Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:I'm not convinced. (Score 1) 305

Fucking google car's sensors can't see in the dark or in the rain....

Which Google sensor" can't see in the rain? You are saying that radar, and sonar and LIDAR aren't able to see in the dark? I've used all three with full success in darkness. Please stop talking out of your ass. If you think Google's driverless cars use a single sensor then why are you wasting peoples time here?

I think Google cars should be able to work on just the cameras when needed. And cameras are at least as good as the human eye. LIDAR, etc should be considered as nice to haves.

Comment Re:Sure (Score 1) 237

"Education" is what rich people do to feel entitled to their wealth. They work hard, study hard for years and years and then feel like they have achieved success on a level playing field. Oh and they let in a few other token poor people based on "merit" who can then keep all the other poor people in line by telling them their is a "path to success". Formalized education has become a tool of oppression.

Comment Re:sTEM (Score 1) 186

Sure, so where is the scientific method in comsci? Math proofs? They are self contained based on closed rule sets, they are supposed to be consistent within themselves but they do not measure anything, nor do they necessarily have anything to do with observable phenomena. Formal science, OK, but not just science, or STEM would be known as STE.

Comment Re:sTEM (Score 1) 186

And I said comsci is technology,math, maybe engineering but hardly science. Mathematical proves of big O and the rest of algorithms and data structures is not a study of natural phenomena and the experiments supporting theoretical run times are not discoveries of natural phenomena, they are more reflective of the engineering effort that goes into construction of the computers that execute the theory.

Comment Re:It should be obvious (Score 0) 359

Propping up our currency did not prop up our economy. It shit on our production/manufacturing while keeping Chinese goods cheap.

- propping up USA currency provided USA with a way to buy cheap Chinese produced goods. No, it did not prop up your economy, it propped up your consumption and it destroyed your economy. However the Chinese did not do this in vacuum, USA got off the gold dollar (defaulted on the gold dollar in 1971) because it was printing so many dollars for decades prior to 1971 and it could not pay in gold for its past spending.

USA destroyed its economy by destroying its currency. At the point of currency default (1971) the expansion of the money supply was set in stone. That is what destroyed USA economy. Common sense is not that common. Once USA destroyed its own currency, manufacturing was going to leave one way or another, since no real savings can exist in that environment.

China gave you plenty of rope to hang yourself with, you took the rope, wrapped it around your neck and kicked the chair of sound money from underneath yourself. The rope was Chinese, but you put it onto your own neck and kicked the chair out yourself.

Comment Re:It should be obvious (Score 0) 359

The Chinese currency peg wasn't to help us.

- like I said, common sense is not that common. Obviously the Chinese currency peg was not meant to help the USA economy, but it did have the effect of propping up the USA economy by forcing the Chinese central bank to print the Yuan to buy the USA paper (bills, bonds, dollars) to keep the peg going.

Printing dollars like mad was the only response available.

- common sense is not that common. USA printing dollars has nothing to do with the Chinese, it started with the invention of the Federal reserve bank and the act of 1917, allowing the Fed to monetise USA Treasury debt. USA has been printing dollars for near a 100 years now, causing the depression that was resolved in 1921, causing the 1925-1929 bubble that led to the bubble bursting, causing the Great Depression that was the result of government propping up the economy after the bubble collapse, causing the 1971 default on the gold dollar, etc.

The Yuan strengthening is the correct market mechanism to bring trade into balance.

- The strength of Yuan will no longer depend on the weakness of the US dollar, now that the peg is removed.

Go back and re-read 'Wealth of Nations'.

- ha, get some common sense before telling others what to do.

Comment Re:It should be obvious (Score 0, Troll) 359

Maybe it is time to retire that particular prize.

100% Especially given that in order to get those prizes a person has to present complete lack of common sense and total misunderstanding of economic principles that guide markets but instead they have to prop up government ideas on how to run the world.

Federal reserve bank is a great example of complete lack of sound economic principles by the government and pseudo-government agencies like that one. Will they raise interest rates after 7 years of 0-0.25 rate range, will they not, will they decide at the last moment....

The reality is that 7 years of 0% interest rates have put the USA economy onto a stimulus that cannot be removed. The entire USA economy now depends on 0 (and even sub-0) rates of interest provided by the Fed, which would never be possible on sound money (gold). Nobody would lend you gold for nothing, however printed (electronically generated) money for nothing is no problem for governments.

