Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:What does taxi service cost the public? (Score 1) 210

by drinkypoo (#47811543) Attached to: Uber Now Blocked All Over Germany

0ne of the costs is for licensing is administration of the testing & licensing itself, as well as any oversight, inspections, etc.

Germany already has inspections, and the driver already pays for the inspections. If the problem is inadequate inspection, send the vehicle for more inspections. This is not a cost to the people, because the driver already pays the cost. If there is no significant additional licensing, there is no significant additional licensing cost.

Some cities build taxi pickup lanes and other infrastructure to facilitate the service in specific areas.

Yes, and those costs are seen as a benefit to the city, because they ease congestion.

Comment: Re:Anti-competitive behavior is a big deal (Score 1) 210

by drinkypoo (#47811529) Attached to: Uber Now Blocked All Over Germany

Taxis are commercial services and part of their fees are used to maintain roads and public facilities they use more heavily than private drivers.

They use them more frequently, but they don't use them any more heavily. If you were taxing vehicles based on the damage they do to the road, buses and trucks would pay basically all the taxes, and passenger vehicles would pay basically none.

They are also required to provide equal access and maintain a certain percentage of handicap accessible vehicles available at all times.

The former is an issue, but cabbies are well-known to choose their fares racially in many countries, why wouldn't they do the same in Germany? It's very difficult to prove. As for accessibility, the market will provide if competition is permitted. The only reason to have such a requirement is that licensed taxis were collectively granted a monopoly on transport for hire, and this restriction on competition in the market prevents market forces from working.

They also have to carry the proper insurance because if they skirted the law on this point, the rest of us would end up paying.

This is solved easily enough with laws requiring more insurance for hire vehicles, and doesn't require a taxi permit system.

Comment: Re:Would it really be worse without patents? (Score 1) 57

by drinkypoo (#47811487) Attached to: SpaceX Challenges Blue Origin Patents Over Sea-Landing Rocket Tech

Patents are still useful for small businesses because it provides protection against someone else coming along and patenting your product after the fact.

Not really. They grant patents which conflict with existing patents all the time, and you still need to be able to take a suit to court to prove that the subsequent patent should not have been granted, which means you still need millions of dollars in your legal fund.

Comment: Re:Too simple (Score 1) 388

by drinkypoo (#47811457) Attached to: Low-Carb Diet Trumps Low-Fat Diet In Major New Study

That's the best response to his post you got?

It's the only necessary response.

His response tried to clarify that for you and the other readers and to respond to your fallacy, the No True Scotsman:

Actually, USDA took over the name "organic" by force without consulting those who coined the term. You're using a pretty pathetic determining factor, sheep.

Comment: Re:Sigh... (Score 2) 116

It won't be the end of humanity... There's no chance that this will ever develop to that scale.

War is an archetypal situation. Once the possibility of one starting develops, it has "suction": people react to the archetype, and that threatens to overwhem rational thought. The archetype was worshipped as a divinity in many cultures precisely because war behaves as if it was a living thing seeking to devour people - or, in this case, the entire world.

So yes, there's every chance this will develop into World War III: Last Dance.

Comment: Re:Eh, not quite (Score 1) 108

by Tablizer (#47811005) Attached to: Apple Reveals the Most Common Reasons That It Rejects Apps

To be frank, I think I would fail that auto-type feature also. Shortcuts shouldn't interfere with long-cuts. People do things out of habit and you shouldn't add shortcuts to disrupt those habits. If they enter the full email URL, then the auto-appended part should be parsed off internally, or better yet: automatically disappear once "@" is keyed.

K.I.S.S. often overrides saving keystrokes when dealing with wide or unknown audience.

Comment: Re:Kodak had the right idea decades ago (Score 1) 109

by Tablizer (#47810837) Attached to: New HTML Picture Element To Make Future Web Faster

Agreed. It would be easier on many levels to promote and support the browser use of a progressive-resolution image-file format rather than overhaul markup standards and load & store multiple image versions on servers.

Let's hope sanity and logic prevail, and this tag idea is dumped.

And I hope patent issues don't derail it also.

Further, we don't have to have an entirely new tag. Just add something like a LOWRES or LOWRESSRC attribute to the existing IMG tag. Old browsers would still use the regular image and ignore the new attribute. This is better backward compatibility than an entirely new tag. An entirely new tag would outright not function in older browsers. (The HTML standard says to ignore any attributes a browser does not recognize rather than skip the entire tag.)

Comment: Re:Artists vs programmers (Score 1) 19

Why would you think artists who create music should get paid?

Because you find value in the product, duh.

If you don't care for music in general (which I've never met a human with that mentality), then no, there's no value in the music artists create.

If you do care for music, and in fact enjoy listening to it in any capacity, then you in fact do understand the value, and why they should get paid, and you're just being an troll.

Hmm... "impossible human" or troll... gee, what a tough determination to make...

Comment: Re:Artists vs programmers (Score 1) 19

I'm all for people getting paid for their work. It's usually called a job... sometimes you have to be an entrepreneur.
I do frown on people doing something once (I just had this brilliant idea - patent; I just thought of a tune - song; I wrote this neat software - copyright; etc.) and expecting to sit on their couch for the rest of their lives and have people sending them money. I call these people "the takers". They are leaches on society.

What would you call the people who create nothing of value, but demand that they have a right to steal everything of value your "the takers" group creates?

Comment: Re:GUI technology has regressed since the 90s (Score 1) 109

by Tablizer (#47810719) Attached to: New HTML Picture Element To Make Future Web Faster

Job security, shhhhhhhh

In all seriousness, while it may create job security, many developers would rather spend their time making 20 useful products using write-once-run-everywhere rather than 5 useful products with multiple versions handcrafted for different devices.

It's kind of boring re-inventing the same app for different devices even if it does pay.

There's no such thing as a free lunch. -- Milton Friendman

Working...