Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:How would you promote job growth (Score 1) 238

So then all you have to do is funnel all your expenses through your business and not get a paycheck of greater than 20k per year.

You must be thick. The point of a 20% flat tax is that there is no way to do that. Income coming in to an entity is taxed at 20%. Doesn't matter if its a foreign entity (as long as the transaction involves an american) or shell corp or whatever, if it passed through your hands its taxed at 20%. In fact, using shell corps and foreign entities would become a bad thing as you would risk double taxation then. So routing all of your income directly to bank account would become the most tax efficient tactic. But it will never happen as tax attorneys, accountants, politicians and CEOs would all band together to stop it.

Comment: Re:How would you promote job growth (Score 1) 238

What exactly... is "their fair share"?

I keep hearing people say that without defining what that really is.

Did you know the wealthy already pay most of the taxes? How much more would *you* like them to pay?

In total amount of taxes paid yes, as a percentage of income, hell no. On average, the rich pay only 1/3-1/4 of their share of taxes (12-15%) as the "average american" (33.5-36%) as a percentage basis. And since the rich are receiving ~90% of the income in the US, they should be paying ~90% of the taxes. See how that works? But they are not even close to that. When you come in to suggest that since they pay 51% (or whatever) of the taxes that's OK, even though they make 90% of the "income". How that even seems fair in your brain is beyond me. If you are rich, you are just a greedy person but I can understand your motivations. If you are not rich, you are truly a fool so please turn in your voter card.

Comment: Re:Reporting on this topic has been insane. (Score 1) 587

by sfcat (#49419973) Attached to: Hugo Awards Turn (Even More) Political

Any articles I've read on this topic have either been:

"Heroic Puppies campaign to free the Hugo awards from the evil clutches of the SJWs" or "Band of Neo-Nazis corrupt the Hugo awards with cheat voting." Come on internet. You can be better than this.

Seems like this is exactly the type of polarizing click bait that the Internet specializes in. Its the cockfighting of debate.

Comment: Re:The HUGOs have always been about politics (Score 1) 587

by sfcat (#49419297) Attached to: Hugo Awards Turn (Even More) Political

If 80% of all SF writers are white males, then you can expect around that same fraction of the nominees to be white and male.

A guess

Maybe, but not necessarily.

If roughly 50% of English speakers are white, and roughly 50% of those are male, then around 75% of English-speakers are NOT white males.

If one were to assume that writing talent is more or less evenly distributed among the population, and that the truly gifted are increasingly able to rise to the top despite cultural and social biases, then I would expect that the majority of outsanding writers today to not be white males, regardless of the underlying distribution of all the mediocre writers.

Just saying.

And another guess. Guess what, neither of you have any idea as to the actual number. So quit making decisions based upon non-facts, look up the actual number. You have an internet and are currently using it for something, but clearly in aid of making factual points. Based upon your experience of SF fans/writers, what do you think the actual number is? Al Al, most of the people who read your post will have an opinion on what that number actually is. And the guesses you post go against their life experience. This is why you won't get any traction for your ideas here as you are asking people to take what you say at face value against their life experience. If you are going to do that, you will have to provide better proof than a guess you pulled from what your underwear covers.

Comment: Re:ABOUT FUCKING TIME! (Score 1) 765

by sfcat (#49201839) Attached to: Ubuntu To Officially Switch To systemd Next Monday

Systemd has laudable goals and people do want it. That's why it's been adopted, because some people want what it does. "It fills a use case people have" is what Linus says. And that use case happens to be the one that desired by the people responsible for building distros.

Ah, so its just like the cloud then.

Comment: Re:FFS (Score 5, Informative) 398

I don't think so. In university some pharmacy or chemistry guys could scrounge pure ethanol. (98 or 99%.) Screwdrives with that were nasty.

But nobody became addicted to that after 1 or 2 dozes, have they? Heroin, on the other hand, is so addictive, a decent percentage of humans get hooked after only a few dozes.

