Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re: Fixed That For You (Score 1) 279

If that's the business of recycling old ideas, without adding any significant new ideas, then why not?

Well, it is a business. New ideas are risky. A movie with an innovative plot may be a hit, or it may bomb. But a remake or sequel using a proven formula is money in the bank. So it makes sense to just churn out another X-Men, Transformers, or Bond film.

Comment Re:Good! (Score 1) 60

And Amazon will lose their low transportation costs if their "fulfillment centers" are not in the U.S.

You seem to be under the delusion that American tax law makes sense. It does not. Taxes are not based on where activities occur, but where the company is incorporated. So if an American company makes a laptop in China, and sells it in France, the profit on that transaction is taxable in America. This gives companies a huge incentive to either incorporate overseas, or to keep their capital outside of America (the profit isn't taxable until it is repatriated). No other country has such stupid job-killing policies, but the American economy is big enough that a few trillion in foregone investment isn't big enough to bother fixing.

Comment Re:Good! (Score 1) 60

Yes, corporations should pay higher taxes.

No they shouldn't. Corporate taxes are regressive. The cost of the taxes are passed on to the customers (as higher prices), the employees (as lower wages), or the shareholders (as lower dividends or share prices). The first is equivalent to a sales tax. The second is equivalent to a payroll tax, which is even more regressive. The third is applied to all shareholders equally, so a working class family with a pension pays the same as a billionaire. It is better to just get rid of corporate taxes, and collect the tax at the individual level. This will not only be more progressive, but it will also give corporations a greater incentive to invest and grow, and fewer reasons to lobby and corrupt our government.

Comment Re:Yes, you entitled fuck, it is the destruction.. (Score 1) 279

Right. The freer the market, the harder it is to win with Hollywood Accounting. It works as well as it does because it's not a free market. In a free market, you pull that trick once, people will never work with you again.

While that may be true, a number of people who back films either:

a. Have some other way they are getting paid for their involvement so they don't care about the upfront costs since they will make money anyway. In addition, they don't have to share that money but profits would be shared so they have no good reason to want a profit

b. It's a way to get to hang around Hollywood types and that's the cost of entry...

The ones who get screwed are those who take a cut of the net profit because they don't understand the system; such as a writer who doesn't understand the system and gets a 10% of the net instead of .1% gross.

Comment Re:Can we get some diversity in the submissions he (Score 1) 33

Speaking of shitty submissions...

"Some Of Hacker Group's Claim Of Having Access To 250M iCloud Account Aren't False"

should be either

"Some Of Hacker Group's Claims Of Having Access To 250M iCloud Account Aren't False"


"Some Of Hacker Group's Claim Of Having Access To 250M iCloud Account isn't False"

No go mod up some of my submissions if you want some variety.

Comment Re:I know (Score 1) 224

Sarkeesian's problem isn't that she makes "mistakes", it's that her videos are hours upon hours of self-righteous indignation

Ah spot the weasel!

First you claimed dishonesty, which you failed to prove or even give a convincing argument for. Now you've moved the goalposts and without ever withdrawing or backing up your accusation, you've moved smoothly on to another one.

IOW, you're the dishonest one.

Comment Re:I know (Score 1) 224

Yes, and the terms "sexist" (prejudice or stereotyping based on sex) and "bigot" (intolerance towards those holding different opinions) clearly apply to Sarkeesian, regardless of whether you agree with her politics.

Citation needed.

And don't go citing some randos blog. Actually point to a place in the video, or if you prefer, text transcript proving your point.

I suspect she actually does,

Suspect based on what? Nothing except the fact you don't like Anita Sarkeesian.

In any case, your sarcasm meter is broken.

I don't think you know what "sarcasm" means either.

Comment Re:Similar (Score 1) 126

So you're saying that if I don't like your opinion I should go somewhere else.

Bro, do you even read?

I said, if you don't like this website (tag line: news for nerds, stuff that matters) when it has an article which (a) is of interest nerds and (b) matters, then perhaps you should consider visiting a different website, one more aligned with your interests perhaps.

I don't really care if you like my opinion. All things considered, I think I'd feel better if you disliked it.

Comment Re:Yes, you entitled fuck, it is the destruction.. (Score 2) 279

...of your abusive business model, where you make shit films, charge too much for them, trick people into going with clever advertising, and then get laws passed that criminalize format-shifting because you're so afraid that a tiny bit of revenue will slip through your greedy fingers. Even Hollywood accounting can't win in a free market. Man, that really sucks. Your life is so hard.

While I agree with you overall, I disagree with you assessment of Hollywood accounting, it always wins. A film's purpose is not to make a net profit, it's to take the angel's money and make a profit for everyone except those investors. Hollywood accounting is a brilliant scheme to do just that.I mean, where else can you spend 60$Million, make 580$Million, and still be in the red so you don't have to payoff the people who gave you the money in the first place?

Comment Re:Rotten Tomatoes is getting self-important (Score 1) 279

Their curated list of critics simply don't like the same movies I do. Therefore there is little to no correlation between my enjoyment of a film and its RT freshness. It's also setting expectations. People went into BvS expecting a terrible movie. If you look for a terrible movie, you will find it.

Then don't bother with reading RT reviews. I don't use it much but generally if I do look for similar movies to se how they tend to rate them and then take their ratings with a grain of salt. Hollywood doesn't like people saying their babies are ugly and want to go back to having to only please a few and build a relationship with to get decent reviews.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Life sucks, but death doesn't put out at all...." -- Thomas J. Kopp