Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment It's marketing (Score 1) 352 352

Err, no, programming still requires a goodly amount of study and understanding, regardless how the various complexities have been hidden. The margin for error remains rather low--how are those Andriods doing? Car entertainment systems? Browsers? And in the department of learning from history, I present, CVE-2013-4259 and CVE-2014-3563 for two shiny new configuration management softwares. How long have /tmp security problems been known? Two decades, at least? Now, marketing programming to folks that might be interested in beginning that journey is a different story, and probably more in line with what Apple is attempting here.

Comment Re:The optimists totally ignore history. (Score 1) 391 391

Mmm, no. One lesson from history would be the technological advance that is the analog computer, and the fact that this technology was lost for some number of centuries. In particular, the Antikythera mechanism (~205 BCE?) and subsequent reinvention of the analog computer (~14th century CE). Thus, technological advance is an insufficient guide, as it did nothing to prevent the Greek and Roman civilizations (and indeed every past civilization, ever) from faceplanting. Such faceplants probably had some impact on the jobs market--mead-maker for local warlord, assuming one survives?

Perhaps optimists would know these cycles of history if they were not so busy fitting straight lines to semi-log graph paper and calling things good?

Comment Re:Missing ingredient: consumers (Score 1) 391 391

Demand does not create wealth. Production does.

Yes, yes, everyone gets up and dances until the economy craters due to overproduction and a lack of consumers for said goods. But do let's forget the roaring twenties and associated rampant consumerism and stock market speculation, eh?

Never heard of luxury goods? Like $17K watches?

No, but I've helped shepherd a six-figure chunk of carbon or two through a small online retailer in my time. Rather uncommon, which I believe is just the point the original poster made. What was yours?

Comment Re:We'll take them (Score 1) 285 285

No, Washington could use fewer roads. Seattle in particular has blown the "bridging the gap" funds on mostly making the Mercer mess that much more a horrible stroad, and with WSDOT stuck in pave-like-it's-1959 mode despite construction costs increasing faster than inflation (yeah, maintenance, how about that?) car sitters have the enviable joy of higher taxes--at least they're hitting you with a gas tax increase, instead of the Federal method of pretending that all is well while stealing from the General fund to keep the utterly broken Highway Trust Fund seemingly solvent. Prediction: induced demand will destroy the short-term benefit of any new pavement they might slap down, leaving you once again stuck in congestion, though now with a higher maintenance bill due to all those new roads. Derp! The long future: look to Iowa.

Otherwise, you do sound bitter. Maybe try walking more, or taking the bus? All that stress from road rage really isn't healthy.

Comment Re:Solar's problem is political not technological (Score 2, Informative) 176 176

The triumphant little guy sticks it to The Man, news at 11. More like, the distributed smart grid (or whatever) turns out to somehow be more expensive and less secure than advertised, and given the noteworthy lack of philosopher kings to run it, regulations become necessary to curb the worst misuses and excesses. (Assuming the distributed smart grid (or whatever) is actually viable.) Meanwhile, back in the real world, note the progress of solar in Japan, where the utilities (that would be, the folks running the grid) are somehow unhappy about having to both eat higher costs and to install new infrastructure to support all the new solar stuff.

Comment Re:Seattle has "no zoning" to prohibit this? (Score 1) 296 296

Eh, what, developers are not offering parking?

"The recommendations (all meeting materials available here) were based on a survey of 219 newly reviewed or permitted residential developments in parts of Seattle where no parking is required, which found that three-quarters of developers are choosing to build parking anyway"

So, 75% of developers without all the usual minimum parking mandates choose to plonk out parking slabs anyways. Could you perhaps expand on what you mean by "too many of them get build without parking" in light of this? Are the mere 25% who choose not to waste space and money on parking really that objectionable? (Disclaimer: car-free in Seattle since, oh, 1994 or so, so lack of parking is a huge bonus in my book. About time we go more of that.)

Meanwhile, on the ugly townhomes front, the following is fairly indicative of how things played out.


Comment Re:What an Embarrassingly Vapid Article (Score 1) 477 477

Inevitable, eh?

  * Jobs are lost as the middle class continues to bump along the path of
      downward mobility, as it turns out re-training a wheel-wiggler to
      some high-education computing job isn't as easy a transition as the
      move from horse reigns to wiggling that wheel was back in the day.
      And how many computing jobs does one exactly need? And how much does
      automation contribute to the rather low labor participation rate?
      Can't raise revenue if folks aren't working.
  * An hour drive? Ouch, car sitting. Hope you got a gym membership or
      something to help undo that damage. Meanwhile, how much do all the
      roads, sewer, electricity, and other services cost for those
      sprawling suburbs? They'll have to build up, or fall down. The amount
      of tax revenue from those sprawling nowheres connected by expensive
      car sewers ain't that great.
  * Drunk driving can already be solved by not zoning the boozing with
      massive, expensive parking lots. Stumbling distance, no car sitting
      required. Simple, inexpensive, and no money wasted on parking, roads.
  * Speaking of parking, it really is already quite silly. See Donald
      Shoup on the high cost of that. Reforms there are badly needed,
      though I'm going to imagine that the car sitters will not much like
      the results (fewer spots, actual market pricing instead of blindly
      following some quasi-religious document from the 1950s, etc).
  * How exactly will the roads be maintained? Congress is busy raiding
      the General Fund to prop up the quite insolvent Highway Trust Fund,
      states are slumped out dead over the "build new!!" lever and how
      about maintenance of what is already built? Uh, yeah, hmm. Not at all
      a pretty picture. And how many trillions is the American Society for
      Civil Engineers asking for in road funding? Can all those Walmart
      workers and Detroit mechanics who already cannot afford a car really
      afford yet more spending on roads?

The reason why worry kills more people than work is that more people worry than work.