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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:#1 slashdot article submitters (Score 1) 257

by frup (#49134977) Attached to: 5 White Collar Jobs Robots Already Have Taken

When there are no jobs, provided we can feed everyone, we essentially have communism. The worker becomes the artist and the commodity is culture. The billionaires of the world would prefer the people to become their cattle however. Marked with their brands. No doubt we'll have a massive population crash before then, we are still just bacteria in the Petri dish that is the earth. And like the wild horse, I am slowly being broken down into complete apathy.

Rulers who seek to rule and make rules, are the worst kind. They proselytize their perspective as if they are somehow more important than the rest of us. Their feudal corruption manifesting deep into the core of their condition. War mongers intent on murder, worse than the backyard serial killer. All for lust and greed.

The benevolent, omnipotent, omniscient judge would surely destroy us all - for own sake. Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust, it all means nothing. Who gives a fuck what happens? We all die some day. We are no more important in the grand universe than the atoms that make it.

Nihilism for the win.

Comment: Re:Approaching the problem from the outside in. (Score 4, Insightful) 106

by frup (#49071919) Attached to: Nanotech Makes Steel 10x Stronger

If it's 10x stronger and gets the job done, it solves the problem. Next job is for the quantity surveyor to figure out at which point having 2 or even 10 steel beams is more expensive than shelling out for this premium technology (Or to put it another way, figure out when this technology is cost effective.) If it's using less material, it's likely to be more sustainable too. Did you want them to invent a new element? lol.

Comment: Re:Couldn't they have spent that money better? (Score 1) 204

I can't locate where you have got the information you base your on assumptions on.

I guess with the attitude you have to this, a rational course of discussion is to ponder, if they have chosen to spend this money on this project, where else could this money have been spent instead?

Perhaps they could have wasted it on painting street lamps and planting new shrubs in a public area, it really doesn't concern me, I don't live there. If the people of this place wanted this, it is perfectly acceptable.

But I suppose you believe they should be slaves to the will of the megacorps who showed no interest in the town. There is nothing they can do to save themselves. They will always be "poor" and it's there fault and they aren't allowed to do anything to try change this. Screw them for wanting what other people have. Let them eat cake.

And you are right, if the employees don't live there, it doesn't have as great a benefit for the town, but all an economy is, is the measurement of how much money is being shifted.

Comment: Re:Couldn't they have spent that money better? (Score 1) 204

Installation fees of broadband cost $200 in my location, given the choice to actually choose how fast the speed was, $1500 would be great. The article mentions that the cost is cheaper, this means that lets say at reasonable discounts of $5 per week, after 6 years, the cost is nil and the overall burden to the town and its residents has gone. This of course does not account for maintenance and upgrades to the service.

Given that it is a local project, it improves the local economy, more jobs in the IT sector, more chances to actually improve that local median salary of $36,000 per year. The 5 dollars per week possibly given in discounts to the monthly broadband fee (a complete estimation but based on a statement by OP) will also likely go into the local economy, because that kind of amount will get spent on things like food and drink by most people.

You can argue it's a waste of money, but you can also argue this will greatly benefit the town. To say it's like borrowing $10,000 to play the lottery is a bit of a hyperbole however. Personally I believe internet access should be considered infrastructure, and the exact purpose of a municipal government is to make this infrastructure function as best as possible, otherwise there is no point in having governments at all.

Comment: Censorship (Score 2) 113

by frup (#48179591) Attached to: BBC Takes a Stand For the Public's Right To Remember Redacted Links

We have two options. One is to censor and hide information. The second is to learn to be more tolerant and just accept everybody makes mistakes and says stupid things at times. If you're religious, you can't hide stuff from your god. If you're not religious your only judgement is by others and perhaps you deserve it.

With the internet what is unfair is how by and large people were fooled into thinking they were anonymous, I think allowing that belief and taking it away without peoples knowledge is a form of entrapment (or perhaps not educating the populace on the consequences of actions when they were always there). While anonymous people say things for reaction that they do not necessarily believe or mean. Perhaps that is a mark on their character. I was taught to believe that sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me. This goes in two directions.

We are each individuals who have our own path to forge. I pity those who try to control others. I pity those who act without thinking. Don't live in the past, the key is to move on and learn from your mistakes, better yet learn from others. That is wisdom. Hakuna matata.