If that was really the case then people who were given morphine drips in hospitals would have high rates of addiction after leaving the hospital. But this doesn't happen. People who get addicted to Opioids either are in constant, on-going pain (due to injury or other reason) or are purely recreational users who are likely responding to external stresses. Basically, the entire model of addiction you are using is wrong and the numbers on addiction bear this out quite clearly. And before you tell me about "soldier's sickness" after the Civil war, remember that most of those soldiers had on-going, serious pain management issues (due to missing limbs and poor quality surgery at the time). This is why our "war on drugs" has been such a monumental failure, our basic model of addiction is wrong and leads you to believe non-sense (like your post). Heroin is certainly addictive but addiction is a response to stress and pain, not a moral failing or a bio-chemical crutch. A better model is provided by the Rat Park research. Policy using this model as a basis will be much more effective if for no other reason than its a far more accurate model of how humans behave than the practically medieval way we deal with addiction right now.

Comment: Re:Pointing fingers at problems (Score 1) 493

by sfcat (#49022339) Attached to: Will Elementary School Teachers Take the Rap For Tech's Diversity Problem?
Most security crews at nightclubs (I moonlight at one sometimes) must have at least 1 woman on them for dealing with problematical females. And generally the female bouncers are quite tough (but not always). Still wouldn't expect the same number of women in those jobs as generally males cause more problems depending on the crowd and thus more male bouncers. Police forces (where many bouncers come from) and other security fields are primarily male so this all works out.

Comment: Re:Excellent idea (Score 1) 779

by sfcat (#48965967) Attached to: WA Bill Takes Aim at Boys' Dominance In Computer Classes

CS is already badly damaged as it is. From the feeling that jobs are going to be at minimum wage rates, to the fact that there is extremely heavy H-1B competition for every single position, be it an entry level coder on up, to the fact that it is looked down upon [1]... all gets people to look for other professions. I've even met high school counselors steering kids away from STEM in general, and into law or business with the phrase, "there is no such thing as an unemployed attorney or CPA".

The last thing the industry needs is a state's foot on the neck of a section of the population interested in this occupation. It just means that that aspiring programmer is now doing other things, and that could be the next Linus Torvalds or Wietse Venema that gets shooed out of the field.

[1]: CS and IT get relatively little respect as a profession compared to others that take as much education and experience. Tell someone you are a veteran IT person, they will immediately ask you what to do because their Windows PC seems slow.

Tell that to my bank account, and my email account that receives at least unsolicited one job offer each day (which generally have a higher salary than a doc or CPA or a lawyer outside of a few select firms plus things they don't generally get like bonuses and options). All that and I can look at myself in the mirror each day (making lots of $$ is law generally requires you giving this up unless you are really lucky or good or both).

Actually, dumb policies like this help me as it will ultimately reduce the number of qualified programmers in the world. Please keep up your mis-information campaign. My banker and descendants thanks you...

Comment: Re:This thread will be a sewer of misogyny (Score 1) 779

by sfcat (#48962921) Attached to: WA Bill Takes Aim at Boys' Dominance In Computer Classes

I suspect most five-year-olds or confused squirrels know what "ignoring" means :)

Dude, reread his original post. And substitute the word 'learn' for the words 'be told'. Then it will make sense to you. He was a rude asshole, but you are still being either intentional dense or the idiot he says you are.

Comment: Re:This thread will be a sewer of misogyny (Score 1) 779

by sfcat (#48962851) Attached to: WA Bill Takes Aim at Boys' Dominance In Computer Classes

There isn't a section that explicitly says 'discourage white boys from signing up for class'. But, like the zero tolerance policies that are mis-interpreted to include biting a pop-tart into a vague gun shape, pointing your fingers, and having a 1 in plastic molded machine gun for your GI Joes, what will happen is if you can't get enough of the underrepresented demographic students into the class as a percentage of the entire class, then there's going to be a kid that really wants to take the class told 'Sorry, that class is full' when there's only 8 people signed up.

