Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re: He cheated OTHER players (Score 1) 397

If I understand what I have read correctly, Ivey and Sun were not punished for what they did. They were merely required to return the money, which went back to the players they won it from. So, there is no reason for the casino to be punished either. However, what I do not know is if the casino returned THEIR cut from the games in question.

Comment Re:Child porn laws are bad and used to frame peopl (Score 2) 389

Child pron is NOT illegal because it supposedly leads to rape. Child porn is illegal (in the U.S.) because children have to be sexually abused in order to create it. At least, that is the justification which the Courts have given for allowing this suspension of the First Amendment. I actually support that logic.The problem is that things which do NOT involve the sexual abuse of children are labeled as child porn and are thus illegal. While I consider all child porn to be disgusting, any publication which did not require sexual abuse of minors to create should not fall under the legal categorization as child porn.

Comment Re:Primary factor (Score 1) 455

Can you list an alcohol manufacturer who has patented a method of preventing people from drinking while driving? Or a car manufacturer who has patented a method of preventing drivers from changing the radio station? Apple went that extra step and patented a method of preventing the drive from using Facetime while driving. If they had not done so, I would argue that this is a completely frivolous lawsuit and should be tossed out on the merits. However, they clearly think there is a need for such a method to the point that they spent the money to develop and patent one (OK, I do not really believe that, I think they just patented it so they could skim some money off of anyone else who actually developed such a method). Then they did not implement this method which they had developed.

It happens that I would ordinarily oppose lawsuits such as this one. However, in this case, I think Apple patented something which they did not believe actually worked, so that if someone else figured out how to make it work they could get a piece of any profits.

Comment Re:The business model (Score 1) 531

Your numbers look likely to me and I know that your explanation about the hidden costs of employees is more or less accurate. However, that does not in any way mean that the gist of what the poster you responded to said. I am going to bring up a couple of other problems with outsourcing (and it doesn't matter if you are outsourcing to domestic workers or foreign workers for most of these) that upper management rarely factors in. First, employee turnover is expensive in lost productivity. When your workers are outsourced, you have no way to manage turnover. For that matter, you probably are not even aware of the fact that it is high (and with outsourced workers it usually is). Second, you are paying some other company to extract data about your company leaving them free to profit from it...and you unable to do so. Outsourcing is sort of like Xerox PARC, except it would be as if Xerox set it up intending that they would not profit from it and someone else would.

Comment Re:Amazon could easily be profitable (Score 1) 70

Except that you do not get any of that value unless someone else is willing to give you their money for it.

Pick any 5 year period since 2007 and you'll find that an investment in Amazon at the start of that period pays well at the end of it.

There was a similar period of time when that could be said of Enron.

Comment Re:Amazon could easily be profitable (Score 3, Insightful) 70

Which means that buying Amazon stock is short sighted. Sooner or later, people are going to realize that owning Amazon stock returns no value to the owner of said stock and stop buying it. Right now, Amazon stock holders are taking part in a complex ponzi scheme. The only way you get your money back, let alone make a profit, is to find some other sucker to pay you as much for your stock as you paid for it.

There are times when investing in a company which does not pay dividends is a good move, but when it becomes clear that part of the company's business strategy is to NEVER pay dividends that is not one of them.

Comment Re:Strong scientific consensus (Score 1) 338

Dr. David Viner from the Climate Research Unit at the University of east Anglia predicted in 2000 that English children would not know what snow was because it would not snow there any more. In 2004, he predicted the end of skiing in Scotland due to lack of snow and temperatures too warn to make artificial snow. Professor Wieslaw Maslowski predicted that the Arctic would be ice free by 2013 and in 2007 said that that prediction was too optimistic, that the Arctic would be ice free sooner than that.

English children still see snow on a regular basis, Scotland skiing is still a thing. The Arctic has yet to be ice free. So, the scientists are NOT being overconservative.

Comment Re:Mass Bribery? [Re:So...] (Score 1) 338

I deny the science because it is bad science. The scientists who propose this theory have repeatedly made predictions which fail to come true. This is the definition of a disproven theory. If they would like to rework the theory and put forward some predictions we can test...and then are willing to wait for us to see if THESE predictions are finally true, I will reconsider my feelings about AGW.

At this point, it is irrelevant if I agree or disagree with AGW since no one has suggested an action which will make any significant difference. They want me, and the rest of the world, to sacrifice significant economic well-being in order to alter their proclaimed coming disaster from 20 years in the future to 22 years in the future (of course, the interesting thing is that the coming disaster has been 20 years in the future for over 30 years now).

Slashdot Top Deals

The meat is rotten, but the booze is holding out. Computer translation of "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak."