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: Better be ready to be beat up when layed off w (Score 1) 510

If a factory will be able to purchase a humanoid android capable of learning and doing various types of jobs and the price for this robot would be competitive against a few months of salary of a single employee, then we are talking about a society so automated and advanced that even individuals who are not running a factory at a time would be able to purchase similar robots. If an individual is capable of purchasing a robot, an individual would be able to rent that robot at a much lower rate to a factory.

My point is that all of these predictions on how automation will affect individual humans who are all of a sudden unemployable are based on an idea that basically general purpose robots are so affordable that they are almost always preferable to human labour.

If that's the case then individuals will be able to own the robots and the wages of a robot would be much lower than wages of a human, again making it more economical for factories to rent robots from people, who would then not search for their own employment but would act as brokers (agents) to sell labour of their robots.

This is similar to truck owner operators of today, except in this case the robot owner operator would not even have to drive the robot.

OTOH if the robot is less than capable, then the owner operator could remotely control the robot for some parts of the work.

Again and again, people talking about these issues are really not paying attention to the reasons as to why automation today is more economical than hiring people, I am trying to get them to notice that in reality it is the taxes, rules, regulations and inflation (money printing) as well as interest rate manipulation, all done by governments that make labour more expensive than capital investment and it does not have to be that way at all.

Comment Re:#1TermDonald (Score 1) 354

Your comment makes no sense at all. Why would it set an "ugly precedent"? Why do you think the Electoral College system even exists? If the Founders wanted the voters' will to be followed without question, they wouldn't have come up with the Electoral College at all, they would have just had a popular vote. Instead, they wanted to give more power to smaller states, and to remove the ability of the people to directly choose the President, so they invented the EC system.

If the Electors choose someone else for President, because they think the voters' choice is harmful for the nation, they'll be doing exactly what the Founders intended.

Comment Re:We knew this going in (Score 1) 354

Oh please. You're probably right that she wouldn't put a goldman sachs billionaire with zero government experience in as head of the treasury, but not installing a GS alum, I don't buy it. She was good buddies with GS people, and Warren and Sanders had zero pull over Hillary. There's no limit to her tone-deafness; that's why she picked Kaine as VP, she hired DWS right after she resigned after being shown by WikiLeaks to have helped rig things in the DNC against Sanders, and she told Sanders supporters that she didn't need them. Picking a GS alum as her strategist (or some other position) would have been perfectly in-line with her tone-deaf actions.

Comment Re:You know what? (Score 3, Interesting) 354

This is a dumb comment. The AC is not threatening to physically harm anyone in any way, or proposing any kind of punishment for climate deniers to be performed by humans. He's only saying that he'll be happy to see them "hoist by their own petard". There's nothing wrong with feeling satisfaction after watching someone suffer due to their own stupidity and bad decisions, especially when their actions are in fact harmful to the rest of society.

Honestly, at this point, there's nothing we can do to stop massive climate change because of the deplorables and their mouthpieces like Breitbart. We're not going to change their minds; people like this fundamentally do not believe in science. So the next best thing is to just wait for the apocalypse to happen, and then take satisfaction in watching these morons suffer due to it.

Comment Re:Thinner (Score 1) 295

That sounds like BS. There's cellphone repair places all over the place; it shouldn't be hard to have one of them order the parts if necessary and schedule an appointment so you minimize your downtime.

If you're in such a rush you need your phone fixed right now and it's currently unusable because of a broken screen, then you have no business buying an expensive phone at all, and should be buying sub-$100 phones so you can just buy a new one when it breaks. There's no shortage of $50-100 Android phones. Or you can buy used phones which take a few days to arrive from Ebay. Or you can buy a nice used (or new) phone and a cheap-o backup phone, and switch your service when you have a problem, while waiting for a nicer replacement to arrive. It takes me all of about 5 minutes to switch my number over to a different Android phone on Ting, just using the website.

iPhones are for rich people, or people who want to believe they're rich. The problem is they suck in a bunch of very-much-not-rich people like my friend and convince them that they *must* have this phone and nothing else will do.

Comment Re:More like a terrible law (Score 1) 98

But awarding all the profit is insane. If that's the standard you're going to use, then Apple should just hand over all their profit from their iPhones 1 through 4 to Samsung, because they infringed one of Samsung's FRAND patents.

