That wasn't "wastewater", that was Exxon's proprietary formula of Hydroxylic Acid. And any children who are found with Hyrdoxylic Acid in their bloodstream better get ready get sued by Exxon.

Job CreatorsTM, bitches!

The only way to stop a bad guy with a grenade on an airplane is a good guy with a grenade on an airplane.

Oh wait...

Those are two entirely different problems you mix there. No surprise you are confused.

"rock star" is mostly an attitude, not a skill level. Some of the very best are not famous, and many of the famous aren't all that good. That is true in all areas, not just music or coding.

So on that question: A "rock star" developer is necessary if and only if he adds value for the company. If you are selling your technology, say you are id software and your main business is selling your game engine to other developers, then a rock star can help you a lot to sell more licenses. Otherwise, no you probably don't need him.

But on the other question: Absolutely yes. Unless your company is tiny, you really, really want at least one brilliant guy on the team. You think in a simple, linear way. The real world rarely works like that. You may be perfectly able to solve that standard problem, but your 10 coder may be able to solve it faster, better, or in a more generic way that can be applied to other problems. Or he may be the one to ask the right questions to make everyone understand that you've been solving the wrong problem all along. If nothing else, he provides a benchmark and an aspiration for everyone else.

If you've never worked with a real pro before, you should. The difference between someone competent and someone brilliant is staggering, and it goes way beyond the difficulty levels of problems he can solve.

Most Libertarians (both big and little "l") don't want state sponsored corporations with special privileges not afforded their individual members.

Let me add that to the list of positions which Libertarians claim both sides.

Maybe. Still I enjoy learning about how these things are used well.

For example, I own a license to Terragen 2. But my own creations are far, far away from the stuff they make as movie backgrounds using the very same software. I love reading about it and watching images and vids, because it shows me just what is possible and gives me aspiration to improve my skills.

City Engine is another thing that I've had on my radar for a long time. It's just way, way too expensive for a small indie developer.

So, basically: Yeah, it borders on slashvertisement, but people like me still care and want to read about it.

This doesn't mean that libertarianism as an ideology is devoid of merit.

OK, then I'll have to wait until someone delineates the ideology of libertarianism in a cogent way.

Until now, no one has done so. The people who have tried? Ayn Rand, David Koch, Ron Paul have pretty much provided mush (not to mention that they don't seem to even agree with each other).

What has been presented thus far, by the greatest libertarian thinkers, has been childish, churlish and fabulist. It is based on a neo-Utopian vision that can be summed up by the words, "if only..." The places where this ideology has been tried in its pure form have been disasters and one of the weaknesses of this ideology is that if it's not "pure" then it's not libertarianism. Maybe that is it's biggest weakness and the flaw that makes it lack merit.

I'm glad to see that unlike some other well-known technical blogs, Slashdot has pushed aside new revelations about our Police State to pass along important product roll-out press releases from the biggest tech companies.

The problem with most people who describe Libertarianism is that they have no fucking clue what they're on about

And that goes double for Libertarians.

Just in the past week, we've had "Libertarians" support restrictions on abortions, both for and against the Keystone XL pipeline (private property rights, yes!, private property rights for anyone but corporations, no!) and both for and against gay marriage.

Read Reason Magazine for six months if you really want to learn how childish and confused what passes for "Libertarianism" really is. It's the political philosophy of undergrads, and the only reason it has as much currency in the US as it currently does is because some very rich people think they can use it to further erode economic and social liberty. And because it's the political philosophy of undergrads, some very cynical people are manipulating it to create and maintain a feudal system.

History will look back at the early 21st century Libertarianism about the way it looks back on the Utopianism of the late 19th century, another childish and confused political philosophy.

Libertarians (both big "L" and little "l") generally want corporations to make the rules. That is not what "free market" means.

How Car Dealership Lobbyists Successfully Banned Tesla Motors From Texas

This is what the "free market" looks like, Texas-style.

I don't think that assertion passes the giggle test.

You're an idiot. The only reason this country is still standing is because we learnt during the Kohl era (her mentor, btw) how to run a country without a government, because its official attitude is basically that they're not interested in running the country.

The greatest strength of Germany is that it really doesn't matter who's in the drivers seat, because we have long removed the pedals and the steering wheel from there anyways.

If you want to understand Germany, the first thing you need to know about politics is that the central government does not matter one bit. Since Kohl, we've had 4 different parties in 4 different coalitions running the country. You need a microscope to find the changes in the actual politics.

Credit where credit is due: Everywhere but the government. The rest of the country is doing a pretty good job keeping the country running even though we haven't had an actual government for a decade or so.

The fighting back against the police state has just begun. That the police state will be defeated is a foregone conclusion. The only question is, how many people are going to suffer and maybe die?

I'm convinced that wanting freedom is in our genetic code. Certainly, wanting privacy is. Fighting for it is how we're made.

A lot of us didn't want to think it was this bad, but now that we're finding out, the fight is on, and the outcome certain.

This.

Uh, no it doesn't. The current ruling coalition is not guaranteed to continue having the majority after the election. We will most likely keep our mother-troll, mostly because she spent the last 10 years wiping out everyone who could challenge her within her own party, but it's unclear if they can rule with their favorite coalition partner or someone else.

Of course this was a publicity stunt. Ponfalla is not in the business of stuff like this unless it is of personal important to the government.