Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Uh, okay? (Score 1) 327

by bluefoxlucid (#48925843) Attached to: Why Screen Lockers On X11 Cannot Be Secure

What about Steam on Linux, Microsoft charging a yearly subscription for Windows 10*, and nobody wanting to pay to continue using the computer they already bought?

*Windows 10 upgrades within the first year of release come with a free lifelong subscription until Windows 10 is discontinued. Corporate subscription is per-user on unlimited devices, rather than per-device.

Comment: Re:No. (Score 1) 215

by bluefoxlucid (#48923755) Attached to: Facebook Censoring Images of the Prophet Muhammad In Turkey


... this is what we all need to reject — a group of extremists trying to silence the voices and opinions of everyone else around the world. I won't let that happen on Facebook.

Facebook hasn't silenced the voices and opinions of everyone around the world. It's just applied some tact in Turkey, where culture and leadership don't tolerate certain things. As for extremists coming from Turkey to blow up Chicken, well, people in Chicken can post pictures offensive to Rude and Reno at their own peril.

Comment: Re:So what will this accomplish? (Score 1) 151

by bluefoxlucid (#48923715) Attached to: Uber Capping Prices During Snowmageddon 2015

People believe that more businesses mean more competition. I've had long, drawn-out arguments that centered around this ideal that a basic income or citizen's dividend, creating a ton of people with guaranteed income streams, would draw out tons of landlords, who would create tons of housing, and then rent that housing at the bare cheapest "because of competition".

I tell people a Citizen's Dividend must be the minimum to get all basic needs. Basically, if landlords can rent a micro-unit at $300/mo, and people need $300/mo more to get food and utilities and such to live, you give them $600/mo. People want to give everyone $1500/mo, to which I say: the landlords will raise rent like fucking crazy and rent you the same shitty $300 apartment for $1000 (like in New York: $1500/mo for 425sqft studio; 425sqft rents for $500 here), because people just have $1000 to burn, and need houses. The overwhelming response? "Nuh-uh! Competition! Other landlords will get in on that, and the price will run down to the same price it would be anyway! Giving people more money doesn't cause inflation!"

They fail to consider risks, inelastic markets, the extreme cost of having empty units, and so on.

Comment: Re:why is the cap a good idea? (Score 1) 151

by Tom (#48917635) Attached to: Uber Capping Prices During Snowmageddon 2015

Hypothetically speaking, if I'm desperate to get somewhere, and I'm willing to pay *whatever it takes*, why is it a good idea to limit the surge pricing?

Because other people will pay for your desire.

Or what about having an auction system where each person that wants a ride indicates how much they're willing to pay for it? Would you want to cap that as well?

Economists are big fans of auctions and say that's the most fair method to distribute resources. Economists, however, are not known for taking social, cultural or human values into account in their simple models.

So yes, I would. Man, it really isn't so difficult. Get some history lessons on when and why the taxi business became regulated.

Comment: Re:So what will this accomplish? (Score 3, Informative) 151

by Tom (#48914375) Attached to: Uber Capping Prices During Snowmageddon 2015

In Econ 101 you also learn about horizontal and vertical pricing.

Basically, if the surge price is reasonably high, most drivers will be available. From 1.0 to 1.5 you may raise the number of drivers considerably, but from 3.0 to 3.5 you will probably not motivate many more drivers to go out and drive - most available drivers will already be on the road, and the few who decide against it will not change their mind here because if 3.0 doesn't motivate them, then 3.5 most likely won't because they have important reasons to stay home.

A cap on such elastic pricing is almost always a good idea.

Comment: Re:Escaping only helps you until a war. (Score 1) 332

by Tom (#48914325) Attached to: Davos 2015: Less Innovation, More Regulation, More Unrest. Run Away!

This exactly.

Why do rich people not live in Africa and Asia where the climate is good? Safety and convenience. If you don't want to spend your life in a castle defending your riches, you go somewhere where culture, society and government will do that job for you.

Strangely, many don't see this as a service worth paying for, which is largely a semantic problem. Maybe we should tackle it there, and instead of taxes, we should collect a "wealth-protection service fee".

Comment: Re:"They" is us (Score 1) 332

by Tom (#48914267) Attached to: Davos 2015: Less Innovation, More Regulation, More Unrest. Run Away!

From the very article you link to:

But Credit Suisse's report doesn't tell the whole story.

It doesn't take into account how much it costs to buy goods in each country, for example. Half a million pounds might buy a one-bedroom flat in central London, but in other countries it could buy a mansion.

It also doesn't take into account income. As a result, many well-paid young people in Western countries may fall into the bottom 50% of wealth - either because they still have student debt to pay off, or because they know how to live well, and spend all their income.

Comment: Re:So what will this accomplish? (Score 2) 151

by bluefoxlucid (#48914247) Attached to: Uber Capping Prices During Snowmageddon 2015
That's not as magic as people want it to seem; but it is a force to be reckoned with. Do note that most goods are priced substantially above the minimum business viable price: there's huge mark-up on all kinds of shit, at all levels, even in markets with healthy competition. Apartments are practically divorced from price competition, for example, and tend to only shift prices with general demand (e.g. they get cheaper in a tough economy, they get more expensive when more middle class move to an area, but they don't become cheaper when more landlords own the same limited number of apartments).

To restore a sense of reality, I think Walt Disney should have a Hardluckland. -- Jack Paar