FRAND patents are utility patents, not design patents, and the "entire profits" rule only applies to design patents. Plus, FRAND patents are explicitly limited to a fair and reasonable royalty, or the patent can be effectively invalidated (not really invalid, but they can't enforce it, once found in breach of their FRAND requirements).

Apple escaped punishment for that only because Obama used executive privilege to nullify that ITC decision.

The ITC couldn't levy monetary damages, anyway. The only thing they can do is stop imports. And if they did stop imports under the ITC decision, then Samsung would have been in breach of their FRAND requirements, since by entering the patents into a FRAND agreement, they explicitly said, "we will never try to get an injunction to stop imports or sales, pinkie swears, honest." So, if the ITC decision was upheld, then those patents would have been unenforceable.

Comment Re: Stop calling it "skepticism". (Score -1, Troll) 354

The difference is my belief is falsifiable.

And that's the problem right there.

CAGW alarmists don't/won't provide falsifiable evidence that can be independently tested. They refuse to release un-'adjusted' data sets, even going so far as to attempt to use copyright claims on publicly-funded research They will not release the actual programs, algorithms, and data used in their computer models, which still are unable to both track past climate changes while modeling the future global temperature rise rates claimed. Models which most accurately track past changes do not show the predicted increases, while models that show predicted increases in global temperature averages do not track against past climate records.

In order to assume this is reason enough to greatly disrupt the US national economy (guaranteed other nations like China, Russia, and India will not harm *their* economies b/c of CAGW alarmism) requires a 'leap of faith' equal to that of a religion. It requires faith without any more proof than Christians have to believe in the God of Abraham.

The way that CAGW alarmists have been acting has not been that different from the Westboro Baptist Church nutters. They try to shout-down and silence opposing voices, substituting outrage, anger, and argument/appeal from/to authority for reason and logic.

Even their precious IPCC/Dr. Roy Cook "97% scientific consensus" is bullshit. The "97%" includes scientists who think humans have *some* effect on climate, which humorously includes many on the "Denier(TM)"-side. Hell, *I* believe humans have *some* effect, I've simply seen no evidence that justifies massive immediate changes.

CAGW==Religion(or scam)


Comment Re:Thinner (Score 1) 295

Um, a reasonable price tag for starters? What good is getting "a replacement on the spot" if it costs a small fortune? I have a friend with an iPhone with a broken screen, who's having all kinds of problems with the thing as a result. Apple isn't going to give her a free replacement on the spot, so she's just suffering with the broken screen. The replacement or repair costs are outside her meager budget, being a single mother and not having a high-paying job. I've tried convincing her to switch to an Android phone, because I can get her a great phone 2 years old for much less than the repair cost for her stupid iPhone. Apple is the brand for people with more money than sense. I'm sure if you can afford a Bentley, you can just go to the Bentley dealer and for a price they'll fix anything that went wrong too. Most people can't afford Bentleys.

In addition to this, when you do need to buy a new Android phone because you broke yours, you don't even have to stick with the same overpriced company. You can easily switch from Samsung to LG if you want, and still retain all your Play Store purchases.

Comment Re:Thinner (Score 1) 295

And since the android OEMs just copy even the stupid apple crap like lack of sd cards and removable batteries but the android buyers dutifully buy them anyway

Incorrect. Samsung tried that with the Galaxy S6 (not waterproof, no SDcard slot, no removable battery), and sales were crap. So the S7 brought back the IP68 waterproofness and the SDcard slot (but unfortunately not the removable battery), and sales were a lot better. I'm pretty sure there's other current Android phones with removable batteries too, as well as SDcard slots. With Android, at least you have choices.

and not constantly copy crapple features then maybe we wouldnt see this problem.

When's crapple going to finally copy Samsung's AMOLED screens anyway? Apple's screens are crap by comparison; AMOLED is far better than LCD.

Yep, there are no irrational Android fanboys, in fact Android fans arent even fans of Android because they are completely open and not attached to Android at all and always willing to consider any other alternatives to Android because Android fans are just so pragmatic, not like stupid Apple fans.

