Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Neglecting to care (Score 1) 65

Seriously, yes. What the HELL do they do with 250 engineers that no one has given a shit about (beyond the investors who watched their stock lose almost 50% in a single day) in the last couple years?

I won't even click on random search links to their site (let alone use it for business networking) once I realized how all of your "private" data is basically negotiable to anyone who wants to pay more than you to get access to it.

Comment Re: Hammerheads in Vermont (Score 1) 577

But taking money you'd use to buy a non-infrastructure resource and then giving you an overpriced, shoddy but "official" government replacement, is also a rather sad utopia. "The even distribution of poverty" comes to mind.

A sad utopia for the 0.1% of the population who have made their billions off of the labor of the rest of the country - as they will become mere lesser billionaires. A tolerable living for the 50% of the population who have no political, economic, or any other influence and thus no way to improve their lot other than their vote in a democratic society.

Given the choice of "pay 50% taxes or GTFO" most billionaires would pay 50% taxes. In fact, 80+ years of the 20th century already proved that. Because the alternative would be to GTFO to 3rd world countries that won't tax them but where they can't I've the lifestyle they are accustomed to...

Comment Re:Hammerheads in Vermont (Score 1) 577

And modded redundant, nice... please mods, if you think that post was useless, continue to waste your points to mod this post down as well. If you do, we allI know for a fact you are a useless waste of a human meatbag so at least we can burn your semi-democratic /. mod points on a post like this...

Comment Re:Hammerheads in Vermont (Score 1) 577

Don't get me wrong, I am not Libertarian in any sense, I am a practical Democrat who would prefer some Democratic Socialism where it actually works.

Your examples are great *social* leaders, but not *socialist* leaders. And none has done JACK SHIT for income inequality in their countries. I guess they are Libertarians Socialists and not Socialist Libertarians... or whatever bullshit people putting labels on people decide this week...

Comment Re:Hammerheads in Vermont (Score 0) 577

government wealth redistribution

This alone makes you socialist/communist.

For the past 35+ years we've been having a government redistribution of wealth from the poor and middle class to those who are already wealthy. What does that make the worthless fucking idiots who created that?

Wish I had mod points (oh wait, I do - but I already commented on this thread multiple times...) This is my favorite statement from this discussion so far.

Comment Re:Hammerheads in Vermont (Score 1) 577

Yeah, his argument is ridiculous. Socialists and Libertarians are just about as opposite on the spectrum in any ways that count as you could think of. The only commonality he had in his point was a total coincidence with different motivations, since Bernie's are (relative) Pacifism and privacy and Rand Paul is into isolationism and small government.

Though I disagree with your statement on Cruz "he too is opposed to an adventurist foreign policy." He wants to carpet bomb Syria and approves of torture if it gets results. I'm pretty sure those are not Rand Paul's positions.

Comment Re:Hammerheads in Vermont (Score 4, Interesting) 577

Wait, what? We have the highest economic inequality in the last 100 years (and worse, in some ways). The last 40 years have basically been one right center economically conservative president after another (if you look at the math, Clinton did more to contribute to it than either Bush). Who's "choices" will be taken away by moderately raising taxes on those in the very top tax brackets? Trump, for example, says he wants to "make America great again", when if you look at it his definition of great (the economic boom of the 50s-60s) had a top tax bracket of 90%.

If you want a proven fiscal conservative and moderate social liberal, you should be supporting Hillary. None of the Republican candidates have the slightest clue what their back-asswards ideas will do to the US economy (and most people who actually have a clue say they will be disastrous). At least with Hillary you will get more of the same from the last 40 years.

I say that with the opinion that the majority of the country's social issues over the the history of the US have at their root cause economic inequality. Crime rates, educational imbalances/opportunity, racial inequality/bigotry, health care, and obviously significant poverty have been exacerbated by the fact that the top 0.1% has made more money than the bottom 50%. And they are just accumulating it for apparently no reason other than to keep score. The fact is, if you have something to live for and aren't just surviving day to day, you are a lot less likely to risk your life and future committing property crimes. But Republicans seem more willing to pay $50,000 a year to incarcerate a poor person than pay them a living wage (which is less than $50,000).

I wish we could get someone like Sanders in as President, and put the tax brackets back to where they were in 1960, fix the ridiculous capital gains rate, etc. Given the current divisiveness in US politics that probably won't happen. So we're probably still screwed for the foreseeable future...

Comment Re:$52/yr is a lot for a subscription (Score 1) 667

They still have a print magazine, and it's only $19.99 a year AND comes with a "free digital subscription". So I'm not sure why their charging over 2x for a digital-only subscription. Reminds me of something a newly-minted marketing major would attempt..."psychological marketing of only $1 / week!"

There are ads in the print magazine, a lot of them. It's essentially subsidized.

As for specific digital pricing, from what's been written it sounds like a lot of that comes from the need to have monthly pricing, as not everyone wants to buy a year at a time.

Comment Re:hyperloop without the hyper or loop (Score 1) 218

How much does the battery cost to replace?

/quote>
Unknown since it is not known how soon one needs to replace it. With the first round of the batteries in the MS (i.e. 2012 version), it appears that somewhere around 200-250K miles, is when the battery pack will be around 85% level. So most ppl think that it new packs will be needed around 2020-2022. At that point, it might costs 5K for a change.
Of course, with 200-250K miles on an ICE car, you will most likely have to rebuild the engine, along with all of that nasty maintenance.

Slashdot Top Deals

We can predict everything, except the future.

Working...