Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Wait... wha? (Score 1) 1482

by atriusofbricia (#46634101) Attached to: OKCupid Warns Off Mozilla Firefox Users Over Gay Rights

If you think same-sex couples should be discriminated against, you're a bigot,and debating bigots is as pointless as debating creationists or climate science denialists.

Point of order, surely you're not attempting to equate Equal Rights Under the Law with scientific disagreement. Surely you're not trying to say that saying that some people are more equal than others and disagreeing on anthropogenic climate change are the same thing. You're not, right?

One can be debated, the other cannot.

Comment: Re:What an asshole. (Score 1) 606

by atriusofbricia (#46346235) Attached to: 'Google Buses' Are Bad For Cities, Says New York MTA Official

So how do explain people coming in and building giant expensive buildings in the city? The number of condos going up in my hood is insane. I guess they didn't the memo about rent control stopping them from making a decent profit. Only like 2% percent of the apartments are rent controlled.

Have you even looked for a decent apartment in the city? Because usually people that say " only way you can get a decent apartment is practically if someone dies." mostly know the city from watching Seinfeld episodes.

I will admit I have not. Of course, that's because no one would be willing to pay me what I'd require to work in "the city" let alone live there. I'd prefer to live in the part of the US which respects all my Rights and not just the ones they feel like respecting today.

An admittedly quick bit of research indicates that for more than it costs to buy a house with an acre of land where I live you can get yourself a 1 bedroom 1 bath cracker box in various parts of "the city". I'd rather not pay more and get one quarter the space.

Also, when you say "the city" as if it is the only city in the world it sounds all kinds of pretentious and self-important.

Comment: Re:What an asshole. (Score 1) 606

by atriusofbricia (#46335491) Attached to: 'Google Buses' Are Bad For Cities, Says New York MTA Official

Cost of living in NYC, by which I mean a place to live, is sky high because of a combination of lack of physical space on the ground and rent control. There's no point in building giant expensive and nice apartment buildings when the government will just come in and force you to rent it out for far less than it ought to cost. Therefore supply is choked off, shortages result and the only way you can get a decent apartment is practically if someone dies.

Without rent control things would most likely still eventually get expensive because of lack of real estate but you'd also likely have people trying to build more options whereas right now what's the point?

Comment: Re:Business decisions should not be altruistic (Score 4, Insightful) 606

by atriusofbricia (#46335329) Attached to: 'Google Buses' Are Bad For Cities, Says New York MTA Official

make it worth their while. ... quit asking them to do things that are not in their best interest.

And that narrow view sums up the problem. Where is your sense of social responsibility? Or if not that, can you at least muster some enlightened self interest? You know, the thought that improving a neighborhood is in fact in your own interest, and that just moving into a neighborhood will improve it? That's assuming the business isn't one of those irresponsible sorts that sets a bad example by spewing pollution into the environment and then walking away from the mess they made, leaving it for the public or natural processes to clean up.

Except that spending my money to improve a crap hole neighborhood is almost certainly not in my best interests. It would cost far more money, have far greater risks and likely benefit me not at all beyond a PR move. Building a new corporate HQ in a blighted area is almost always going to be a moronically bad idea for nearly everyone concerned except the city which gets to tax you to hell and gone for the privilege. On top of that you're almost certainly going to have greater security concerns and far higher crime rates to deal with.

Can you imagine the recruiting message for getting new employees to work at said HQ? Come work in beautiful downtown Crimeville! AKs provided for your security! Only 12 muggings this week!

Yep, awesome idea.

Comment: Re:Based on what? (Score 1) 888

by atriusofbricia (#46252179) Attached to: Star Trek Economics

Out here in the real world wealth is created by the process of work and innovation among other things. Wealth is not this finite pool where if I have more then you have less.

What an idealistic little world YOU live in.

Out here in the real world, wealth is hoarded, scammed, and crushed from those who can't afford to defend themselves against well-funded corporate legal teams. The rich get richer. Everyone else gets the shaft.

