maybe. Maybe some of them have been captured by their industries, like our energy resource oversight group that's run by a coal lobbyist.

You have no idea or appreciation for what bureaucrats do. But you turn on your tap and water comes out -- and most places without flame. And you can swim in the river, and you can walk clean streets, and you can I don't know, fly a kite in a park. I worked in marketing at a Financial Services company that sold expensive insurance products -- did I do anything more valuable than someone at any of this agencies in the scheme of things? No. An agency may or may not be useless -- but let's reduce the ones that do harm first -- and after we understand them.

The nature of the economy is that prosperity is NOT created by efficiency. We've lowered wages, pulled the caps off banks and how much a CEO can make and I make less than my dad did 40 years ago. I don't want to live in a corrupt cesspool of government waste any more than a dog-eat-dog free market. But Hell, I'm more worried about being eaten by dogs right now.

The "Fed's Business" is to help Americans prosper. And people employed by these agencies are Americans too -- Beyond that, they might actually provide services that industry might use but NOT invest in in the short term. They might regulate things so that resources are not abused. If nobody regulates fishing -- one company can capture all the shrimp and next years harvest.

I just saw a rationale for an Oil pipeline that would make "thousands of jobs." it would pollute the world, and almost all the profits would pass away through a tax free port in Texas. And then we find it would create about 50 permanent jobs because; hey it's just a big pipe!

Honestly, I just don't know everything about all those agencies do. But I have an inking that you have less of an idea of what purpose they serve and have no idea how you benefit. So why are you bothering everyone with unresearched and unverified data? It's useless ranting.

I realize the irony of making my comment about opinions, and not bringing research -- but that's the bar we've lowered this to, why bother? Whose going to read the well researched links? People without a clue, spouting opinions, and getting voted up by other low information people because it "sounds right" to them.

People getting modded to 5 should have said something I didn't know, something really funny, something inspiring, or something epic. This was just a laundry list of stuff someone doesn't know. "Big government bashing" because you don't know shit about the country you live in nor appreciate that the bridges and pipes are not being replaced and we are coasting on infrastructure created by socialists -- but again, that's my opinion that I could back up with facts and links. War and giant space projects and security is ironically, also government and just as prone to abuse as any other branch.

Comment Re:Trump makes sense again? (Score 0) 442

As I read this comment, without logic or support, it's moderated to a 5 -- on Slashdot???

What's the deal here that moronic comments are getting a 5? Are NeoCons and Tea Baggers chasing off all the people with brains now?

I came to Slashdot because there are geeks here who know a lot more than me. I'd offer an opinion with temerity and respect because it was very likely someone would inform me why X, Y and Z were incorrect, and tell me HOW they derived their conclusions.

Now I feel above average for the wrong reasons, and I have to make useless comments to people who made useless comments.

We need to go into space for national pride -- I get that. But screw off with your half baked, Rush Limbaugh derived talking points. You take the glorious image of bases on the moon or mars, and then throw in your own agenda for screwing over the poor --- as if they wanted to live in constant anxiety about paying the rent and buying food.

It's not a valid connection, and taking care of the Citizens of the USA is the prime justification for the Existence of our Government. Or go to some fascist country where they eat their young, get out of mine.

Comment Re:Trump makes sense again? (Score 0) 442

Pay a living wage and tax super earners and you won't have to complain about "throwing money at the poor."

In fact, the Great Society and the New Deal mostly did fix the problem; people were dying. Old folks were freezing to death. Before the Reagan era, the Homeless problem was almost nonexistent. To be fair; Carter did release a lot of people from mental institutions with no alternative -- but those institutions were pretty messed up warehouses, I'd dare say walking the streets was a better life for a schizophrenic.

Why does the space race have to come out of money we give TO PEOPLE? Take it from war, or handouts to the wealthy. How about not having a bank collapse we have to shell out for every twenty years?

How do you figure $21 Trillion? Is Social Security included? Because people MOSTLY pay into that. Also, workers comp and unemployment insurance; you pay for it when you work.

If the disparity between low paid and high paid weren't over a 1000x, then you MIGHT have a point. But really, no. There are a lot more people trying to get a fair wage than a handout. And I'll be programming, creating digital media and working my butt off for less than the Median wage. People with $200,000 college degrees now are working for $30,000.

They'll need handouts too like food stamps -- and you can inflate that $21 Trillion figure further. And tell us how social programs don't work. Because this is an economy designed for the CEO, not the po.

Comment Re:I'd like to see a comparison (Score 1) 442

I find it interesting that he has the same conclusion despite finding that his statistical basis for the prior conclusion is wrong. Different input, same answer; Damn foreigners!

If you get rid of cheap foreign labor, crops get picked by higher paid Americans or easy to fix super cheap robots. OK, we don't have super cheap robots yet, so prices would go up.

This guy talks about the lawless Mexicans and their government. Well, we could decriminalize drugs and bankrupt those horrible cartels down South. We could change the terms in our trade agreements that we will apply tariffs to items that do not pay higher wages and guarantee worker safety. Good jobs in Mexico -- people stay. Good jobs in Brazil -- people stay.

