Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Are you kidding (Score 3, Interesting) 796

by roman_mir (#46765505) Attached to: Study Finds US Is an Oligarchy, Not a Democracy

You are correct in that the Republicans in the USA are not actually free market capitalists, which is what USA is supposed to be - a free market capitalist Republic.

Republicans are not different from Democrats in that they have their own constituents and those are the people that are tightly connected to the government and the Federal reserve is sponsoring them.

Unfortunately for the USA (and really for the world in general) USA Republic has degenerated into a 'democracy', which really only means that the majority of people are kept in the dark of who is truly running the show, but that is the problem with the mob, the collective, you can't have a democracy that does not degenerate into oligarchy, because the people are stupid and will vote against their self interest, however when I say that I do NOT mean what the average /.er means. I do NOT mean that voting for free market capitalism is voting against your own self interest, quite the contrary. An average (not one of the top wealthiest people) person should always vote LIBERTARIAN (or more correctly - free market capitalist, whatever that is. It can be a libertarian or it can be an anarcho capitalist or an objectivist, doesn't really matter much which one of those).

However the mob votes for the short term satisfaction that is promised by any lizard politician and the end result is always the same: the politicians end up with all the power, the individuals end up stripped of their rights and of their property, basically of their right to pursue happiness on their own terms.

The politicians end up gatekeepers for the top most connected people, the government is a mafia that uses threat of violence to destroy individual freedoms and sell them to the top bidders.

Free market capitalist republic (or even a benevolent dictatorship, like Singapore) works to improve the conditions for all people by allowing the true private property rights and self determination, people work to improve their own situation and as a result they increase the overall wealth in the system. The top wealthiest people do NOT need free market capitalism, they are just fine within a system that is corrupt, they can afford to purchase the gate keepers.

It is the middle class and the POOREST of the people that benefit from free market capitalism, they get the lowest prices and the biggest selection of all products and services that the system builds.

19th century USA was a very good example of what free market capitalist system does to improve the standard of living for all people, not for the richest people, but for everybody. The standard of living was rising faster than at any other time in history because of the freedom, private property rights, the rule of law (rule of law means applying laws equally to everybody regardless of their personal circumstance, that is true justice and morality, not what the mob thinks morality and justice are).

Today that example is found in Singapore, Hong Kong, Switzerland, China, but actually the Scandinavian countries have been on the correct path for the last 20 years, since the time they started moving in the right direction 20 years ago, when they finally destroyed their economies with socialism. Today they are much more capitalistic and responsible (have little to no debt) than the so called 'capitalist' nations like the USA.

Of-course currently the ECONOMIC STUPIDITY is reaching some insane local maximum, with the vast majority of the population believing in nonsense, Keynesianism, socialism, welfare state, other such equally destructive patterns of behaviour, so for example in Switzerland there will be a referendum to attempt and introduce a minimum wage and a welfare system, those are huge mistakes and the only reason the Swiss can even talk about it is the fact that they grew their economy so much in an actual free market capitalist system, so now they just may be ready to start destroying it with the socialist nonsense.

In any case, as I said, people are very very stupid, the majority have no clue about the economics and how it works and what is in fact in their best interest. The special socialist groups that benefit from the dependency state and from poverty (they thrive on the poverty votes and movements) are using so much propaganda on the general population, that at this point average economic intelligence is probably the lowest in history of human kind. The cavemen understood economics much better than the current population, at least the cavemen didn't buy into demand side nonsense, they knew that they had to produce stuff to enjoy higher standard of living.

I don't have any illusions about the people around me, they are stupid, economically illiterate, they act against their long term self interest and they will fight to keep that nonsense going, so from my perspective right now it makes complete sense to try and live outside of any established system of nations and states, to structure affairs in a way that would minimise the damage by the political systems established in the vast majority of the world today. Be smart, don't ground yourself, ensure that your assets are global, not local, ensure that your business is never tied to the place where you are supposed to pay taxes, pay attention to how it is done by the people that know what they are doing, etc. etc.