The American^H^H^H^H^H^HCapitalist Dream is a lie. The statistics paint a pretty grim picture about our so-called "economic mobility". Sure it's there, but it's mostly in the downward direction.

You're right, wealth is not a finite pool. It's a seesaw with a endless buffet in the middle. The big fat asses on one end of the seesaw make sure that they continue to stuff their faces so more and more food comes to them while everyone else is held helpless at the other end watching the gluttony.

Bitter much? I and several people I know worked their way well into the middle, if not upper middle, class by our own hard work and talent after starting out anywhere from poor to dirt poor. You can take your defeatist attitude and go right back to the sad little world you live in and continue hating on those who can and do make something of themselves.

As wealth is not finite, thanks for conceding that right off the bat, it cannot be hoarded therefore my point is correct and everything you said is defeated by that admission. QED. If you think that the American Dream is a lie then that too is your problem. Those who come here every day to live that Dream don't need people like you trying to drag them down.

Most people in this world who are well off got there by hard work and talent. If you can't hack it, that's your problem and not one that is the fault of the system or anything else or would you rather just take from those who can create and make? What a sad, gray and terrible world you live in.

Comment: Re:Based on what? (Score 4, Insightful) 888

by atriusofbricia (#46246475) Attached to: Star Trek Economics

You could suggest that it's still scarcity, but defining scarcity on an individual or even local level is a bit strange given the fairly globally connected world we live in.

You mean... a scarcity which is not natural? Artificial scarcity?

People are poor because other people can be, and want to be, rich, at the expense of other people if necessary.

There will never be any such thing as a "post scarcity" economy until humans stop being humans.

So, in your world wealth is finite and if I have more then by definition it is because I, directly or indirectly, took it from someone that has less? What a dreary and depressing little world you live in.

Out here in the real world wealth is created by the process of work and innovation among other things. Wealth is not this finite pool where if I have more then you have less.

There will never be a post scarcity economy until we figure out a way for virtually limitless energy. Not very cheap, but limitless and the ways to use it to directly provide goods. That is what makes the Federation run and allows people to work more or less only when they want to. The combination of replicators and limitless energy, which at this point may as well be magic. Coincidentally magic is pretty much required to make any socialist utopia run for too long so I guess one ought not be surprised.

One thing that is never answered in the ST universe is why would anyone want to be a waiter in a restaurant (or similar service job)? They show them from time to time but the number of people who feel their true calling in life is to bring people food and deal with crappy attitudes is vanishingly small so where do they come from?

Comment: Re:how many products? (Score 1) 298

by atriusofbricia (#46130321) Attached to: Price of Amazon Prime May Jump To $119 a Year

Yeah, right now at $79 I just keep letting my Prime membership auto-renew because a) I'm lazy, and b) it does save me a little at Christmastime. But their video catalog is pretty limited - much of what I've tried to watch is TV shows where, it turns out, they've only included a few episodes you can access without paying more. And their Kindle Lending Library is likewise pretty limited - it's "all the Harry Potter books plus hundreds of authors you'll never want to read".

Really, even at $79 it's hard to justify. There's not a whole lot I *must* get in two days...

I'll probably just not renew this time around - free ground shipping is good enough. And, if they further limit that, I'll probably start frequenting other online stores. Pretty much everyone is on the web now; I just currently default to Amazon because of the "free" shipping.

Either you don't buy much in the way of electronics, or you live in a place with lots of options. I do buy a fair bit and live in a place where the best computer store is Best Buy. Sure, I could wait days and days for something to show up (and still pay for even that likely) or with Prime I can order as late as Thursday and have it no later than Saturday.

Given the alternative for someone in my position is to wait up to a week for something to show up, or buy it locally at highly inflated prices and just take whatever the local stores feel like carrying it's a pretty simple thing.

Newegg wants to charge 23 bucks to ship anything over night. Prime will do it for 3.99 and you only have to do that a handful of times for Prime to pay for itself.

