Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale Extended! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 20% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY20". ×

Comment Re:Sakura Battery (Score 1) 174

As part of the world at large I'd beg to differ. There are a hell of a lot more of me.

This is like an argument that the top .001% by wealth having their wealth redistributed would be the greatest of all evils... despite having a dramatic positive impact on 99.999% of the population and the negative impact for the tiny few is only that they'd have to get a real job like everyone else.

If you live in a town of 100,000 people and that new traffic light is a benefit to everyone but you the 0.001%er do you really think they shouldn't build the light? Why exactly is it that suddenly this all falls apart if your interest is business? Oh right, because you can bribe the people who are supposed to be representing the other 99,999 people.

Comment Re:Sakura Battery (Score 1) 174

That is interesting but is a different conversation. Note how quickly you jumped to random crackpot related material or conspiracy material. And this after the mass government warrantless NSA spying cover-up was unveiled.

The claim was that energy companies buy up emerging energy technology startups. Startups like university researchers who bred algae that turns sunlight and nutrients in a tank directly into gasoline, diesel fuel, and other hydrocarbons. These aren't laymen in their garage trying to build the next unity engine.

How plausible is it? Well they are corporations, first and foremost in all things they do is the fundamental profit motivation. Literally no action a corporation takes is for any purpose but saving or making maximum profit. Is it profitable to eliminate competing technologies? Yes, yes it is. Is it profitable to buy any technology that might be the next step after oil runs out? Yes again. Is it profitable to get utilize existing infrastructure and inventory (oil) for as long as possible before moving to something new? Yup. In other words, if energy companies are NOT doing this they are at risk of being sued by their shareholders.

Is the juice worth the squeeze? There is no squeeze, the energy lobby is massive and would never allow something so profitable for them to be illegal. Which is why not only is this not crackpot conspiracy theory, it isn't even a secret or a theory but an easily verified fact. Energy companies will spin this as them planning for the future rather than trying to block technologies that would bottom out their market.

You can be sure of one thing though, they certainly would buy technology that carries a risk of doing so and leave that one on the shelf. That is self preservation and doing otherwise would almost certainly result in shareholders suing the board.

Comment Re:...would smell as shitty as any browser (Score 1) 63

Well, maybe enough folks are still pissed off about having to *rent* their software with that fscking Creative Cloud monthly rental model....and that will help kill Flash off for good?

One can only hope.

I just still at this point, refuse to RENT my fucking creative software. For now, my CS6 Suite of Adobe tools will work...and now, with things like Fusion from Blackmagic..... Davinci Resolve from black magic design that is not only one of the ultimate color grading apps, it is also now turning into a world class NLE to compete with Adobe Premier.

I'm also playing with Affinity Photo and Affinity Designer , which so far look to compete pretty nicely with Photoshop and Illustrator respectively. All without the damned RENTAL buy a standalone license and be done with it.

Also Davinici Resolve...has a FREE lite version that really has about 99% of the functionality of the paid version....The affinity tools, are mac only for now, but they are working on releasing Windows versions soon.

The sooner the better...I really want to give the Adobe CC rental model some real competition with teeth and kill this thing off that is not in the consumer's best interest.

Oh dear, I seem to have gotten on a soapbox again....

Comment Re:Sakura Battery (Score 1) 174

Existing energy companies can and do buy up almost any emerging energy startup with a real product. It isn't even a secret, their justification is that oil won't last forever and they want to be the ones who own whatever comes next. Like any and all corporations they exist to make profit and anything which would result in a model that would reduce their profit isn't pursued further. There are no shortage of companies who have bought other companies primarily to take them out of the game and energy companies are not the pure and sacred exception.

There are definitely some crazy crackpots out there. If a few years ago you would have called someone talking about the us government having a network of foreign torture prison camps to bypass due process, a massive warrantless internet spying infrastructure with backdoors in all common encryption technologies in collusion with every major network carrier, a secret court to grant automatic permission for any action the government wishes with no authority to demand accounting for any of it, and that the response to the outrage of it being uncovered would be to shut people up with an unconstitutional bill from congress that claims to stop the illegal warrantless spying while actually authorizing it to continue a crackpot or conspiracy theorist... maybe you should take your gullibility points and learn from history already rather than repeating it yet again.

This kind of thing is essentially the same thing the defense does to a rape victim at trial. Anything you can do to disparage their character. If you can get people laughing at them all the better. By discrediting the source you make people forget that all forms of argument which utilize the merit of the source are fallacy because an argument is valid or invalid on it's own merits independent of any supposed authority of the one making it.