Exactly right. Android fans aren't cultists, and when their preferred manufacturer takes a turn they don't like, they either stick with their old phone, or they switch to another Android phone maker. That's the nice thing about Android; it may not be technically the best-engineered OS ever (neither is iOS), but it's not the sole domain of any one manufacturer, so you can easily switch from Samsung to LG or HTC or whatever and still keep all your Play store purchases. You can even use the same charging cable! (For now; they'll probably all switch to USBc before long.)

Comment Re:Enjoy your mass insurrection/civil war, CEOs. (Score 1) 510

My position is that if we get the government out of business, out of money and out of interest rates, allow the people to be free from government oppression, get rid of income and wealth taxes and get rid of government sponsored wars and all other forms of redistribution then the economy can accommodate any number of workers because automation is not free.

Automation is a form of capital investment, some forms of automation are simpler than others. Writing a script to automate server restart and network configuration is much simpler than acquiring a humanoid android capable of arbitrary tasks. It's not impossible, it's just expensive.

A humanoid android will have an upfront cost comparable to other machinery and any company has a choice to incur that cost or to avoid it by hiring some employees and having operational costs as opposed to capital costs.

Capital costs are more difficult to justify for a company anyway because they are much larger than any operational costs. Putting together a fully automated factory takes an effort and a cost, putting together a partially automated factory can be done much faster and the operational costs would be much lower than the initial capital investments into a fully automated factory. Of-course over time more and more could be automated in a factory, my position is that in a free market capitalist system there is no reason why there shouldn't be more factories started by businesses if they had access to some capital savings.

In today's environment there is very little capital savings in the system available to any new businesses, the investments are absorbed by the giant government borrowing and spending machine and the fake ratings provided by the bought rating agencies are not helping the matter, making the government debt look much more attractive than any private investment because it *seems* that government debt is risk free.

Of-course in reality government debt is not simply *not* risk free, it is the riskiest of all assets.

As to communism, obviously it never worked and always caused mass starvation, mass murder, mass oppression, mass suffering. It will not be different in the future, people are not ants, those of us capable of accruing massive amounts of wealth are not doing it to give it all away, they are doing it to build empires, which makes perfect sense, that's our destiny - the most capable of us build empires. Emperors can be charitable but they do not share power and giving away power is a rare thing.

So AFAIC the struggles between those of us who can and those of us who cannot will continue and this struggle and since the masses are unable to accept that they are not the ones occupying the thrones they will always end up revolting.

Of-course in the future revolting against emperors will be as dangerous (if not more dangerous) than in the past. Mass surveillance and robots, drones, automated armies will be able to put down massive revolts.

I think the only way for us not to keep murdering each other is to ensure that our system is based around free market capitalism, because free market capitalism at the very least provides tolerable (and possibly pleasurable) life styles even for people who are not exactly on the top of the highest of pyramids.

Comment Re:Want to save your hearing? (Score 1) 74

Have a look at Etymotic plugs. I've used ER20s (looks like they are called 'Ety Plugs', now) at clubs and events for years. They do what they say - drop the volume without distortion. I can have conversations while wearing them that would have been a muted mess with the more usual foam earplugs. They aren't bad for long stays in server rooms, either.

If you attend loud events with any regularity, and want to _keep_ being able to enjoy those events for years to come, protect your hearing.

Caveat - no association with the company, just a satisfied customer.

I keep a pair of them in a small metal tube on my keychain, just in case a bar is too loud. :D

Comment Re:Thinner (Score 1) 295

You make a good point here, but it's always Apple which is pushing the envelope on thinness, and iPhone buyers are very cult-like in their behavior, insisting on buying iPhones no matter what without even looking at alternatives, so they can be blamed for this by enabling Apple and its behavior.

In addition, I've seen Apple cultists online, including here on Slashdot, arguing loudly about how wonderful iPhones are because they're 0.7 mm thinner than the competition (or whatever), as if this is the most important feature. I've never seen Android users argue in favor of thinness. All Android fans seem to really care about is having a nice phone that does what they need, without an unhealthy attachment to any particular brand; this just isn't the case with Apple fans.

Slashdot Top Deals

"...a most excellent barbarian ... Genghis Kahn!" -- _Bill And Ted's Excellent Adventure_