Comment: Re:Simple problem, simple solution (Score 0, Flamebait) 356

by roman_mir (#46762747) Attached to: San Francisco's Housing Crisis Explained

Up until the 1970s we could build like craz

... ask yourself a question, why is it that everything in USA was done "up until the 1970s" and then all of a sudden there was a gigantic decline (from building, to meaningful manufacturing jobs, to wage disparity, to ability to afford anything, etc.etc.etc.)?

So what is it that happened in the 70s that changed the USA economy so much? 1971 - Nixon defaults on the gold US dollar. The reason? Inflation that was caused by the Fed, all the massive government that could never be paid for with any amount of taxes (never mind the insane tax rates before that time).

It's the government, my dear, USA government has destroyed USA economy.

Comment: it IS safer (Score 2) 580

by roman_mir (#46761383) Attached to: How Does Heartbleed Alter the 'Open Source Is Safer' Discussion?

What if this was not 'OpenSSL' but instead it was some form of 'ClosedSSL' library that had this problem in it?

NSA would still have access to THAT code, you can bet your ass they would, they wouldn't leave a project like that alone. However nobody else would know (unless stumbling upon it by chance or being able to access the source OR if some insider SOLD that information to somebody on the outside and now you'd have a vulnerability that is exploited by the gov't and by shadiest of the organisations/people out there).

This does not change the discussion in terms of open source code being safer, this changes the discussion around certain practices of development / testing and also this may attract more attention of people towards the SECURITY of our information on the Internet and hopefully we'll move in the direction of working out the details of actually much more SECURE methods of communications.

I certainly have a few ideas of my own that I would like to implement now, but never mind that. The point is that this is good stuff, it finally shed a light on this topic, that should have had much more light on it for a much longer period of time in the first place.

We need better methods around building security within our systems and I think this raises the bar.

Comment: Re:Grudgingly reluctantly... (Score 1) 385

by roman_mir (#46761163) Attached to: Slashdot Asks: How Do You Pay Your Taxes?

By the way, if we are already on the topic of taxes, anybody who is interested should listen to this show, not only does it discuss the illegality of taxes, but also it provides some insight on what the USA citizens doing today to reduce their taxes (offshore accounts, etc.etc.)

Americans, you need to listen to this of-course, you should eliminate your federal government, a good step towards that (before you end up shooting the bastards) is to stop paying your taxes.

Comment: Re:Grudgingly reluctantly... (Score 1, Funny) 385

by roman_mir (#46758281) Attached to: Slashdot Asks: How Do You Pay Your Taxes?

You are wrong, but that's your right to be wrong.

USA government is unconstitutional, it has abandoned the principles upon which the Republic was established. There are no private property rights anymore. This started with the Sherman's act and continued into everything, from income taxes themselves, IRS, the Fed destroying the value of the people's savings, all of the departments, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, ACA, payroll taxes, every type of income related tax of-course.

The correct thing to do is to remove USA federal government from power, which it usurped illegally and unconstitutionally and it must be removed from power immediately, by force and with extreme prejudice. Of-course this means that people must not give up any of its earnings to the central mafia that is known as the federal government.

Comment: Re:Private sector and efficiency. (Score -1) 103

by roman_mir (#46742247) Attached to: Why the IETF Isn't Working

The point is you are an ignoramus of enormous proportions. The rise in wealth in USA was due to the so called 'robber barons', which created entire new industries and allowed the economy to flourish around them. The 'trust busting' was the beginning of the DESTRUCTION of the economy, as it started destroying the principles of private property rights. Government destroys the economy, it doesn't create it, the economy has to be created first for it to be destroyed by the government, and the private sector in the USA built a mighty economy that it took the growing USA government this long to destroy it.

Comment: Re:no one would HIRE them, either (Score -1) 578

by roman_mir (#46727077) Attached to: Michael Bloomberg: You Can't Teach a Coal Miner To Code

So once again, if you want a 'socially responsible' company that you think will survive being exactly what you want it to be, set one up and do with it as you wish. You want OTHER people to do something for you, well, tough, other people shouldn't be forced to hire you or do anything for you that you believe you are entitled to and you believe they are obligated.

