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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Government Intervention (Score 1) 416

can you make a plain language argument countering my point?

i am saying a high cost to market entry creates a natural monopoly. no government is needed to create it. it's a natural consequence of the underlying costs of the market sector in question

where am i wrong?

i think my statement is pretty straightforward and without error

you simply paste a link

i'm sorry, but "go read my religious literature" is not an argument. in fact, i would say you have no argument. you have an unfounded faith in an unsupported belief. a bit of foolish trendiness, which is all your link represents, that will fade to history, along with such nonsense as phrenology and lamarckism, as dead ends of academic thought

the emperor has no clothes my friend

the cult of the free market fairy: the free market fairy solves all problems! how? don't ask silly questions, don't think, just BELIEVE

Comment: Re:Government Intervention (Score 2) 416

agreed except for two points:

1. for chronic conditions there isn't informed choice. choosing oncologist A over oncologist B because A smiles more doesn't mean much. 99.99% of us lack the educational capacity in oncology to know which is the better oncologist.

2. broadband for the narrow topic of internet connectivity is pretty much about fiber/ cable. it's too slow to get it over dial up/ cell networks/ satellites (unless you live in nunavut, not much choice otherwise). so when we talk "broadband" the topic is for all practical purposes only about the guys running fiber in your average urban/ suburban environment

which is a natural monopoly the government should own, then lease the fiber fractionally to everyone and anyone who pays a fee and wants to offer a service, any service. pretty much the same economic model of how we auction off the EM spectrum to radio, television, wifi, telephony, etc. that's the way it should work with fiber

Comment: Re:Government Intervention (Score 2) 416

that's called corruption

the error is with those who believe it is government behind it all

the truth is the monopolies corrupt the government

for those fools who think the answer is to weaken government, well the monopolies can do away with corrupting legislators and regulators and rape you directly. they want that

then what? with no government/ weak government, how is the monopoly challenged?

the answer of course, is that nothing stops them now

only government is your tool against monopolies

those who argue for the weakening of government then are either genuine plutocrats with vile intent, or witless naive well-meaning fools in the unwitting service of plutocrats who genuinely believe pseudoreligious wishfulfillment economic nonsense ("the free market fairy solves all problems!" "how..." "shut up, stop thinking, just repeat after me!")

the true solution of course is to fight corruption, not fight government

oh don't get me wrong, government sucks on many levels and in many ways. i don't like government. it's inefficient, bureaucratic, slow, and often blind

but on the specific topic of natural monopolies alone (the only topic i am defending government in, to inoculate this comment from all the idiots who want to accuse me of loving government in all matters), government regulation and control is the only viable option. not an option to like. a horrible option. but better than all the other options (weak government and monopolistic control)

again: on the topic of natural monopolies alone, government is the unfortunate only answer. only answer because no government, weak government, or corrupt government, is worse

just look at healthcare or broadband in the usa. and compare the status quo in our social and economic peers who spend far less on healthcare and have higher quality healthcare, and likewise with broadband, because of heavy government involvement and regulation

rather than the legalized corruption of the usa where plutocrats buy regulators with revolving door jobs, buy legislators with election campaign funds, and screw us with shoddy service and high prices

and pump out propaganda saying it's all government's fault. and morons lap it up, helping with their impoverishment. in their effort to weaken and corrupt government, the only tool we have against monopolies, there is no greater friend to the plutocrat than the propagandized fool who hates the idea of government without thought or reason, when it's the only tool we have *on this topic of natural monopolies alone* (because here comes all the "you love government on all topics" drool snort. no, i do not)

Comment: Re:Government Intervention (Score 5, Insightful) 416

The threat of competition prevents long term monopolies from persisting.

explain how that works. you've just made a statement of unsupported belief

i've explained to you reality, straightforward: a high cost of entry into the market prevents competition. high cost alone

you have opposed my description of reality. that's fine, you don't have to agrere with me

but you have to be able to explain how or why i am wrong. you have not done that

"go read my religious literature" is not an argument

if you can't make your case in plain language, that says something doesn't it?

