Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:People support a lot of stupid things (Score 1) 312

by King_TJ (#48944329) Attached to: Most Americans Support Government Action On Climate Change

Well, the big disconnect also comes about because government leaders learned LONG ago that any time you offer to do something new, you start talking about tax increases to pay for it. People get to the point where they accept that's "just how it is", so the debate, each time, turns into one of asking if it's worth paying that much MORE out of your paychecks for whatever proposed improvement or benefit is on the table.

In *reality*, government sits on so many resources, we should probably be at the point where the right question to ask is one of redistribution of their existing budget.

As just one example, up here in the DC area right now, there's a big debate raging because the National Park Service wants to start charging a fee to use the C&O canal "towpath". Basically, this is a 70+ mile long stretch of land that runs along the side of the Potomac River that people use for biking, hiking, jogging, etc. Nobody's even really sure how the heck they'd enforce charging a fee to use it -- but the park services people are all gung-ho to do it anyway. The claim is that with Federal budget cuts, they just don't have the funds to maintain the towpath without enacting fees.

But woah! Wait a minute here! If you look over at the Bureau of Land Management, those folks own a HUGE chunk of the entire West Coast of the U.S. right now, claiming it's land they need to care for and manage. How much of a budget do THEY have?! How about letting a little more of THAT land go back to nature, un-managed, and give that money saved to the National Park Service? That's a much more logical move, IMO, than expecting people to pay to bicycle or hike along a dirt path.

Comment: As others said, pointless project .... (Score 1) 247

by King_TJ (#48924281) Attached to: Engineers Develop 'Ultrarope' For World's Highest Elevator

The fact is, we have no need for building this tall. If the Arab world didn't have more money from oil than they know what to do with, they'd never spend the money on such a project in the first place.

Many of our current skyscrapers have problems with unoccupied rooms/floors, as it is. You can try to recoup money on tourism - but that only makes so much sense. The higher the building, the more you've got invested in heating and cooling, electricity, maintenance, etc. etc. -- just to get the same tourist dollars the "other guy" used to get with his tall building that USED to be the "tallest one" before you beat him.

Carbon fiber technology is worth pursuing, so sure - this has some engineering and scientific interest. But realistically, no ... We've got plenty of space on this planet for people without resorting to these measures.

Comment: And it's ok to admit Jobs was wrong, too.... (Score 4, Insightful) 297

by King_TJ (#48923921) Attached to: The iPad Is 5 Years Old This Week, But You Still Don't Need One

I happen to be one of the people who admires many of Jobs' business decisions and ideas. But he was also known to "overshoot" reality at times, with expectations that went beyond what was reasonable.

I think he was desperately looking for solutions for a "post PC" world, where people would give up traditional computers, in exchange for a superior device. (After all, in the sci-fi "Star Trek" universe, nobody was carrying around a laptop computer, right? The computer was just built in to the environment so you could speak commands to it.)

I really like my iPad, especially since I started taking the train to and from work each day in a 1 hour long commute. It's the ideal device to read the news on, check email, waste time on Facebook, play a casual game or two on, etc. But it's really just a convenience item in the modern world. It's never been anything much more than a big version of Apple's smartphone, without the cellular voice call features.

Comment: Re:Damn, nannies are hypocritical idiots (Score 1) 154

by A nonymous Coward (#48917079) Attached to: Uber Capping Prices During Snowmageddon 2015

Someone else who hasn't bothered actually reading stuff written in support of minimum wage legislation. They make up all sorts of specious claims as to how employers really do have all that money lying around unused, or how the increased pay will spark improved productivity, or how employers will invest in more training for their suddenly-expensive employees .... yada yada yada. All so very simple, by their reckoning, and they are super smart and know so much more about how to run businesses than the actual owners and employers do.

Here's an interesting insight: If I knew of a simple way to make money that required so little investment, I could make a fortune doing so and help others in the process. Yet not a single one of these know-it-alls, these nannies who claim to want to help the poor and unskilled, is willing to put their efforts where their mouth is both make money and help the poor.

Not a single one.

I guess I know how much they believe in their own theories.

Comment: Exactly.... (Score 2) 235

by King_TJ (#48915193) Attached to: White House Drone Incident Exposes Key Security Gap

The word "drone" itself conjures up all sorts of fear in the general public, so of course they're going to milk this situation for all it's worth.

Let's be realistic though... You could probably drive a small radio controlled car up to the front entrance of the White House too, with some payload like a bomb on it -- and that's been possible for long before the toy drones/helicopters were available on the mass market.

