Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Oh Great! More Central Planning! Just what we n (Score -1) 183 183

Industry is regulated by free market, which is the collective desires of all people only without government supplied violence. Actually I would rather see the life on this plant completely exterminated than enslaved.

I will never stand even for most trivial amount of socialism, which to me is slavery. Not even a trivial amount of slavery, 1% slavery is completely unacceptable as far as I am concerned.

Comment Re:Greenspan (Score 1) 8 8

You're pretty much a Greek in all but character encoding, as far as I can tell from your oral attachment to the public nipple.
And let me stipulate that I think that's perfectly acceptable as a choice. My chief gripe is the way MY tax dollars are taken to pour down the same little endless circular holes for the $18 trillionth time, while you are all on your high-horse about it.

Comment Re:headline is misleading (Score 1) 363 363

I don't doubt this is the case. I suspect there are some doctors that retired simply to spite obamacare.

No, you're not understanding what happened. The new law made lots of insurance policies no longer allowed. For example: if you're a married couple 80 years old, you still have to carry, by law, insurance that includes full maternity care. So a lot of existing insurance simply evaporated. People who lost those insurance plans lost their health insurance. They then had to go find a way to buy new insurance - usually at much higher prices, often from a different carrier ... which wouldn't do business with the doctor you used to use.

This isn't a matter of the doctors retiring. This is about the law forcing people to buy very expensive new health insurance from a new provider that - because of all of the heavy new requirements of what and who they must now cover - greatly reduce the number of doctors they'll work with. And so people lost access to their familiar doctors, despite Obama's promise that no such thing would happen - remember, he said nobody would have to leave their plans (a lie).

Comment Re: 20% slowdown isn't that bad... (Score 0) 89 89

No, most of vistas problems were due to drm. With the release version of vistas playing a music file would reduce reduce network bandwidth by like 80%. This was fixed in a SP but it was available weeks after 7 launched and there was no reason to run vistas.

Comment Re:Smart (Score 1) 272 272

In fact, I would bet that the reduced metal machining from not having a solid-block engine under the hood probably saves overall manufacturing emissions, once you factor it all the way back to the metal foundry, refinery, and strip mine. Only the strip mine would be comparable for rare earths that go into batteries. The refinery is much smaller due to smaller volumes and the foundry isn't really necessary at all.

You seem to have forgotten that an electric car has fairly large (metal) electric motor - which require the selfsame strip mine, foundry, and much of the machining of the 'solid block' (since it really isn't) engine.

Comment Re: Tiny black holes (Score 1) 137 137

Which is exactly why I said what I said. There are people who show up here to scold people about holding onto (or exploring) some of the more exotic physics frameworks and compare that to being a True Believer (in the traditional religious sense). These are NOT the same things.

Comment Re:headline is misleading (Score 1) 363 363

He said that because people were worried that the doctor the currently had would suddenly be unavailable to them when the law kicked in. This is exactly what happened, to a lot of people. It happened to our family. The insurance policy with which we were perfectly happy evaporated because the law considered it unacceptable (the new law requires that we buy insurance that covers, among other things, maternity care ... which is super handy now that we're in our 50's). The new plans from which could choose did not include the doctor we're happy with, and precluded the use of two of the nearest (and best) hospitals. Our premiums went from roughly $250 a month to over $500, and our deductible went from $2,500 to $12,000.

Each of these things was predicted with great clarity by not only the people opposed to the law's passing, but also by the people who WROTE the law. But in front of cameras, Obama lied about each and every point of it, repeatedly, and deliberately. If he had been honest, and if he'd talked Pelosi and Reid into also being honest about the consequences of the law (instead of the "You'll have to pass it to see what's in it" explanation she provided), it would never have passed. Democrats talked into voting for it have since said they wouldn't have voted for it if they'd understood the huge new costs, taxes, and service limitations that it puts on middle class families.

You know, and Obama knew, EXACTLY what "you can keep your doctor" meant when he said it - he was trying to tamp down the very vocal concerns that exactly what has happened would in fact happen. He knew it was going to, but he lied about it anyway. What I don't understand is why you're trying to spin it for him. What do you gain by attempting to back up the deception?

Comment Re:headline is misleading (Score 1) 363 363

the first iteration


What does it matter if there is some future change to the law (not counting the illegal unilateral changes made by the president by selectively choosing whether to follow the statute's specific requirements once he realized it wasn't politically expedient). If you've already lost your insurance plan, or you've had to give up your doctor, and can no longer use the convenient nearby hospital because of the law's impact (all things that we were promised wouldn't happen, which the law's partisan authors knew WOULD happen, and about which the president repeatedly and deliberately lied), then that damage is already done. Not that it matters. Even if you can afford one of the new plans, the deductibles are hugely higher - making the effective premiums even higher than their new, higher stated values.

So for many, many people the "affordable" care act has: blown away existing insurance plans, removed choices of doctors and hospitals, doubled and sometimes tripled premiums, and in many cases quadrupled deductibles. All of which was well known in advance, and was proactively lied about, repeatedly, by Pelosi, Reid, and Obama. Republicans also knew it was coming, which is why NOT ONE of them voted for that monstrosity of a law.

Comment Re:Talking points? (Score 1) 363 363

"Last time we had a Clinton, we shrunk the deficit down to zero and grew the middle class and the economy."
We had an internet bubble, and Clinton failed to prevent the attack on the WTC... It happened right after Bush became the president but the planning had to happen during Clinton's term.
Actually who ever replaces Obama will probably have an easy term. Oil prices are low which drives the US economy. The US could actually start exporting oil which would lower our trade deficit. China's stock market is imploding which will drive investment to the US.

Comment Re:Talking points? (Score 2) 363 363

"Will it turn out well? Hard to say, we won't really know without trying, but at some point we either try something new, or accept the current situation forever."
I have never set myself on fire but I really don't need to try it to see if it is a good idea.

%DCL-MEM-BAD, bad memory VMS-F-PDGERS, pudding between the ears