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:"Feel forced?" (Score 1) 278

It seems clear that Uber's long-term plan is to get rid of the drivers entirely. Self-driving cars are in our near future. Having humans drive them for now is a plan to achieve mindshare while they wait.

Getting rid of the drivers means they can't really externalize the cost of the car like they do now, especially fuel and maintenance. I would not be surprised in the least to see their fares go up substantially if this happens.

Who says Uber needs to own the cars? They can rent them from their owners or from car-rental companies.

Imagine taking your car to work and then instead of parking it, letting Uber "rent" it until you go home.

Comment Re: "Feel forced?" (Score 1) 278

Again, car rental firms already have this one tied up. If you're investing in Uber expecting this outcome, you're likely a sucker.

Car-rental firms don't have the smartphone-driven hailing infrastructure that Uber has. I can see car-rental companies becoming "fuilfillment partners" with Uber, again in analogy with Amazon and other retailers.

Comment Re:Hillary Lost Because of Her (Score 2) 449

If truthfulness was a determining factor in the election Trump would have lost to the third party candidates. He literally would lie about statements he had made less than an hour beforehand. I think one of the political accountability orgs did some kind of analysis of one of the debates and I think they tallied up about 10-20% of Clintons statements as misleading/somewhat untruthful, Trumps statements were closer to the 50% truthful region and most of his stuff was in the lies/blatant lies category.

You're thinking of politifact. Trump scored far worse than Clinon on tuthfulness.

Comment Re: More like "most bitched about" (Score 1) 87

As the exit polls showed, people lied to the pollsters.

No, there's no evidence of that.

The exit polls seemed to indicate that Clinton would win, but it was the vote counting from the various states, particularly the battleground ones, that ultimately demonstrated otherwise.

Granted, Clinton neglected the battleground states, obviously to her detriment. But saying the exit polls "seemed to indicate Clinton would win?" I say again: a majority of voters didn't like Clinton, and a majority of voters didn't like Trump. You can't infer a win for either candidate based on that.

The people who voted for Trump did like him, but were too pissed off at the media to give a shit about them. The ones who disliked both mainly sat out the election: that is why Clinton underperformed among groups that her campaign expected her to win w/ larger margins.

Partially, you have a point, Clinton did not connect with the Obama-revolution Democrats, and that cost her. But neither Clinton nor Trump showed a majority approval rating in the exit polls. And that means some voted for a candidate they didn't like, be it Clinton or Trump.

Comment Re:What would have been different? (Score 1) 87

Ranked preference / instant-runoff voting in primaries and in the November general election

Why would the results have been any different? If you add up all the Stein/Johnson votes it's not enough to have the whole election results turn out differently, even IF all such voters listed Hillary second - many would not have.

You're right, the results might not have been different for this election, However, an instant-runoff system would increase the viability and influence of down-ballot alternatives in the long run.

Arrow's Impossibility Theorem shows that it is impossible to devise a voting system that will not fail in some situations. However, there is evidence that some systems are better than others, and instant-runoff is one of the better ones.

Comment Re: More like "most bitched about" (Score 1) 87

Wrong. Everyone liked Trump, they just weren't allowed to admit it because the media would turn people against them.

That's not what the exit polls said.

A majority of voters did not like Clinton.
A majority of voters did not like Trump. (Slightly more than Clinton actually.)

That means there were people who did not like X but voted for X anyway. (X = Clinton or Trump.)

If you actually think that everyone liked Trump, then you are delusional.

As for people not being "allowed" to admit liking Trump, well what about all those people at his rallies? What about all those Republicans who supported Trump despite not being "allowed" to do so by the al-powerful and scary media?

Your post is a pile of steaming nonsense.

Comment Re:We knew this going in (Score 4, Insightful) 573

Hillary lost. Get over it.

Yes, she did. And that means she is irrelevant now. As far as politics are concerned, she's in a rocking chair with a glass of lemonade. And now it's up to you to get over that.

Trump, on the other hand, is fair game for the next four years. Bringing up Hillary in an argument regarding him is just pathetic.

Comment Re:We knew this going in (Score 5, Insightful) 573

I fail to understand why you think Trump will do anything about climate change.

During the campaign, he said that climate change was a hoax, perpetrated by the Chinese, to make American industry less competitive.

He has appointed a climate-change denialist to oversee the power-transition at the EPA.

Recently he has allowed that there may be some connection between climate change and CO2 emissions, and he has met with Al Gore. Encouraging, but weigh that against the above, and his mercurial tendencies when it comes to policy positions.

Comment Re:Lets turn the dial to zero then (Score 1) 158

Even better: remove all regulations on spectrum use. Why shouldn't I be able to "innovate" with the air waves?

Because your "innovation" may cause interference with others. And the reverse.

Radio spectrum belongs to all of us, but the government has a legitimate role in regulating the use of our spectrum so that chaos does not happen. That's why there are portions of the spectrum for various uses, some of them commercial, and others private.

Comment Triple-negative (Score 1, Funny) 158

It's hard to imagine, with the way the election turned out, that we're not going to have an environment, from several aspects, that is not going to be more positive for my industry

If you read this carefully, you'll see that it says the opposite of what CFO Braxton Carter intended.

Slashdot Top Deals

This place just isn't big enough for all of us. We've got to find a way off this planet.