Of course, YMMV.

Comment: Re:even a broken clock... (Score 2) 523

by atriusofbricia (#46070751) Attached to: RNC Calls For Halt To Unconstitutional Surveillance

Both factors make feedback cycles more rapid & precise. I wouldn't be surprised at all, if evidence existed that those poor backward horse-riding founders could conceive of this.

But again, this was very much a function of the state of technology and the limitations of travel and communications at the time. The feedback cycle today can be instantaneous, across the country. And while state representatives live closer to those they represent, that's not a function of state power. Members of Congress live near those they represent. We could have no recognition of states or any state governments and still have federal government representatives distributed across the US, representing people.

State and local government does lend itself to backwardness, which is probably why conservatives gravitate to it. The founders should be admired for the country they created, however if you brought them back today they wouldn't know what a computer is, what a semi automatic weapon was and why somebody shot up a movie theater with one, why all the homosexuals aren't in prison, and why there are so many free slaves walking around.

The giant difference is the amount of influence you have against your city or State government is far far greater than you do against anyone in Fed.gov. Depending on the size of the city you're in your Mayor may care what you personally think and say. The President of the US cares not one little bit what you personally think and your Senator's likely care little more. You're a number among millions and they are going to be far more influenced by someone down on K Street than you.

That's the point in the end. Your direct power over someone in the Fed.gov is very limited simply as a function of numbers. Your direct power over your State rep is far greater and in the end if your State sucks in your mind, you can relatively easily move to one that matches your view points. Don't like the conservatism of the Mid-west for instance, move to California or vice versa. The Founders reasonably foresaw this and they may have no idea what a computer was but that doesn't make the Federal system they crafted antiquated and we are poorer for having moved from it. They might wonder why there were so many "free slaves walking around" (or not, as many of them were abolitionists or proto-abolutionists) but they definitely would wonder why in the world we had let Fed.gov become the out of control leviathan it is and how in the world it has been allowed to reach into the life of every last man, woman and child.

Comment: Re:even a broken clock... (Score 1, Insightful) 523

by atriusofbricia (#46070639) Attached to: RNC Calls For Halt To Unconstitutional Surveillance

A budget that can't be passed by the Senate and won't be signed by the President is not a real budget. It's a hope that they can still get reelected in their gerrymandered districts and still remain relevant.

Sorry, no. That logic would only apply if the budget were insane and passed by the House specifically to fail. In any case, if the Senate thought the budget was crazy they should have taken it up and voted it down. Instead they simply said "meh" to their Constitutional duties and ignored the budget for years and years.

Their bloody job is to take it up, vote it up or down and/or amend and return it. Not to bloody ignore it so they can avoid going on the record.

Comment: Re:Google plus (Score 3, Informative) 244

by atriusofbricia (#45940835) Attached to: Bennett Haselton: Google+ To Gmail Controversy Missing the Point

"Not only is G+ not forced upon you, at all, but it's one of the easiest social services to delete your account from, removing ALL your history (every post, every reply, every picture, every single trace of your existence). And to top it off, it allows you, before you delete your account, to download a .zip file of all your posts, if you want."

Says the AC with no link.

IT certainly has been forced on me and if there is an option to delete it short of deleting my accounts on gmail and youtube (which seem to have been merged without my consent) in the process it's far from obvious.

Odd, I was able to search and find a delete your google plus link easily. I do agree that it is slightly annoying they don't have a check box to not create the G+ profile but it isn't like they automatically fill it out and push everything into it. You have to manually go to G+ and finish the process if you want it, delete it if you don't.

The poster's stalker premise is also pretty silly. If I'm being stalked am I really going to be dumb enough to create accounts with my actual name on them? The whole thing still strikes me as a tempest in a teapot.