Treasury is supposed to have treasure in it even to be called treasury, what if instead it has no treasure and only debt? Shouldn't it be called Debtory?

Debt ceiling that the Congress votes on.... what a joke! To believe that raising the real debt ceiling is up to Congress as opposed to the buyers of Treasuries is nonsense. To believe that getting another extension of limit on the credit card is 'paying our debts' is nonsense. Yet millions of people live by this nonsense ... as long as they can until they can no more, because the real creditors (those who manufacture stuff and give it to you for your fake money and fake IOUs) keep propping you up ... until they no longer do. China decoupled from the USD, as the USD was in the bubble, now as the USD will go down, Chinese Yuan will go up instead, China will not be there to save US dollar and will not buy US debt, it's selling it already.

There are people who understand economics and then there are hacks (like Krugman) who understand which way the bread is buttered.

Economics is not science, it is a set of rules that are very simple and that work over long and short time periods, but they do not fail to work.

Get rid of your manufacturing and you will lose your economy. Get away from real money and you will lose your manufacturing. Promise something for nothing and get elected that way and you will end up getting away from real money. It's not a secret in any way, it's very much common sense, it's just common sense is not that common.

Comment Re:Sad (Score 1, Interesting) 227

So, government would have no say in the business realm?

- correct. Nor in money.

Picking winners and losers, I would agree, but to say government has no authority is anarchy.

- no, it's freedom, you can say freedom is anarchy and I have no problem with that, why do you?

And politics is not automatically about stealing people's money.

- it is. It is automatically about stealing some people's money tu pay for something that those people would not give money to on their own in the same way.

Politics are increasingly being used to create a divide, but not for the reasons you state.

- politics is always about creating a divide. Try and find politics that are not creating divide, that type of politics does not exist. Politics is about taking from some and promising others something for it, it's always about creating a divide.

The wealthy are the divide creators, and that in service of maintaining and advancing their wealth.

- actually AFAIC the wealthy in a free market capitalist economy reduce the divide by building businesses that make your money go further and reducing the divide. The divide is created by the politics of greed and promise of free stuff and promise of theft from those who have more to provide the loot to those who don't have as much regardless of how the wealth is generated.

A, money should not equal speech.

- it is speech. It is political speech first of all, money is the speech of the politicians who offer to steal and offer something for nothing to those, who would give them the political power. Once that it is the case, those with money will try to protect themselves from those, who want to steal from them, and those with money will use money to buy more votes, to buy more speech. De facto money is speech, always was, always will be, not because of any court rulings, because of what the world is.

B, those who make more money are the ones benefiting from our legal system. They have more to protect, use more services, etc.
                Paying more seems fair to me.

- you mean those with more means should expect to pay more disproportionately so that those with fewer means will not mob together to steal from them?

You think this is also 'fair'? Well, it's realistic that those with more to protect will spend more to protect it. What you are doing though, you are equating disproportionate (so called 'progressive') taxation with 'justice'. The interesting thing is that you seem to have convinced yourself on this subject enough not to see the immorality of that stance.

C, taking the government budget, dividing by the number of citizens and expecting each to pay that amount? really?

- first of all that is Constitutional (capitation tax), secondly that is not even the subject I am bringing up. I am talking about the immoral nature of marginal income and wealth taxes, not absence of truly Constitutional taxation principles.

Could that work? Why would you expect that? This fails on practicability as well as on fairness.

- 'fairness' can never be achieved in the eyes of those, who want to steal more from those who have more. As long as somebody has much more than you do, you will always say it is unfair to tax you and not them, even though objectively are completely outpaying you in the size of taxes they are paying in every way, in absolute amounts, percentage wise, in everything.

Pure and simple. Might as well go back to Warlords and Kings

- Strawman argument. how about going back to Constitutional taxation, capitation and excise taxes? Seems impossible to you? That's how US of A was built before 1913 in the first place and became the dominant economic power, manufacturer of cheap, high quality goods and biggest creditor nation. USA no longer manufactures, over the last 40 years it became the largest debtor nation in history of the world and it is now bankrupt in reality.

QE4 will be coming soon of-course. Fed will not raise interest rates, the world will raise it for them and it will be much more painful that way. Collectivism has destroyed the healthy free market capitalist economy that USA used to have prior to 1917.

Why is this so? Excepting that greed among those who have want it so, what principal makes this necessary and definite.

- once the politicians no longer view a person as a target to steal from, that person doesn't have to protect himself by buying political power.

"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -- William E. Davidsen