There's probably not anything you can or should do about this stuff beyond the systems they've got in place. (A bunch of human beings paid to try to protect the president and the grounds.) New FAA restrictions? That will mean nothing to someone bent on mis-using a drone to cause destruction at the White House!

Comment: Re:Damn, nannies are hypocritical idiots (Score 1) 154

by A nonymous Coward (#48914983) Attached to: Uber Capping Prices During Snowmageddon 2015

You haven't been paying attention if you really believe " I don't think anyone believes the minimum wage will increase demand for workers." There are quite a few who believe exactly that. They seem to think that business owners throw all their profits into a pool like Scrooge McDuck so they can swim in it, and all the pay hikes will come out of those Scrooge McDuck pools.

Comment: Damn, nannies are hypocritical idiots (Score 3, Insightful) 154

by A nonymous Coward (#48913857) Attached to: Uber Capping Prices During Snowmageddon 2015

They tax booze, tobacco, and anything fun, and raise tariffs, expressly to reduce demand. They subsidize whatever they want more of, to nudge people and to reward cronies.

Yet they think raising the minimum wage will increase the demand for low skill workers, they think wage and price controls will reduce demand and increase supply, they think capping surge pricing will increase supply and reduce demand, on and on the hypocrisy goes.

Just go away, nannies. Go away.

Comment: Another vote for the Performance MX mouse! (Score 1) 429

by King_TJ (#48902053) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Where Can You Get a Good 3-Button Mouse Today?

I've used a *lot* of different mice out there, and I keep settling on Logitech's MX series as one of my favorites.
I used to have their MX1000 laser mouse, and then the MX Revolution .... and now the Performance Mouse MX.

My only complaint about these mice is that the black rubber "grippy" areas on the sides where you rest your fingers wears off after a while in spots, making the mouse look pretty ragged/beat-up at that point, even if it's still functional otherwise.

I also preferred the MX Revolution's charging cradle to the current design where you just plug a micro-USB cable into the front of the mouse to recharge it. (I find the micro USB cable to be a bit difficult to get inserted just right, and I have a feeling it will be one of the things that breaks first on this mouse.)

What I'd really like to see, though, is a bluetooth version of one of these. If you're a Mac user (especially of a notebook like the Air which doesn't have a lot of ports), a bluetooth mouse makes much more sense than wasting a USB port with a wireless receiver dongle. But there's VERY little available in the way of quality bluetooth mice. HP makes a couple of Z series BT mice, but the more expensive ($60 or so) one that tries to look like an Apple product (complete with gesture support on the flat top surface) fails to impress. Other than it's promised long battery life, it was nothing but negatives when I tried it. Gesture support is jerky and overly sensitive, unlike Apple's own Magic Mouse -- and the buttons start acting up where they stick when pressed or fail to register when pressed. The cheaper black Z series BT mouse from HP actually feels more comfortable in my hand and works better as a standard mouse (no fancy gesture support or slim line buttons that don't work right). BUT, drop it on the floor even once and expect it to blow up into pieces all over the floor.

Comment: Re:Why is the DMV kowtowing to a commercial busine (Score 1) 216

I think you're looking at this from the wrong angle, myself.

Someone deciding to make some extra money on the side driving for Uber doesn't need a "commercial license" from the DMV! What they probably DO need is a special car insurance policy or rider that covers the situation.

Just like if I upgrade my car with a fancy, multi-thousand dollar stereo system -- I can't expect my auto insurance to cover its replacement cost if it's stolen. They're going to say, "Sorry buddy. We insured you based on the standard equipment we know comes with the particular make and model of vehicle you insured with us." They WILL however, let me pay extra to itemize what's in it and get that covered as additional coverage.

The auto insurance company who starts marketing a reasonably priced insurance rider specifically for folks doing "ride sharing" will find it very profitable and popular.

Comment: Re:CA requires commercial licenses for pickup truc (Score 4, Interesting) 216

Wow! Really?!

That's just one more argument against living in California then.

IMO, the *real* reason for commercial licenses was the concept that commercial drivers are driving much larger vehicles that require special training/skills to operate safely on the roadways. (Your average licensed driver can't just hop into an 18-wheeler and operate it. They'd likely not even be able to figure out the transmission with as many gear as it has!) And the ability to properly back one up into a loading dock isn't something that comes without training either.

A vehicle anyone buys at a regular car dealership and uses as a "daily driver" for things like commuting or trips to the grocery store should NOT require a commercial license.

The states ALL want tax revenue, but there are ways to go about it that make relative degrees of common sense to citizens. When they start making unreasonable, illogical demands, it's time to get that changed or consider moving to a more reasonable place.

There's no future in time travel.