Sorry dood. You're the one with no moral ground. If you don't like a product, don't consume it. If you like it, decide whether you want to pay for it. If it's too expensive, move on. That's how life works. It's disgusting to watch thieves like you rationalize robbing artists.
How do you think you're going to save for old age? You're going to buy shares in some venture and seek rent. Rent seeking is a fundamental part of savings and society can't plan for the future without it. Or maybe you just had the old, the infirm and the ones who want to save to start a business, send their kid to college or go on a nice vacation. They're all rent seekers, each and every one.
Yes you are. You're putting the weight of development on the shoulders of the suckers who pay. You're stealing from them. You're denying them the chance to pay their fair share of the development costs.
Nah. I say "lock him up." He's scum. He's destroying the web. Because of jerks like him, the movie makers are demanding all kinds of spying privileges. If you can't be honest and respect other humans, to jail I say.
An anonymous reader writes: The Atlantic has a story with some video of a traffic simulator showing just how the roads can be jammed up by people looking for a place to park. (You can play with the simulator too.) This has been suspected for a long time by many traffic researchers and city planners, but the simulator shows just how quickly the roads jam up after just a few of the blocks fill up with parked cars. The good news is that autonomous cars don't need to park-- they just go give someone else a ride. They could change city life forever.
I hate to say that I agree. I'm reminded of one trip to the Smithsonian Museum of American History. There was a team of about seven curators there to put three items in a display case. They all seemed to be attentive but it was work that could be done by one person. I think there's a ton of featherbedding around the place.
I bet they could have just put the suit in a dry box and that would have been enough. I doubt there's anything they can do to keep the rubber soft enough. But they've figured out how to tug at our heart strings.
An anonymous reader writes: Amazon has a new plan to keep authors honest: they're only going to pay them when someone actually reads a page. Peter Wayner at the Atlantic explores how this is going to change the lives of the authors-- and the readers. Fat, impressive coffee table books are out if no one reads them. Thin, concise authors will be bereft. Page turners are in.
Okay, the kids won't be killed, but only those that jump through the hoops of the all powerful Google will be given the prizes. I thought the miracle of the Internet that everyone could enjoy the fun. But somehow GOOG is turning it into a brutal, knock-down, no-holds-barred competition.
An anonymous reader writes: The Atlantic has an article asking whether autonomous cars need windows. If there's no driver, will the passengers want to look outside? In the summer, will anyone want to endure the relentless heat from the sun? The robot cars offer us a great opportunity to rethink the platform which is largely devoted to supporting the driver. But if a computer is in charge and it sees with dozens of cameras ringing the car, what else can we change? What else don't we need? What can improve?