Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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

Comment Re:The whole problem was the unneeded secrecy (Score -1) 127

Trade secrets is the correct way of protecting knowledge, afaic all copyright and patent laws need to be repealed and for a company to make money it has to show results while protecting its knowledge and processes. I don't see anything wrong with treating a product as a black box that takes inputs and produces outputs, I only care that it does what it says it does by comparing the outputs to the expected results.

Of course this theranos thing (this is the second time in my life I am hearing about it, the first time was also on /. ) is a fraud and would be identified as a fraud based on the black box testing criteria.

Early investors should be more careful than trusting that a 19 y.o. girl with no 30 years of experience in the field will deliver 'ground breaking results'. I think in most cases this expectation will end up in a failure.

Millions of dollars are gambled on a promise because the market is set up for this type of a gamble by the Fedrleral reserve bank, by the dismal economy of the USA and by the government implicit and often explicit promise to bail out failure.

So the real problem here is the loss of efficiency in the overall economy, not that the product was never delivered, it was always a pie in the sky, just like never falling housing or bond markets.

Comment Re:Tax (Score -1) 538

are they doing it with some alterior motives? strings attached? join 'our club' or else?

- 100% the government is doing getting into the business territory to control the population, to be able to exert control that actually is used to help some very well politically connected people to steal from everybody and thus to get richer at the expense of the efficiency in the society.

The government exists to steal from poorly connected and redistribute to those who are either very well connected or those who vote as the large block that provides the government with its power, that's the goal, that's the purpose of the government - to control, to exert power, to destroy individual rights and liberties. While private entities (people, businesses, which are ultimately people) can destroy your liberty as well maybe by abducting you and enslaving you, the government does the abducting and enslaving on a systemic, so called 'legitimate' level.

Draft, taxes, so called 'public' utilities, 'public' lands, anything at all that is collective is theft, redistribution, control, violence.

AFAIC every single thing under the Sun should be private if it is expected to provide any sort of value and if it is at all valuable. There should be no government whatsoever and I think the information age is going in that direction. Governments rely on fears, on nationalist ideology and on straight violence to stay in power. Information and freedom of movement remove power from the governments and they will fight against this threat to their existence but at the end will lose.

Comment Re:I think it's fair (Score -1) 178

Companies everywhere have regulations. It is called 'free market' and it means that anybody is free to work where they van find a job. So if you do not like Uber and its working conditions, you can always work somewhere else. If you cannot find any other job the question you should ask is not how to stop Uber from providing those jobs, the question should be: what is the system doing to prevent other jobs from existence?

The answer is obvious, the other jobs don't exist because of regulations, taxes, government manipulating money supply and the interest rates. That is the answer, because if the only company providing jobs idea company that hoesaround those regulations then competition is impossible because of the regulations.

The government completely destroyed the economy over the last 50 years with taxation, regulation, money and interest rate manipulation, thus destroying capital formation. If you want more of that, then sure, have more government. If you want an actual real economy realize the fact, the fact being that the government is the enemy, it is the force that destroyed the economy and keeps pushing it down and it needs to be removed for the economy yo restructure and rebuild with private savings and businesses.

Comment Re:What's the price of your integrity? (Score -1) 338

Labour is no different from anything else that is sold and bought for money. All of this outrage directed at businesses that are doing whatever they need to minimize costs and nobody here is outraged if they can find a cheaper deal in a store.

You are trying to minimize your daily expenses as well, so instead of eating at a fancy restaurant every day, you can eat something from a hot dog stand. Of course the restaurant owners are outraged: everybody needs to be forced to become a licensed restaurant to sell any food, nobody should be allowed to buy food not cooked by a licensed restaurant. That would be great for some restaurants.

It would be horrible for people who want to eat and don't want the expense of a fine restaurant. It would be horrible for the economy, as more and more people would be forced to go hungry.

Of-course it would also create a healthy underground black market for hotdogs.

