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


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Why do this? (Score 1) 112

To put pressure on Apple to lower prices, and on other manufacturers as well.

Consumers did not see the cost of their phones directly, but demanded the best from carriers. Thus they wanted an iPhone first, and their preference in carriers, if any, second. Carriers paid Apple for customers. Apple had a monopoly on the oligopoly.

Comment Re:this is getting old (Score 1) 206

The United States military protects China's freedom to trade worldwide. It does not protect the economic interests of the people of the United States.

U.S. Foreign debt is not like a bank loan. Regarding China, nearly all is held in the form of U.S. governments bonds specified in U.S. currency. The United States will always be able to pay off its dollar obligations and the only factors keeping it from doing so today are anti-inflation policy and trade policies, both of which at this point favor China more than the United States.

The Romans regarded roadways as military structures. China is currently financing a bigger canal from the Pacific to the Atlantic and it would make sense that they would want reliable transoceanic roads to service their outlying colonies in North America.

It's been a long time since the United States military was dedicated to the interests and the security of the U.S. It protects the gobal economy. Any government dominating the global economy gets to set the military agenda of the United States -- among the many ways it gets to influence the federal government.

China does not have to worry about going broke in the process of establishing a worldwide empire. The colonies are there to finance their own colonialization.

Comment Control, not thrift. (Score 1) 420

They don't want efficiency. They want innovation.

They don't want to innovate. They want to control the commercialization of new technologies.

Everybody in charge focuses on control first. Since they don't thoroughly follow what you're doing, they monitor by watching you do it.

They don't want anybody else doing what they do.

Comment Re:The human eye is proof God exists (Score 1) 187

I'd rather bet on a .001% chance that Jesus is Lord than 99.999% chance that life is based on nothing but random chance and death.

Most sperm get a brief swim and that's it.

Your chance of becoming the Messiah are millions of times greater than one sperm's chance of fulfilling its purpose.

Still, most sperm are dedicated to a sense of purpose. That purpose is to be absorbed by a larger cell and trigger the well-programmed growth of a new organism.

Of course, as your yourself are the rare result of a successful sperm, you discount the role of randomness and believe that life has purpose.

Why not?

We are only one generation away from Google Contact Lenses.

Haptic underwear.

Intracranial modems.

Broadband cochlea replacements.

At that point most of will be sensible only to the internal signalling of the larger organism of which we will be but cells.

DNA, against all odds, will have made it past evolution all the way to Intelligent Design.

Of course, eventually -- or perhaps soon, or maybe even now -- we will be a mere organ in the anatomy of a superintelligent intergalactically networked individual.

And what will our role be? Perhaps we will be a remote scouting organ on the lookout for even larger creatures that want to consume us. Or it.

Comment Re:from the what-until-they-get-a-load-of-this dep (Score 1) 292

The term "Oxford comma" exists only because the term "Chicago omission" would not indicate something visible. There was no such thing as an Oxford comma until the Chicago omission was invented. Omitting the comma creates a jarring inconsistency, results in unnecessary doubletakes, and fails to convey the cadences and inflections of the spoken sentence.

Comment Re:Don't like it? (Score 2) 57

Build you're own internet.

Now we're talking stakeholders.

Build your own Internet. This one's already been claimed by stakeholders. Isn't that what they called in the Gold Rush -- staking a claim?

Gather a big financial package and give stuff away to change the direction of traffic in your favor. Don't appear to be evil, but only long enough to command big fees for wasting attention and hijacking browsers.

It is odd that Secretary Pritzger struts with the Internet overseas at a time when stateside the Federal Communications Commission has so much contempt for humans that it is considering allowing service providers to demand payment from content providers.

The international Telecommunications Union, the audience for this grandstanding, is like the FCC, in that it governs the used of electromagnetic spectrum, but in its case for purposes that exceed the sovereignty of any individual nation.

We don't have a Department of Individual Rights in the United States, but by gum we have a Secretary of Commerce.

So from the looks of it, Secretary Pritzger is just greasing the rest of world so those stakeholders can do whatever they plan to do with their stakes.

Comment okay, but... (Score 1) 151

Also from the article:

Simulations suggest that the Z machine’s maximum current of 27 million amps should be enough to reach breakeven. But the researchers are already setting their sights much higher. A hoped-for upgrade to 60 million amps, they say, would boost the power output into a “high gain” realm of 1000 times input—a giant step toward commercial viability.

Comment Which scenario applies? (Score 1) 460

Scenario 1:

You keep a webcam focused on a dam to monitor whether it fails. You see cracks. You watch as the dam washes out, but you warn no one. You are a scientist. You have broken no laws.

Scenario 2:

You are paid to monitor the dam and to issue warnings when appropriate. You see cracks. You watch as the dam washes out, but you warn no one. You are an element of the public safety system and you willfully and criminally left people unprotected. It doesn't matter if you were a scientist under contract.

Comment what sales ought to know (Score 1) 159

Strategic sales usually involve an internal champion who has the confidence of senior managers and is betting three to five years of career advancement on the adoption of your product and its strategic importance to your firm. Sales is the process of helping that person acquire endorsements up the chain of command.

The best way to locate an internal champion is to meet with managers who appreciate the need but lack the time to immerse themselves in the decision. They will hand you off.

Incidentally: since you are already publishing your buglist, you personally have very little more to do to gain the trust of an internal champion and your appearance at one or two critical meetings will help senior managers understand that a sale is an alliance. Go to learn, not to teach. You'll do well.

"Ignorance is the soil in which belief in miracles grows." -- Robert G. Ingersoll