Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:So it's NOT a mistake, then? (Score 1) 324

None of that is evidence that Apple has made any kind of mistake. They just haven't how behaved how this guy wants them to.

What do you mean by "evidence"? You want scientific proof? A full expression in Lambda calculus? He's saying that it seems to him Apple would better serve themselves by not offering a 16GB model, and he explains why. Whether he's right or not is one question, but his claim is clear and his reasoning is simple. Your implication that there is any kind of contradiction here is asinine.

Comment Re:So it's NOT a mistake, then? (Score 1) 324

But this raises the question of what purpose is served by Apple amassing more money anyhow. Apple pays out large (and growing) sums of cash to existing shareholders in the form of dividends and buybacks, but its enormous cash stockpile keeps remorselessly marching up toward $200 billion. "Killing the 16GB phone and replacing it with a 32GB model at the low end would obtain things money can't buy — satisfied customers, positive press coverage, goodwill, a reputation for true commitment to excellence, and a demonstrated focus on the long term. A company in Apple's enviable position ought to be pushing the envelop forward on what's considered an acceptable baseline for outfitting a modern digital device, not squeezing extra pennies out of customers for no real reason."

I know we don't read articles around here, but to not even read the summary... That's going a bit far.

Comment Re:The Five Steps of Climate Change Denial (Score 1) 370

The best economic estimates are that free market adaptation will cost a few prevent of world GDP decades from now.

Source? To my knowledge, while there is overwhelming scientific consensus that a certain amount of AGW has happened and will happen, there isn't so much consensus about the extent of damage it will cause. I've heard nightmare scenarios of worldwide dustbowls, wildfires, frequent hurricanes, dozens/hundreds of millions of migrants, wars over water rights, etc etc, and that's without even getting into methane gun territory. While there is no certainty any of that will actually occur, I don't think there is any certainty that it won't, either. And if it does, it's not something that can be easily waved away by a few percent increase in world GDP.

Just look at what's happening to Europe now with the refugee crisis, and imagine what it might look like if half of Bangladesh was displaced by floods.

Comment Re:Surge pricing wasn't meant to exist, shill. (Score 1) 250

Yeah, it was totally intimidating to me when I realized I finally had a "not a taxi" service in my city that would actually show up when I needed a ride, unlike the previously existing "taxi" service that once left me waiting in 10F wind chill on the curb for three and a half hours and had absolutely no record of me having requested a taxi every single time I called. I was very intimidated that someone was willing to take my money to move me from one location to another, without necessitating a prayer and a minor miracle.

Comment Re:Solution: Embrace an actual free market (Score 1) 250

How do the drivers know when it's time to increase their price? How much time should a driver spend waiting for a ride before decreasing their bid? How frequently should a driver try to increase their bid to see if they still get rides? How much time would drivers waste working below the true market rate or waiting for rides because they're too high above the market rate? How would a rider decide what their initial bid should be so they don't end up overpaying? How would a rider decide how long to wait before increasing their bid because they're not getting any rides? How much extra time would the average rider end up waiting before they catch up to the true market rate, and how much money would they waste overpaying? Bidding might make sense when buying a house or trading commodities, but if I'm trying to catch a cab, spending even five minutes playing that game would be a pretty big deal to most people.

Comment Re:They're beginning with a false premise (Score 1) 519

The point of that line was to motivate the importance of ads for content creators, not to explain the desire of people to block ads. I.e., "we need ads to survive, because you won't pay for shit, and now you're blocking ads too!!" Not saying I agree, but that was the intended meaning.

Comment Re:Deliverance? (Score 2) 664

Typical prejudice. No better or worse than judging someone by the color of their skin. Ho, ho, ho. Redneck from Kentucky.

You're completely right so far.

I'd say the only person with a seriously misguided moral compass is the jerk who expects anyone to believe he wasn't flying over somebodies with the intention of spying on them.

Holy mother of a hard left turn. You're gonna end up murdering some poor bloke who knocks on your do ask you to call AAA, aren't you?

Comment Re:i love infrastructure (Score 1) 465

But let's be clear - circletimessquare also read your post in the exact same way

Is that really what you're going to back yourself up with? That there exists at least one more person as eager to assume they're talking to a pro-Putin boogeyman as you are? Weak.

"Well, it sure as hell impressed opportunistic American politicians who have been expanding NATO for 20 years without seemingly any sort of awareness of the provocation towards Russia it entailed" Yes, you never said it was America's fault NATO expanded eastwards indeed. Unfortunately you can't disown things when you've published them to the internet, what you said is there clearly for all to see.

In one sentence you admit you were wrong, and in the very next you suggest I want to disown something I've said... Why would I want to disown any of that? The only things I've tried to disown are things you've put in my mouth, like that I "have this ISIS style 'US is the great satan' outlook whilst implying Russia is just an innocent bystander."

Speaking of which -- can you copy something I've said that you think indicates that I either "have this ISIS style 'US is the great satan' outlook", or that I believe "Russia is just an innocent bystander"? Do that, and I'll honestly tell you whether a) your interpretation matches my intention, b) your interpretation doesn't match the intended meaning, because I didn't express myself well enough, and you have my apologies, or c) your interpretation is a complete logical non-sequitur. But be careful -- if while quoting me you intentionally leave out important context for what I said that misrepresents my position, you'll dig yourself even deeper in the hole of strawman-fighting you're in.

"We don't care. We don't have to. We're the Phone Company."