Comment: Re:price (Score 1) 110

by atriusofbricia (#45926319) Attached to: Dell Joins Steam Machine Initiative With Alienware System

Agree with everything... Though, who actually checks system requirements these days unless you know your machine is so marginal that it isn't even funny. I'll grant maybe I'm not the average, maybe I'm blinded by my own experiences and resources, but unless you're wanting to play Crysis at won't most people's normal machines handle the vast vast majority of games without even blinking?

Am I wrong here?

Comment: Re:Overreach (Score 1) 366

by atriusofbricia (#45875185) Attached to: The SEC Is About To Make Crowdfunding More Expensive

Because clearly the solution to this problem, like all problems, is ever more government intrusion. Big Brother must be allowed to protect us morons from ourselves. Someone has to do it, no?

Even the strongest libertarians believe that preventing fraud is a legitimate roll for government. Of course if you aren't a libertarian then I guess that won't mean all that much to you.

I'm not totally sure that's the case though. I'm sure many would see the necessary powers to do that as a gross intrusion. One may not like it but the freedom to succeed includes the freedom to fail. The freedom to spend your money as you see fit includes the freedom to possibly be defrauded out of it. That sucks, but the alternative is that government monitor and approve directly or otherwise every single transaction or at least the conditions under which those transactions take place. I have a hard time imagining a libertarian granting government the power to do that, no?

Comment: Re:Overreach (Score 1) 366

by atriusofbricia (#45870471) Attached to: The SEC Is About To Make Crowdfunding More Expensive

The point of the Interstate Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution was to cut through regulations and to prevent states from prohibiting commercial activity between states. It was there to stop things like the tariff wars that happened between New York & New Jersey that nearly started the U.S. Civil War a few decades earlier with the fighting across the Hudson River instead of the Mason & Dixon line. How something designed to prevent a shooting war ends up regulating somebody trying to make a YouTube movie is utterly stupid.

Agreed. It is an excellent example of the true nature of government. It grows and gobbles up power unless something comes along to stop it. Once SCOTUS ruled that the ICC was pretty much the blank check you mentioned there was nothing left to limit Congress from doing whatever the hell it wanted as long as it could some how or another tie it to either commerce or the market in general.

Comment: Re:Overreach (Score 3) 366

by atriusofbricia (#45870453) Attached to: The SEC Is About To Make Crowdfunding More Expensive

This is all about small time investors and the attitude that somebody with a spare hundred dollars is incapable of being able to make an informed decision about a potential investment opportunity.

This is about making sure that somebody with a spare hundred dollars has the bare minimum information available to make an informed decision. It is analogous to standardized labeling requirements on groceries.

Because clearly the solution to this problem, like all problems, is ever more government intrusion. Big Brother must be allowed to protect us morons from ourselves. Someone has to do it, no?

Comment: Re:FSF does free; they do step one, others step tw (Score 3, Interesting) 340

by atriusofbricia (#45739775) Attached to: Free Software Foundation Endorses a "Truly Free" Laptop

> no understanding of the importances of "just works"

That's not their part of the job.

Various entities can label something as user-friendly. FSF is pretty much the only entity that can label stuff as free.

This is one laptop. Hopefully next year there'll be twenty, and then someone can take on the job of announcing which is the most user-friendly of the twenty free laptops.

I'd take issue with them nominating themselves as the one true source, but that's neither here nor there. The real question is whether people will be willing to pay exorbant prices for relatively ancient hardware on the grounds that it very slightly increases the amount of "freedom" they have. Given that 99.95% of people will have no idea what this is about and further wouldn't care if they did (as we're talking about an increase that is difficult if not impossible to measure and arguably doesn't exist) I wouldn't hold your breath on this becoming anything more than an isolated instance.

In short, unless one can prove that even a tiny percentage of computer BIOSes and the like are phoning home or contacting the NSA with daily activity reports exactly no one, on the grand scale, will care. It reminds me of all the efforts to create a "free" CPUs or graphics cards in the past. Sure, you could do it and have them as long as you're okay with 10 or 15 year old technology that is incapable of doing anything that is currently useful. But it's Free! :D

1: No code table for op: ++post

Working...