I run a company, I hire people the way I want to hire people, I fire people the way I want to fire people. I provide my employees with this information upfront, it's their choice to take or not to take the job. I tell them exactly what I will pay them and if they don't like it, they are 100% free to find some other guy to work for. I have no interest in anything you call 'social responsibility', in fact I do not believe in such nonsense in the first place. I only have responsibility to myself and I have responsibility to be HONEST with people I hire, that's all.

You think there should be some other responsibility: take your own money and start your own company to provide that. That's not why I run my company, YMMV.

Comment: Re:no one would HIRE them, either (Score 0) 578

by roman_mir (#46726397) Attached to: Michael Bloomberg: You Can't Teach a Coal Miner To Code

we have a major problem with companies not being socially responsible. they don't care that an aging population is being wholesale REJECTED by corporate america and worse than that, local US born and raised citizens are second class, now; with imported labor or outsourced labor being first class.

- so, TheGratefulNet, start your own company and hire whoever you like. Once you do that, you'll quickly figure out that you can't survive as a company, hiring unskilled labor at minimum wage labor prices, having to deal with payroll taxes, medicare (ACA now), income taxes and all the other taxes and that's AFTER you having to figure out what exactly you will be using your savings (or borrowed capital) to build as a software company.

Good luck.

Comment: Re:Level of public funding ? (Score -1) 292

by roman_mir (#46721167) Attached to: Nat Geo Writer: Science Is Running Out of "Great" Things To Discover

Level of public science funding should be precisely 0 (that would be zero, as in nothing at all). The Internet would have existed regardless, individual people must not be forced to become slaves to the collective even to publicly fund science or health or education or food or anything, not even little cute orphans should be publicly funded, there is 0 authorisation for any of this and there should be 0 authorisation for any of this and if YOU want to fund something, that's what you have YOUR OWN bank account and you can set up a charity to donate to your particular cause.

Comment: Re:Corporations are not people (Score 0) 139

Lock them up for what?

In Russia big business does NOT happen without involvement of government officials, who all EXPECT bribes and will NOT allow you to build your business if you do not pay them what they want.

So HP or whoever it is, if they want to deal in Russia they will be paying bribes to the politicians, there is no way around it at all. You can either do big business in Russia and as an ABSOLUTE requirement you will pay bribes, or you can forget about that market completely.

But hey, if you are talking about locking up the POLITICIANS that expect bribes, then I am 100% with you.

Comment: Illegal to work (Score 0) 477

by roman_mir (#46713989) Attached to: New French Law Prohibits After-Hours Work Emails

So what this law does is preventing people who want to do more from doing it, making it illegal for people who want to climb the corporate ladder faster from attempting that.

I am sure that the French will figure out a simple way around this law, after all if an employer sets up a newsgroup and posts to it after hours, who can prevent employees that are interested in reading what the boss posts from subscribing?

Comment: Re:Mismanagement (Score 0) 163

by roman_mir (#46685385) Attached to: It's Time To Plug the Loopholes In Pipeline Regulation

except maybe individuals who also happen to be in control of large companies/corporations

- precisely. You want to destroy individual rights, and people that own/run/operate companies are individuals, whose rights you want to destroy, so I understood you quite correct then. No, none of any business, regardless of its size and industry should be regulated, quite the opposite. There should be 0 regulations, 0 licenses, 0 income related taxes, 0 government intrusion into our individual lives, only that prevents corruption that is inherent in systems that attempt to regulate for the 'good of the society'. Everything and anything that starts 'for the good of the society' ends up being for the destruction of the individual and as I said earlier, society that is willing to sacrifice individual rights has 0 entitlement to exist, it has no purpose, there is no purpose for us, individuals to create societies and civilizations that destroy our own individual rights.

Society is only a concept, individuals are actually living breathing creatures and as living breathing creatures we need to prevent collectivist concepts from destroying our rights to be free people.

As to nuclear power being anathema: that's the problem with government regulating business, including regulations of nuclear power in the first place. The collective is using government supplied violence to prevent individuals from their own attempts at nuclear power plants and that is what should be stopped - government and the mob should be stopped, not individuals.

Real computer scientists don't comment their code. The identifiers are so long they can't afford the disk space.