Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


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:Conversely... (Score 1) 242

If the situation is exactly the same up to the point of your two options, then there is a "Self digging shovel" available at some level in both situations. In situation #2, it isn't for sale, and unless you can conclusively promise shovel in one year, for only $5,000 then option 1 is still the only valid consideration. Further, if option 2 says there are no patents (assuming that is the change) then I can build a shelf digging shovel today for whatever price, and as long as the value I get out of it is better than before, I'll get my $20,000 shovel either way.

1) 20000 for shovel get 30000 use from shovel in year one. Year two is how much (no answer in option 1) is it free, or nearly free? Does it cost 20K / year forever (unlikely) or what. Incomplete information leads to bad decisions.

2) Can't buy Self Digging shovel (unknown reason). Promise that they will be available in a year for $5000 (if you believe vaporware promises)

all the unknown variables make your assumptions useless, which is why I chose (and still choose) option 1. Based on the INFORMATION I have, it is the only real choice.

Comment Re:Conversely... (Score 1) 242

Heck, you can still charge the same amount as a well-written patent, but can crank it out in an afternoon!

Legal profession robots coming soon for this reason alone. Yes, good lawyers will always be needed, but most "lawyering" today is boilerplate legal forms and processes that can be replicated by a series of questions that pick which process one needs. We can get rid of most lawyers and and streamline the legal processes.

Comment Re:Conversely... (Score 1) 242

In that world, do you think we'd successfully get rid of patents? Also, have you given thought to the implications of getting rid of patents?

No. And Yes.

We'll never because its in the Constitution, and that is next to impossible to change. And I have, and it is liberating of enterprise. I prefer "trade secrets" to Patents for protection anyway.

Comment Re:Conversely... (Score 4, Insightful) 242

They are written vague on purpose, because to be specific, would allow others to build upon your patent, and patent their improvements, locking you into a stale old way of building said invention, never able to improve it.

As a libertarian, I am all for the repealing of most patents, and the shortening of the term of protection. As it stands now, patents do not protect anyone from anything for very long. If something is popular, and patented, it will be cloned and ripped off anyway.

Patent abuse is like anything else the government does, it doesn't help many people, and hurts more people than it helps.

Comment Re: That's their job (Score 1) 447

Basically my reasoning is nothing like your emotional projection says it is. My reasoning is: "Taxes are regressive, all of them. The rich can avoid them, the poor doesn't pay them, and the middle class is stuck paying them". I personally don't pay any more taxes than I have to, to avoid going to jail. I expect everyone to do exactly the same thing.

This case (Apple/NZ Taxes) kind of proves the first two of the chain in reasoning. I expect a witty expletive riddled retort to follow.

Comment Re: This is extortion (Score 1) 227

The CIA presumably got the hacks from Russians, so that they would want the Russians to take the fall.

The CIA is actually working with affected companies, and they really can't disclose the vulnerabilities to the public, because they already know about them.

The CIA would love to undermine the public trust in WikiLeaks, so blaming the Kremlin for everything is logical (cold war mistrust)

The CIA would love to be able to shift the focus off their hacking skills and put it on the Kremlin.

OR Perhaps both the Kremlin and the CIA are both pissed at the other exposing them and are using public press to wage a war for the minds of citizens of the world. Meanwhile, I'm pissed that nobody seems to give a shit about doing the right thing, except it appears ... WikiLeaks.

Comment Re: This is extortion (Score 1) 227

you made a vague accusation that the Kremlin is influencing WikiLeaks. Do you have any evidence?

This is the second time I've seen this accusation, and the first time the guy offered no evidence, just that he "was Russian, and knows things". My guess, is that this is all part of the vague "Russians Hacked the US elections" thing, that was exposed as being based on vague accusations ... from the beginning.

It is actually more likely that it was Seth Rich that gave WikiLeaks at least part of the treasure used to upset the election. And having "Password" as your password ... revealed in a Phishing attack is evidence that said person shouldn't be anywhere near sensitive/secret information.

So far, vague allegations are all that is needed to upset people with Trump. The fact that he is playing the game back is popcorn worthy material. Nobody gives a shit when the Press lies with its unsubstantiated allegations, but when Trump does it, all hell breaks loose and his is "unhinged"!

Comment Re:Yeah, the bubble will pop long before that (Score 1, Flamebait) 374

but in America the special snowflakes can't possibly be judged academically

Because systemic "Racism", "Sexism", "Genderism", "Homophobia", "Transphobia" ... basically anyone that is not a white male has "societal discrimination" in their favor, so we must accommodate.

Comment Re:Tax incidence vs competition (Score 1) 447

I would suggest to you that end users always pay the taxes, and usually additionally more. Taxes reduce competition (eventually) when those that can afford less profit in the short run, are able to absorb the costs of new taxes, better than others. Eventually, the market shrinks as taxes take out the corporations that cannot afford to not pass on the cost are removed from the market. Eventually a smaller number of companies can provide said services, and eventually they raise prices when there is less competition.

The end result is, the user always pays the taxes, and usually more. Taxes should always be as minimal as possible. Zero if we could manage it.

Comment Re: That's their job (Score 1) 447

And yet most individuals pay more income tax than Apple.

irrelevant emotional reasoning. There is no reason anyone should pay more taxes than is legally required. NZ doesn't require taxes from Apple, because the tax laws says that Apple owes nothing. Again, if you don't like the laws, change them.

Comment Re: That's their job (Score 1) 447

You can correct tax laws by taxing velocity of money, not the profits. Why should we care if a business makes or loses money in order to pay taxes?

Think of it this way, velocity (transference of money) would circumvent the paper shuffling of money between wholly owned entities to avoid taxes on profits. Instead, efficiency of capital would be the end result of "taxes". Those that save money, invested money would win, those that spend money as fast as they made it, would end up losing.

And since Employment is also a goal, I would exempt normal payroll from said velocity taxes, so that it was only "business to business" money flows that would be taxed.

Comment Re:Yeah, the bubble will pop long before that (Score 1) 374

I'm ALL for standardized testing in America where it has true consequences for the student.

I am against standardized testing of student. But not for the reasons you might think.

1) Standardized testing isn't about students, it is about educators.
2) Standardized testing is a holdover to standardized education (Industrial). We are no longer in industrial society, and our ancient educational processes need updating ... big time
3) Standardized testing fails because it doesn't affect grades, so by the time kids reach Jr High, they stop caring and don't even bother trying

In short, Standardized testing looks good on paper, but fails in real life. Or, as my dad used to say ...

In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not

Slashdot Top Deals

Marvelous! The super-user's going to boot me! What a finely tuned response to the situation!