an unsupported faith in an unsupported statement is trendy nonsense

Comment: Re:Government Intervention (Score 5, Insightful) 416

it's not government mandated, it's a *natural* monopoly

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...

things like fire, police, healthcare, powerplants: there is no market for such things. for a number of reasons. with broadband it's because of high barrier to entry: no one has the billions to gamble on entering the market with uncertain payout

oh google does. so go ahead and wait 40 years until they get to your city

but if you make believe (like the usa does) that things like broadband and healthcare are free markets, you just wind up with grossly expensive, inefficient jokes

what we need is universal healthcare, and government owned fiber

i hear it already: "oh you evil socialist statist..." *drool, snort*

i don't like the government. but unlike some people, i recognize that on the topic of *natural* monopolies, government control is the least horrible situation, and certainly better than the usa's joke of healthcare system or approach to broadband

capitalism is a wonderful tool. i love capitalism

for example: governments should own all fiber, and then lease it to private companies to deliver services. any private company can lease to provide any service. that's wonderful capitalism, embraced in a manner of fair competition. without the bullshit notion they own the fiber too, and there's "competition". no there isn't. and there never will be. and no government policy is to blame. it's the simple nature of the sector fo the economy: too high of a cost to enter. no one else can afford to roll out the fiber

capitalism is not a fucking religion, and it has its limits

natural monopolies represent those limits

if you don't understand what a natural monopoly is, stop talking about economics, you don't understand the topic

government is not your enemy, rent seeking parasites CORRUPTING your government are. you want to remove the corruption and have your government work for you. not weaken and remove government, thereby allowing the monopolists to rape you even more

there's just a certain kind of person in the world that think government is the problem no matter what. and on topics where the real problem is something else: natural monopolies, they simply enable the monopolists by misdirecting their anger at the wrong target (government). propaganda funded by the plutocrats are happy to feed this error, because indeed, with a weakened government, they get to rape you even more without even the pesky need to buy off congresscritters and pass warped regulations at all

Comment: Re:First they came for... (Score 0) 226

by circletimessquare (#48927655) Attached to: Facebook Censoring Images of the Prophet Muhammad In Turkey

what have you "won" exactly?

You "win" Turkish citizens annoyed with their government -- a win in the only venue likely to be able to create change there.

i stopped reading there

how did that work with cuba? iran? north korea? china?

what you're asking for is massacred citizens

iran for example

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2...

no matter how many intelligent, forward thinking students you have agitating in the cities, the government just calls up busloads of basiji thugs from the countryside and cracks skulls until change seekers shut up in fear. or worse:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

slow stead engagement is what really works

reactionary inflexibility simply means no change at all

welcome to reality

this is you:

http://www.politico.com/story/...

pragmatism, flexibility, realism, compromise always wins

inflexible ideological dogmatism is how you lose and are ignored

Comment: Re:Eisenhower said it (Score 1) 209

by circletimessquare (#48927567) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Makes a Great Software Developer?

well yeah, by definition a rock star is very rare

so if you want a rockstar working for you, you better be ready to shell out big money or provide truly extraordinary perks

you can't just expect or demand rock star status from average or even above average programmers. you can't mold people's personalities like their technical proficiency. i suppose there does exist stress mitigating strategies someone can consciously adapt. but from the rock star i met, it is a sort of chilly immunity to even the concept of stress that is quite awesome to behold

that's why i quoted eisenhower

because when i met such a person, i immediately thought of someone functioning under the stresses of extreme combat. i thought of this person on the eastern front in wwii. what it would take to survive *real* stress, because stress in programming, while real, taken in perspective to something like fields of combat, is a joke

i always wondered if this person had indeed been in such an extreme stressful environment, like war. a sort of "once i've seen that, none of this shit impresses me." because indeed, nothing seemed to impress him. you could scream in his face and he would react the same as if you were casually discussing gardening. nothing phased the dude

Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.

Working...