Take anyone who tries to dismiss someone by saying or implying that they are a crackpot or conspiracy theorist with a major grain of salt. They may or may not be a sock puppet but either way the merit of the claim stands or falls on its own.

Comment Re:Education... (Score 1) 138

I would rather send my kid to school in the poorest Ozark school than almost any inner-city shithole school in America.

Actually, in northern AR, there are some VERY wealthy communities up there, due mostly in part to the Walmart Walton family. There are multi-million dollar homes, and an airport, I believe, was put in just for all the business that is done up there....with industry folks coming in up there to try to get Walmart to carry their goods, etc.

So, with that kinda money, the school system up there doesn't hurt at all.

But, as for the rest of the state, overall, the public school system there is decent, and there are plenty of private schools that excel there too.

If you have a picture of barefoot, Hillbillies all over Arkansas, you have a pretty poor picture of the whole state. There is a LOT of wealth in that state, hell, Little Rock has more damned banks per square foot than most any place I've ever lived. You had the Steven's corp. there too, there is a lot of money that flows through that state, it is a fairly well kept secret from most of the US I'm guessing.

Comment Re:But intel... (Score 0) 120

But intel keeps telling us we only need 4 cores for games?!

They're right. A quad-core intel chip beats the pants off an eight-core AMD chip... for twice the money. The maximum frame rates are only maybe 5% higher, but the minimums are almost 50% higher. If it's worth the money to you to keep your minimum frame rates up, which really can make the difference between killing and being killed in an online match mind you, then you buy the Intel chip.

To me, saving a hundred bucks (and almost another hundred on the motherboard, which was also cheaper) was more important. But to each their own.

Comment Re: At what point do we reevaluate the position (Score 2) 226

Given that most western socialized medical systems provide the same quality or superior medical care compared with the US while paying less tax dollars per citizen for that care than the US does I fail to see any reason not to socialize healthcare.

Do you really like paying more to subsidize an industry with a market that will bare literally anything the consumer can pay when you could enjoy a tax cut and provide every citizen with complete healthcare?

Last time I went to the hospital I had a broken humerus. It needed to be immobilized and morphine delivered immediately. Instead they left me in the waiting room and wandering around with it loose for four hours. The staff was mostly hanging out chatting during this time. When I finally got in I noted no shortage of empty emergency stalls and was given a quick x-ray and a sling for a rotor cuff injury (no relation to my broken bone) along with a shot of morphine and a script for pain pills.

Quality of care: I should sue them.
Time spent treating me: Maybe 15-20min
Cost to hospital for the tests: Lets go off the charts and call it $1.
Bill: $3,000 and counting, as you are double billed by the hospital for the service and again by each person you walked near.

Which part of this do you actually believe is consistent with the nonsense spouted by those opposed to socialized medicine who claim we have the "best care in the world" and that "waits will be outrageous?" The only place I've found decent speed of service (less than 40min combined waits) in the US is in the offices of surgeons and dentists looking to provide unneeded and overpriced care on the order of tens of thousands of dollars.

Comment Re: At what point do we reevaluate the position (Score 1) 226

I assume by that you mean eliminate all forms of employment freelance/contractual arrangements that are de facto employment? Or at least 100% employee owned with equal stakes private companies with total personal liability. Sure, I'd be down but I suspect there would be a lot of opposition.

Comment Re:False sense of security (Score 4, Insightful) 226

"Welcome to being an entrepreneur. You want time off? You earn enough to take some time. You want work/life balance? You earn it. Sometimes getting there requires working pretty hard for a while. You talk about work/life balance as if it is something you are entitled to have rather than something you earn. There's nothing wrong with working for someone else but very few people can earn a substantial income without a lot of time, effort and risk."

A freelancer is hardly a true entrepreneur. A freelancer is effectively an employee without benefits. Freelancers are capped by the market rates for staff plus the cost of providing them benefits. This is quite different than truly being an entrepreneur making the value of what he is producing. There is a huge gap between the market rate for labor and the market value of a laborers output... if there weren't nobody would hire employees or entrepreneurs. Actual entrepreneurs are exploiting this to make a profit on the work of others without adding value themselves (at least not beyond the value of any one of the workers) and they absolutely owe those workers benefits.

60% of business ventures fail and most of the ones that don't fail aren't profitable in the first five years. You better have one hell of a safety net to be taking that kind of roll of the dice. It does depend on the business of course but the only ones I know of that significantly improve that outlook are effectively just employment opportunities minus benefits.

"No, no, I don't mind being called the smartest man in the world. I just wish it wasn't this one." -- Adrian Veidt/Ozymandias, WATCHMEN