Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Imagine the reverse (Score 1) 1069

Actually if you read the history of the Electoral College, the framers thought that each state would have the people elect the electors by district and entrust them with finding a suitable candidate. In fact, they assumed the House would decide the election most of the time. Then we had political parties and that stopped pretty damn quickly.

I don't have a problem with the fact that smaller states are overrepresented given the federal nature of our government, and that is the effect, but it was never explicitly the intent. I do have a problem that whoever attains the most votes (even if it isn't a majority) gets all of the electors. They should be assigned by way of proportional representation. Half the votes gets you half the electors. Any reasonable method is acceptable for determining splitting of fractional electors.

Comment Re:I still want short distance & long distance (Score 1) 395

If you're talking about services, yes. If you're talking about infrastructure no.

I live in an area where there there are two cable companies (Wide Open West and Time Warner). There is no reason there couldn't be a 3rd except for the fact that no one thinks it's a good investment to run another series of cables throughout my neighborhood.

Decouple service from infrastructure and you will get all the competition you want.

Comment Re:Replacement Ballots (Score 1) 248

I think the more compelling argument is that in the grand scheme (at least for anything but local elections), vote buying is a very bad investment, which you make reference to. This isn't an easy case though. There are reasonable arguments on both sides. However:

they're about preventing people from expressing their political views on social media. Such postings have more benefit for insurgent candidates than establishment candidates, so the establishment is firmly against such efforts.

Is not one of them. I did not vote for a major party candidate for President, but I don't have any delusions that we'd be seeing a President Johnson or Stein if ballot access was equal and they were both in the debates. I think combined the most the Libertarians and Greens could get in such a scenario is about 20%.

Comment Re:That's exactly how it SHOULD work! (Score 1) 246

You are correct, however the concern is what happens when large parts of the workforce become essentially unemployable. Increased productivity and free trade are good things, but they do create winners and losers. We need to be more mindful of the losers and help them adjust to the changes.

Comment Re:So says every SJW attacking Peter Thiel (Score 1) 437

You realize why, right? Those people think it's wrong to give Trump money.

I think Peter Thiel is an asshole, and I'm happy to give any company shit that employs him or takes money from him or helps him in any way. That's my right. Your right is to think the same about Zukerberg. Don't use Facebook. Don't give him or any company he has an interest in any money directly or indirectly. That's completely fine by me.

Comment Re:I don't agree that these are "conservative" vie (Score 1) 235

Yeah, and that does suck for those people. They do it by the book and a bunch of people who don't are not punished. Its the same thing when there is intentional inflation and monetary devaluation. Plenty of people save their money and do it right, and then here comes inflation to wipe out their savings.

When too many people break the law, sometimes the best thing to do for the country as a whole is to declare amnesty. It isn't fair, but that's best for the country. We either give them amnesty, have them apply for citizenship, and maybe make them pay a tax penalty for a few years or spend billions of dollars deporting them. I don't like either option, but the status quo isn't acceptable either.

Comment Jennifer Government (Score 1) 636

This reminds me a bit of the novel Jennifer Government.

In the future, I wonder if the way we will put pressure on our politicians is by using our money to pressure commercial entities to support the candidates we do or don't like. Pepsi might be who you buy if you're a Democrat. Dell is for Republicans, etc.

We know they're all bought and paid for, but we can switch brands if they end up backing the wrong politicians. That would have them get smarter about who they support, etc.

Comment Re:Why is this a problem? (Score 1) 42

Its only a problem inasmuch as filing for the trademark in a country more likely to grant it gives them a leg up in countries that would be less likely to grant it.

Its like if I wanted a CCW permit, but my state makes it onerous to get one, whereas a nearby state just requires a fee and short test on gun safety. I go to the other state to get one, and through reciprocity agreements, I can use it in my home state. My own state's regulations are basically a dead letter.

End of the day this is not too big of a deal, but could become one if the major players are really using it to their own advantage.

Slashdot Top Deals

Happiness is a positive cash flow.