Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Classic Obama - you guy are naive indeed (Score 1) 211

I rather expected this.

You guys really have some learning to do. Obama promises very vague things, fundamental change or fix the XXX, and you read into it what YOU want rather than asking him for specifics. As long as you let your leaders get away with this sort of shenanigan you're going to be disappointed much or most of the time. "Patent reform" is another vague declaration. Patent reform to limit or eliminate patent trolling is specific. Patent reform to make it easier to obtain frivolous patents and use then for trolling is specific. Which one do you read into the statement, "I intend to see that the patent system is reformed?" Which one do you think will happen in reality?

Demand the specifics of your owners er legislators and POTUS. Then hold them to the specifics. Until you do you are going to be owned by the government rather than you being the government's owner. You should face any government officials with some strong well earned cynicism.

{^_^}

Comment: Re:Fundamental reform? (Score 1) 148

It would be nice if "fundamental reform" was defined, wouldn't it? I basically do not trust vague platitudes such as "fundamental reform". They must tell me specifically what they plan. Is it more government to "protect me" or is it "get the friggin' government out of my face?"

I've rather had it up to here with oppressively huge government. Let's try small government for a change. It worked when we did it that way. It's better than "more of the same old same old" we've been doing of late, R and D both.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

{^_^}

Comment: What could possibly go wrong? (Score 1) 322

by Wizardess (#47189355) Attached to: Fixing China's Greenhouse Gas Emissions For Them

This sounds SO good, clean, and to the point. But there are holes in this picture.

But, what could possibly go wrong?

For example, what does the world do if China turns around and hurriedly constructs a hundred Chernobyl style reactors for power?

I'm surprised nobody (moderated high enough to matter) here has asked that obvious question. This is simply an application of the general rule that no good deed goes unpunished or the old cliche about the road to Hell being paved with good intentions.

So, yes, I really am wondering, "What could possibly go wrong?" I wonder because as a pessimist I figure the worst possible thing will go wrong if you apply a nuclear weapon to digging a hole in the ground.

{^_^}

Comment: Re:Even higher! (Score 2, Interesting) 1040

by Wizardess (#47153557) Attached to: Seattle Approves $15 Per Hour Minimum Wage

Communism leads to dead retirees if not babies, dear. They are on a fixed income. Seattle has just doubled what it will cost them to go out for a dinner or a coffee. If all they get is social security you've just constrained them to their homes. Oh wait, they can't even live there because the prices of the food they eat are going to go up. The prices of the gasoline they use to get out of the city to saner purchasing climes goes up. All prices go up. How about making sure those on a Social Security income have their income go up accordingly?

If the current minimum wage is not worth working to receive why do people work? They have welfare to fall back upon? It sets a very effective and practical minimum wage? Oh, you say these are young people of school age trying to build up work resumes of any kind possible so they can move on to better paying jobs? Hm, will they be able to get the resume job (hey, he actually is willing to work) with the higher cost for their unproven (or proven barely adequate) labor?

Minimum wage has a lot of "feel good" associated with it. Now sit down and build the logic tree for what happens next, with real people involved not fantasy idealized people.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

{^_^}

Comment: Far better would be capturing the leaders (Score 0) 433

by Wizardess (#47064939) Attached to: U.S. Drone Attack Strategy Against Al-Qaeda May Be Wrong

It would be far better to capture the leaders and use the information we can get from them to unwind the organization from the top. But that means soldiers might get killed doing something constructive rather than for trivia as we've been doing in Afghanistan. With drone attacks there is no danger some terrorist might get a bent pinkie fingernail and scream about it. There is also no danger we'd actually be able to stop the threats.

Color me cynical about the twits in DC.

{^_^}

Comment: Re:Yes, for any mission (Score 1) 307

by Wizardess (#46674921) Attached to: Should NASA Send Astronauts On Voluntary One-Way Missions?

There is a downside to that?

NASA has outlived its usefulness to society. We need to start over without all the old baggage. Note that our first astronauts were sent into dangers we did not fully understand. They also understood that the chances of their deaths were not negligible. They went anyway. Some died. Most did not. These days NASA could never deliver men to the Moon when faced with the same odds as they faced in the 60s. We need an old NASA equivalent with intestinal fortitude rather than paralysis by fear of failure.

{O.O}

Comment: Re:I think this is bullshit (Score 0) 1746

by Wizardess (#46658903) Attached to: Brendan Eich Steps Down As Mozilla CEO

Um, the CEO of a corporation is employed by the board of directors and ultimately the shareholders. That said the CEO is in charge of everything else related to the day to day operation of the company. So the hiring (and firing) is his responsibility usually delegated to various high level employees in Human Resources.

In this specific case there is no evidence he ever acted against the inclusive culture of the Mozilla projects. Yet he is being hounded into losing his job by a collection of ravening hyenas. Shame.

{^_^}

Google

Google Argues Against Net Neutrality 555

Posted by Soulskill
from the here-is-your-internet-connection-but-don't-use-it-for-internet dept.
An anonymous reader sends this quote from an article at Wired: "In a dramatic about-face on a key internet issue yesterday, Google told the FCC (PDF) that the network neutrality rules Google once championed don't give citizens the right to run servers on their home broadband connections, and that the Google Fiber network is perfectly within its rights to prohibit customers from attaching the legal devices of their choice to its network."

Don't steal; thou'lt never thus compete successfully in business. Cheat. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...