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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Debt is not the cause of wage stagnation (Score 1) 614

by complete loony (#48617093) Attached to: Economists Say Newest AI Technology Destroys More Jobs Than It Creates
Sorry, that's got nothing to do with the point I was trying to make. Though I'm sure I rushed over a few details. I'm not talking about government debts at all. I'm talking about the total debts of the entire nation compared to GDP. The ratio of debt to GDP is higher than it has ever been. Higher than the peak in the 1930's (which was mainly because income fell). How are business and households going to pay back their debts to the banking sector? These are the debts that will not be repaid.

Comment: Stagnation is the result of private debt, not tech (Score 2) 614

by complete loony (#48615749) Attached to: Economists Say Newest AI Technology Destroys More Jobs Than It Creates

Paraphrasing the work of Steve Keen;

Taking out a loan to buy something, increases the income of the seller and the supply of money in circulation. A constant velocity of new loans, would result in a constant influence on economic activity. An accelerating amount of new loans will boost the economy and create jobs. The reverse is also true, decelerating loans will cause spending power to shrink and jobs will be lost. And this is borne out in economic data, there's a strong correlation between debt acceleration and change in employment.

Now, since the 60's the level of private debt has been growing, to become a significant force driving the economy. While borrowing more to buy an existing asset does nothing to create real wealth, it does push up asset prices giving us the illusion of rising prosperity. While rising interest payments are draining real wealth from borrowers.

The banking system should eventually go bust. Probably not tomorrow, but all we have managed to do so far is delay the inevitable. The loans they have issued cannot be repaid. The only question is how we are not going to repay them. Either we go bankrupt, or we find some other way to wipe off the debt.

The Great Depression started with the stock crash of 1929, lasting for the next 10-ish years. But it was the rising debts of the 1920's that were the real problem. Through the depression, those debts started to reduce. But it took the huge spending effort and industrialisation, fighting WWII to really eliminate them. Setting us up for the boom years of the 50's and 60's.

Our economic woes will not go away until we deal with the problem of our private debt. We may see another Depression, some parts of the world already are. Or we may see an extended period of stagnation. History doesn't repeat, but it sure does rhyme.

Comment: Re:Looks pretty impressive... (Score 1) 114

I've been using android studio for a while now, it's much better than eclipse for editing android resources or referencing them from code. But I haven't changed our build process. I still use ant & adb from the command line for building and testing everything on actual hardware.

Comment: Re:SSL? (Score 1) 92

by complete loony (#48454093) Attached to: Book Review: Bulletproof SSL and TLS

POODLE, BREACH, CRIME etc all require the attacker to control some bytes in the ssl stream in order to deduce other bytes that they shouldn't be able to see. POODLE requires the attacker to change the http url & form post body in order to force the alignment of bytes, BREACH and CRIME are gzip length attacks. Both require the attacker to control bytes in a http request in order to guess the contents of other bytes in the request that they wish to know, like a session cookie.

All of these are attacks on HTTP & SSL, not on SSL alone.

Comment: Re:My two cents... (Score 1) 516

by complete loony (#48415503) Attached to: Rooftop Solar Could Reach Price Parity In the US By 2016

In Australia we forced the utility companies to buy any solar power you sent to the grid using a separate meter, at a fairly high rate to encourage adoption.

Those higher tariffs are now over. So now we pay around 30-40c kWh (AUD, from memory) for mains, and they only pay about 5c kWh for any solar power you provide. But at least you're better off if you can use that power yourself.

Comment: Re:TWC are (surprise, surprise) crooks and thieves (Score 1) 223

by complete loony (#48381675) Attached to: Overbilled Customer Sues Time Warner Cable For False Advertising

In Australia Telstra maintain the copper line, if there's a problem you log the fault and they fix it within 2 days or they have to pay you. Unless they file a claim for a natural disaster, which can give them an extra couple days to fix it.

At the other end of the copper, your wire may be patched directly into your ISP's equipment. Though in practice I think there are only 2 or 3 companies running the DSLAM's. Smaller ISP's then lease them per line.

Comment: Re:Linux desktop never happened (Score 1) 265

by complete loony (#48358475) Attached to: Worrying Aspects of Linux Gaming

Weston has the potential to clean up the UI quirks, I hope they're headed in the right direction. It's way past time we got rid of X11, it's been holding us back for far too long. If they can't do it, I doubt anyone else will bother.

For 20-ish years windows games have been optimised for windows proprietary drivers, and vice versa. That's a lot of invested effort from both sides, that the linux eco-system hasn't had. Frankly I'm surprised at the recent rate of improvements, but linux is still a long way from parity.

Comment: Re:Not smart (Score 1) 219

Just because you can prove that there are *some* programs that can't be proven to halt, doesn't mean that there isn't a subset of programs that *can* be proven to halt.

We can build a language / compiler that rejects all programs that aren't provably correct. It might be difficult to get any useful work done, but it's not impossible.

Something like the rust programming language might be more useful in practice. You can still write completely unsafe code, while being careful to limit the impact of doing so.

If it happens once, it's a bug. If it happens twice, it's a feature. If it happens more than twice, it's a design philosophy.