Comment: Re:No surprise here (Score 1) 170

If someone invades and harms your people (those who are your neighbours and most similar to you) then there is nothing wrong with seeking information to protect them. However it is wrong to invade others. Killing is wrong, there is no justification for military action. It is barbaric animal behaviour. Compare Chimpanzees to Bonobos.

It is time for a generation of neutrality. A generation of peace. Let the actions of the past be healed by time and forgiven. But never forget for history guides us to the future. We will never get off this planet and ensure the long term survival of humanity while we fight with each other, and if my miraculous achievement we do, you can bet that while we are warlike it will eventually mean the destruction of earth at our own hands.

Our particular form of consciousness is unique as far as we know. It is something to be cherished and preserved. No life should be taken by the hand of a man.

Comment: Re:No surprise here (Score 1) 170

There is nothing wrong with seeking the truth, but spying also involves deception, it involves stealing and it is done to gain influence and power, in the current climate of the world, it is done to harm people not protect them. The truth should be out there. Nothing should be censored. Everything should be recorded but privacy should be maintained. Those who commit crimes against their fellow men should then be tried in court and the evidence shown. Those who have done nothing wrong have nothing to fear.

If you try to imagine how scrutinised a politician must feel in the public eye, he is spied on daily, nothing he does is private, how then does he view spying on his people when they all spy on him. I can see why they do it, we are partly to blame, dirty politics and media sensationalism too.

Who cares who sleeps with who. Who cares what they did in the past (if they didn't steal, lie or kill) judge them by their actions, the rest can be judged at death. The focus should be on truth.

Comment: Re:Bottom line... (Score 1) 170

There should be no secrets in the first place. It is necessary for everyone to know the truth and the truth should not be hidden. The ancient greeks had no concept of sin. Their philosophy was only concerned with Truth. In truth there is little evil. And while the subject of truth is complicated as we all suffer from error and occasionally a white lie must be told to keep the peace, peaceful states would be open, transparent and truthful, for they would have nothing to hide or fear.

In a truly free market, with truly free peoples, nothing is required to be secret. Openness is peace. Openness is innovation. Openness is a better way.

And while these men are all flawed in their own ways, their views and beliefs likely to contradict in places, the following list of men are heroes of the 21st century. There are many more and I apologise I have not included any women. No person is perfect.

Edward Snowden
Richard Stallman
Elon Musk
Bradley (Chelsea) Manning
Julian Assange
Linus Torvalds

And like I said many more. I do not agree with all their views, I am politically dead neutral and centrist.

Comment: Re:Bottom line... (Score 1) 170

In a free market with global trade, the nation state is irrelevant. It is those that profit from war that are fighting to keep power. The world does not need despot politicians competing for their popularity contests like idiots in a talent show. A truly democratic computerised voting system is possible. Democracy should be about policy and people not who the people who rule us are. In democracy they are not meant to rule, they are meant to lead, they are meant represent the voice of the people. This is not happening.

There is too much anger in the world and it is upsetting me. I have always been taught to turn anger in to something positive. When I come in to conflict I will extend the olive branch. I will offer discourse and dialogue. I will be willing to compromise. I have learnt from the past.

Comment: Re:See: Anita Sarkeesian (Score 2, Interesting) 98

While you outline a scam by a woman which is relevant to this article, for comparison, of female started projects, how many are scams and vice versa? I would be willing to bet there are more male scammers out there (proportionally) than females, just as males are more likely to commit crime.

Comment: Re: Women should earn more than men. (Score 1) 98

Sexist is discrimination based on gender that causes harm. Sexist is caring about something like this that does not affect you directly.

We should all be neutral about this. It is a fact, it is an observation and there is not necessarily a motive behind it (although for some there might be). Sex sells and the whole world is buying. If women earned more than men there would be no need for child support.

For the large part most feminists are as sexist as those they oppose, and in every walk of life (whether it be to do with race, gender, religion, politics or sport etc.) those that hold convictions are seeking dominance over others. If we look at the positive of every action, the outcome is more likely to be good for everyone.

We should marvel and cherish those who have been able to achieve greatness and hopefully with the winnings of their efforts they will realise that others have supported them, that others have helped them achieve and they will give back to others, whether in life or at death.

And while debate, free expression and constructive criticism are necessary and virtuous, rousing feelings of anger is not. Whether in yourself or others.

"Don't talk to me about disclaimers! I invented disclaimers!" -- The Censored Hacker

Working...