Rather than threatening them with weapons -- a real diplomat with the trading power of America could certainly FORCE countries to do better by their people.

The problem with the border is completely fixable, but the will is not there because the problem is very PROFITABLE to Archer Daniels Midland, hotel people like Trump, and food processors, sweatshops, developers, and politicians who rabble rouse to do something macho about the situation and get paid by industry to do NOTHING to resolve the situation. If you just closed the doors on companies or at least confiscated a lot of their money for hiring illegals -- that would prevent people from entering.

But do we WANT to really stop them from entering, when they do so much work, don't get SS or workers comp, and stimulate the economy with little fuss? I mean; other than my ideas of fairness and empathy, why am I bothering to stop this? -- I'm not going to pick strawberries. I have no direct down-side to the Latins crossing the border. If they commit a crime against me, I might change my mind. But it's hard to believe that all the "build a wall with the border" folks have all been mugged.

The only people REALLY getting screwed here and living in danger and fear are the poor people coming to the US for the opportunity to feed their families.

Comment Re:I'd like to see a comparison (Score 1) 442

That's it! Play the race card! The first and last resort of everyone who pretends they can't tell the difference between genetics and culture.

It's really worrisome that you bring up genetics and culture. The "criminal element" from Mexico wasn't a problem a few years ago. But how does a person with no education rise up in Mexico without drug trade or kidnapping? Apologies to anyone more familiar with Mexico and perhaps easy to obtain McDonald's franchises.

The people who talk about "Genetic dispositions or superiority" are thinking of breeds of dogs. Dachshunds and Greyhounds have very different, and consistent profiles. The variance in people is far, far less. There is more genetic difference between tribes in Africa, than between whites and blacks in the USA. So humans are like the difference between Labrador and Golden retrievers. I'm comprised of lawless Irish blood, invading Welsh heritage, and a smattering of crazy French. Yet here I am, not running raids into Mexico. Maybe my circumstances have more influence -- who knows?

There are genetic disorders that can very much affect performance of specific people.

But why does Trump (who has lots of Latins working in his hotels for low wages) and people like yourself, worry so much about Mexico? Were not teaming with crime -- except in places where kids get sucked into gangs.

Really, I think we can follow the rise in gangs with the decrease in Unions. Parents are away at work or have broken homes, and the kids see little future and a subsistence living.

Years ago, I was working at a Convention for my company in Vegas. The loading dock and floor were controlled by young men who were all from the Crips gang. The guy who coordinated workers for our convention sat down with the leader at a lunch table that I happened to sit down at without any clue as to the "danger". This guy was Latino if memory serves, and he was covered with Tattoos -- big and muscular. You know what we talked about? Whether his son would be in a gang in the future, economic prospects for his family, and how to have a good quality of life. I respected him (as I do everyone I meet, regardless) and he respected me.

The coordinator told me they paid a "bribe" to the Crips in order that they not rob us during the convention. ON balance, it was a little less than what we'd pay for Union labor in a Chicago convention.

So if this guy had a stable union job, he and his kids might not have to join gangs to have influence. To me, it's always a balance of power and if people can't get fairness legally -- they move outside the law.

If people really want a happy and harmonious America, it starts with not exploiting people and giving everyone a shared interest in being part of society. If people have nothing to lose -- they are dangerous.

You know who reports almost all Muslim extremists who might do damage? Muslims who live in America. The best way to keep Mexicans from being a threat is to put them in a home with a mortgage and a fear of losing the good deal they've got by breaking things.

It works every time. Shared prosperity and opportunity.

Comment Re:I'd like to see a comparison (Score 1) 442

The "illegals" are employed by someone in the USA. So we can solve that problem by punishing the companies that hire -- not the poor shmoe who just wanted to feed his/her family.

It's US policies that prop up governments that have high disparities of income that cause this problem. Now we might not BE the government -- but, well, I probably won't get you to follow down that road. Best to stick to humanity 101 before the tough courses.

*Pew Research reports that only 4% of Central American illegals in the US actually work in agriculture*
Did someone do the stats for "how many produce pickers are NOT from Latin America working as migrant workers or illegals?" Because if you kick them all out -- they'll have to hire all these lazy people who want a living wage and health benefits, and maybe, not to die in the fields.

And the hotels, food processing, and such -- they are also a "small percent of illegals" however, if you ask the question the other way; "What percentage of Chicken Nuggets is produced by illegal Latin Americans?" What are the stats on that?

I just removed some choice comments that should not be part of a "discussion" that should remain congenial. But people like you really try my patience, you really do.

Comment Re:Won't do a thing. (Score 2) 168

That was an awesome quote from Ayn Rand.

But one good quote out of so much dreck is not a redemption of an elitist hack. The smart people and engineers aren't being burdened by the dumb and the poor -- they are being exploited by the owner class.

And Atlas Shrugged would have been better if Rand had had raining fetuses. Keep with a good shtick.

"Today's robots are very primitive, capable of understanding only a few simple instructions such as 'go left', 'go right', and 'build car'." --John Sladek