Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Google It (Score 1) 189 189

Damn, that's a nice program. Kudos to Brother.

I wish I could find something on their website that states what they actually do with the returned toner cartridges. All I could find is this:

We will evaluate the opportunities to recycle, reuse, reduce, refuse and reform resources throughout the life cycle of our products.

My emphasis. This is not a commitment to recycle. It's feel-good corporate-speak.

Do they actually dismantle and recycle them? Do they refurbish them, or sell them to a refurbisher? Or do they just dispose of them so that they stay out of the after-market?

I'm sorry to be cynical. Brother may very well be acting as a good corporate citizen. But when I don't see explicit mention of their actions, I start to wonder what they are.

I suspect there are two problems for them in being too clear. First, I suspect they can't guarantee to reuse every cartridge - some of them will be damaged or contaminated, I imagine; second, they won't want to validate third party cartridge refills by admitting they actually do refills themselves! I recycle my Lexmark cartridges by mailing them back (with a prepaid shipping label they include with every new cartridge); my guess is they will refill and reset perfect-condition cartridges, recondition damaged or older ones, and recover the raw materials from unusable ones, but they won't want to be too open about the details. The "new" cartridges aren't exactly cheap, admitting they're sometimes actually refills would probably hurt sales.

Comment: Re:You can still buy Windows 7? (Score 1) 172 172

That is exactly why the stickers are gone, IMHO too. It is rather easy to find XP Pro/Home stickers. Vista stickers happen occasionally. 7 stickers are rare though in residentials dumpsters.

I don't dumpster dive much more these days, it's not worth the effort.

Comment: Re:That's not what the blockchain is for (Score 4, Insightful) 46 46

Then configure your miners to not accept these transactions.

Essentially the blockchain is exactly this: A way to record information in an unforgeable way, for a fee to the miner. Bitcoin works, and the only way it can work, is by being a system that behaves in a desired way when each player maximizes their own benefit. (To a small extent this can be affected in a centralized fashion because the community can develop the reference implementation to a desired direction, but that may or may not turn to be anathema and may or may not be a powerful enough tool.)

True, blockchain bloat causes problems, and it's a limited resource. The bitcoin solution is to sell the space to the highest bidder, because generally that maximizes the seller's benefit. In a sense, someone saying "that's not what the blockchain is for" is very similar to someone complaining that people are using lithium to make these stupid batteries, driving its price up, and "that's not what lithium is for".

Whether Bitcoin can survive all the technical challenges in the long term is not at all obvious. For all we know, it might be that the entire model is game-theoretically self-destructive if analyzed thoroughly enough. In fact, it has provided quite a few surprises where the incentives have turned out to be something different than anticipated, causing weird scenarios where e.g. in some situations it's advantageous for a miner to not immediately report a found block. So far none of these have been such that they would cause a death spiral, but that's far from a given. (Arvind Narayanan's blog posts on the topic are quite insightful; you might want to start from https://freedom-to-tinker.com/...).

Comment: Might read the whole thing yourself (Score 1) 16 16

Took me about 4 hours:
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html

I think if you read the whole thing, you'll find he's a pretty equal opportunity offender, sexual libertarians got a good hundred paragraphs against their lifestyle as well.

Comment: Re:Dude, this is so easy (Score 1) 32 32

Not fault alone, of course. In many ways, I blame liberals of both stripes- fiscal conservatism these days is strongly libertarian, and thus, liberal.

One said says I want to fuck who I want to and damned the consequences tomorrow, we'll just kill any inconvenient product of sexual abuse. The other side says I want to profit from who I want to and damn the regulations, I am not my brother's financial keeper.

Both are putting radical self interest- liberty ahead of the common good- and liberty is liberalism.

There are never any bugs you haven't found yet.

Working...