Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:A Tad Expensive. (Score 1) 456

$160k sounds like a pretty low price for builting a house. In 2013 the average construction costs for a new home in the USA seemed to be just shy of $250k


It looks like materials cost about half of this ($146k) according to http://www.fixr.com/costs/buil... so even if you did everything yourself, building a typical house for $160k seems like a bargain.

Good god. I don't need a 2500 sqft mansion, and $125 per is including total contracted out. I'd do most of the work myself so I can get a house better than contractor grade for at least half that. Really the only thing I'd need to contract out would be the foundation and brickwork if I wanted brick.

Comment Re:Think? (Score 1) 522

No sewage runs, just water lines. In fact, they've even had to put water towers out there to keep pressure up. There are some house out there, so that was probably the main justification for water lines and towers, but the camp lines are miles away from any house and on dead-end lines. They end the line at the end of the road or last camp that paid to have the line connected. My uncles camp is about a quarter mile from the previous camp. The next camp out wanted to stick to his well, so the line ends right in front of my uncles camp. He only paid around $100 to have it run down there and a meter put in. Three camps on that five or six mile stretch had water connected. That's $300 or so for six miles of trench and pipe laying.

Comment Re:Think? (Score 1) 522

I don't know about where you're from, but here in Arkansas they are piping water and running power lines all over the place. They've wired electricity and piped water out to hunting camps where no houses have ever been. This is all due to government subsidies, and is cheep as hell for the customers. Around $100 or so for the connection back when they were laying the pipe. My cousin inherited his grandfathers farm out in the middle of nowhere. His grandmother didn't have the water connected when they were piping it, so it's now going to cost him over $800 to connect to the line.

Comment Re:Think? (Score 3, Insightful) 522

Being the majority of the population lives in larger population centers, that is the correct solution.

No, it's not. The large population centers don't need subsidies to get the latest and greatest, the ISPs can afford to up grade due to the large number of subscribers per line. It's the people out in the boonies that need the subsidies, just like in the days they were rolling out electricity, then phones, then water lines.

Comment Re:I'll have to give it another look.... (Score 1) 111

And this douche is why we're perpetually wondering if this year will be the year of the Linux desktop. Way too many attitudes like this can be found amongst the Linux Elite.

Isn't it obvious to you yet? They don't want normal people to use Linux.

It's not that we don't want normal people to use Linux, it's that we don't want Linux dumbed down to a normal level with no way to turn the dumbness off, which is what usually happens.

Comment Re:Europe (Score 1) 160

My fridge is networked, so is my chest freezer in the basement. I have an ESP8266 in each reporting the temperatures and if it's running the compressor or not for power consumption graphing.

It allows me to get an alarm if the temps rise or if the compressor stays running and does not shut off.

But you don't need the temperature readings reported to, stored and data mined by a third party over the internet before being available to you. This IoT crap is nothing less than a data grab by the corporations. If they were truly interested in helping the customer, they'd agree on a standard for an Network of Things that report to a local server and allow us to do what we want with our data.

Firmware updates on each bulb, switch, outlet and appliance is going to be non existent after realise, and you can bet your ass there will be breaches, and they will have the potential to cost lives.

Comment Re:Sounds Right (Score 1) 104

Or perhaps he keeps most of his cash in a higher yielding savings account, ...

Ha! "Higher yielding" Good one. :-) The amount of interest one can earn is pretty minuscule - even one over-draft or maintenance fee could kill any earnings. It's not really worth the hassle to have to monitor and move money around like that.

If you use a bank, you're right. I use a credit union with free overdraft protection, no maintenance fees, and interest on checking, although it's about a quarter of the interest on savings. I may make only $30 to $40 a year in interest, but it's that much more a year I'd not have otherwise. I'm considering keeping it all (or 90% or so) in the savings account and using a credit card, paying off at the end of the month, to make an additional two to three percent. Even at only $100 or so a year, it's a win.

A savings account is not a place for savings, it's a place to make a little bit of interest on quickly accessible cash. Then comes a money market for a bit of emergency cash at a slightly higher interest, then investments to put your money to work with capital gains.

Comment Re:Sounds Right (Score 1) 104

More to the point, if you need to actually check your bank balance at all, you might be doing something wrong.

Like the TV commercial where a guy is looking at new flat screen TVs, checks his bank account with his mobile app, then buys the expensive TV. If you're running that close to the red, perhaps a new TV shouldn't be top on your to-do list.

Or perhaps he keeps most of his cash in a higher yielding savings account, and has to check to see if he needs to transfer over some funds before using his debit card.

Slashdot Top Deals

The person who's taking you to lunch has no intention of paying.