Comment Re:Only possible with unreasonable tax rates (Score -1) 630

Today the poverty is institutional and the reasons for it are systemic. Poor people are poor due to the system that discourages savings, encourages consumption spending, discourages production, encourages borrowing for consumption, discourages a healthy return on a productive investment, encourages creation of fake money for consumption debt by pretending that the collective government can actually cover the losses in case of malinvestment.

All of this was made possible by the Keynesian charlatans, who are in the position to dictate their nonsensical views upon the economy in a political system that benefits from this complete nonsense. The political system benefits from it because the voting majority makes a short term rational decision to vote itself a subsidy at the expense of the people with more productive means. The collection is dine via the violence of the State.

The long term consequence of this led to consumption binge on the State level that created a permanent class of welfare recipients on both, the personal and the corporate sides.

The corporate welfare is in all the government contracts and government created and maintained monopolies, this includes the military industrial complex, big food, big utilities, big banking, big anything that gains from government regulations that destroy competition either directly or indirectly (laws or taxes and inflation for example).

The personal welfare created a permanent voting block on whatever side of the so called political spectrum, with the majority of the voters expecting the politicians to provide economic benefit to some at the expense of others.

The system will reset once the further borrowing becomes impossible and the bond holders that currently subsidise this system decide that their money can better be used (and be safer) elsewhere.

There will be a very large reset before the next POTUS leaves the white house.

Comment Re:He's just changing robbers. (Score -1) 302

A 'functioning democracy' is organized crime whose methods are based on the collectivist government acting as the thugs, muscles to steal and 'share' the loot. Theft is masked under the guise of legality of the state, supported by the desire for this theft by the vast majority and the majority votes for it because though it also seemingly pays this tribute, the reality is that the majority votes itself a sweet deal, where it is heavily subsidized by the minority, who are actually robbed, stoleb from, to provide this vast subsidy.

This 'functioning democracy' is a thieving, gangster, racketeering society and the irony of your statement is that USA used to be that 'somalia' that you keep bringing up.

USA was the Somalia that people escaped to from their racketeering societies. Somalia, on the other hand, is not 'somalia' at all. It has just enough governments to make your head spin. It has nothing to do with anarchy but instead everything to do with the war that the local population had to fight to rid itself of even bigger governments that ruled it throughout the century.

Comment Re:Next up O'Google (Score -1) 212

Oh, so this is theft and actual violent removal of private property by the state under the name of 'taxation' is not theft? The actual theft happens when the violent means of a state are used to forcefully take property of a person or his business regardless of what the name is. A rose by any other name... Ireland is the best thing that happened in this insane world.

Comment Re:free choice (Score -1) 297

Yeah, they're perfectly free to go back to dire poverty and hunger if they want.

- correct, the key word in your sentence being *back*. Back is where they would have to go in order to get away from these 'horrible companies' that are giving them something they never had before - a choice of not going back, from where they came.

I guess they are making their own choices every day regardless of what you think they should do.

No one is holding a gun to their heads to force them to feed their kids and have basic shelter.

- precisely, nobody is forcing them to eat and to feed their kids. They are choosing to do so by working for the companies that are offering them these jobs. They can go *back* of-course, back from whence they came.

Comment Re:Ban drug ad's like most developed nations do! (Score -1) 396

'Most nations' do all sorts of crazy shit (and so does the USA) however drug ads to me are not different from shoe or car or food ads, drugs are a business, the only problem is government involvement, be it fda or medicare or medicaid or any form of government taxation and spending on anything related to healthcare or any form of business regulation beyond fraud. Ads are fine.

Comment Re:Be a Licensed Profession, folks... (Score -1) 332

Let me interject here as a business owner who hires developers to build the services sold to other businesses. So let me get this straight, you are going to prevent me from hiring whoever I want to do development and will further raise my costs? I already outsource 75% of my development work to Ukrainian developers. This will simply further increase this percentage to maybe 95% or what the hell, why not 100%?

Slashdot Top Deals

"I think trash is the most important manifestation of culture we have in my lifetime." - Johnny Legend