All just to keep the % of underrepresented students at a certain level.

Funny you should mention that. At Berkeley High (in CA), they had only a girls computer club despite the fact that dozens of boys wanted a computer club. There were no girls who signed up for computer club but they still wouldn't have a boys computer club (or a students computer club which is what it should be). So rather than teaching those that are interested, they denied everyone rather than have an out of balance club. Sad considering Berkeley High used to be an excellent high school. Its now behind the high school I attended in rural Kentucky that has less than 1/20th the budget.

Comment: Re:Don't let perfection be the enemy of good enoug (Score 2) 60

by sfcat (#48956693) Attached to: Test Shows Big Data Text Analysis Inconsistent, Inaccurate

That's a great question. Do you think 80% accuracy is good enough for medical use? If you're a doctor facing an unfamiliar situation, and your data says treatment X helped 40% of patients it was tried on, treatment Y helped 35% of them, and all other treatments (Z, W, etc.) helped no more than 30%, but you know the data might only be 80% accurate, what treatment do you choose? Are those ratios even meaningful in the presence of so many errors?

Consider the case where the patient's condition is critical, and you don't have time for additional evaluation. Is X always the best choice? What if your specialty makes you better than average at treatment Y? Maybe that 20% inaccuracy works in favor of the doctor who has the right experience.

It could it be used for ill, too. What if you know you'll get paid more by the insurance company for all the extra tests required to do treatment Y? You could justify part of your decision based on the uncertainty of the data.

In the end, historical data is just one factor out of many that goes into each of these decisions. Inaccurate data may lead to suboptimal decisions, so it can't be the only factor.

Great strawman, but your strawman happens to actually be a nuclear powered, armor plated tank...with sharks and laser beams!!! Turns out way back in the 60's, when they started to think about what problems computers could one day solve, they listed many: beat world champion at chess, drive cars, of them was medical diagnosis. It took decades longer than thought to solve the ones they have been able to solve with one exception: medical diagnosis. By the early 80s we had "expert systems" that were more accurate than human doctors at medical diagnosis (especially 24 hrs in to a 36 hr shift). The AMA and insurance companies have basically blocked this tech for decades despite overwhelming evidence that they were killing people by doing so. Today we have started to slowly role out this type of tech for things like drug interaction but not yet for medical diagnosis. Ironic huh?

Comment: Re:Jealous much? (Score 2) 431

by sfcat (#48927931) Attached to: Justice Department: Default Encryption Has Created a 'Zone of Lawlessness'

I don't think that this has to be a FUD scenario. I think law enforcement has a job to do, and they get to use certain tools to do it. If one of those tools becomes ineffective, then they have more trouble doing their job. Then they will complain because they are still expected to do their jobs.

Every year the city of Philadelphia along seizes $5.8m in civil forfeitures. Less than what robbers steal in that city. Right now, I'm more scared of being robbed by cops than by crooks. That's because cops are currently stealing more than the criminals on a dollar for dollar basis. Stuff like this...

Can you see why we don't trust them? Now tell me why again I should expose my personal information to them, (and ID thieves) to make their job easier? Maybe I'm not certain who I'm more scared of? And maybe I'm not sure them doing their job making my life better or safer. Maybe I think they are worse than the criminals. And it doesn't seem to matter what level of government we are talking about, local, state, or federal. Might be time to start over again with LE, and this time not exclude people with an IQ higher than 102.

Comment: Re:What Paul Graham doesn't get... (Score 1) 552

by sfcat (#48686845) Attached to: Paul Graham: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

HP was famous for having parallel tracks for management and engineering talent. Promotion didn't mean moving to management, that was a separate skill set and managers would often be paid less than the people that they were managing.

I think IBM was initially known for this. It spread to most other major technical companies during the era when IBM was dominate. Sadly this seems to have stopped in many places now. Many software firms do still do this but not nearly as should.

"Say yur prayers, yuh flea-pickin' varmint!" -- Yosemite Sam