Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Finally⦠(Score 0) 126

In fact, the intention was not to stop tracking. The EU’s “cookie law” (formally the ePrivacy Directive of 2002, amended in 2009) was originally aimed at preventing unwanted software and data being stored on users’ computers—especially malware from driveby downloads. However, the EU law was drafted so poorly that it inadvertently covered cookies as well. Only later, at the national level, were (tracking) cookies explicitly brought under its scope.

Must say I haven't seen cookie banners/walls lately, Brave Browser does a great job working around them.

Comment Re:Chop Chop Chop (Score 2) 42

Corporations don’t exist to hand out jobs — completely agree. They hire people because human creativity, judgment, and problem-solving generate more value than they cost. That’s the foundational engine of economic growth.

But saying “companies don’t create work to hire people” assumes the amount of work is fixed, like slices of a pie. History tells a different story. Every major leap in technology — electricity, assembly lines, computers, the internet — didn’t eliminate work overall. It created whole new industries, new products, new forms of demand, and millions of jobs that never existed before someone imagined them.

The real question today is: will companies use automation to expand opportunity, or will they let fear and short-term profit pressures shrink their vision to whatever fits after payroll cuts? Treating workers as a cost to minimize is the fastest way to shrink your own future. Redeploying them to innovate, build, support customers, and explore new markets is how productivity becomes prosperity.

Humans haven’t become too expensive. What’s become too expensive — at least in the corporate mindset — is patience. Investment. Shared success. The belief that people are not just an expense line, but the actual source of value creation.

If we want a thriving economy, the answer isn’t fewer workers. It’s smarter, more meaningful roles that turn technological progress into shared wealth rather than shared precarity.

Comment Re:Chop Chop Chop (Score 2) 42

It’s definitely true that a lot of companies are cutting workers right now — and that creates real anxiety about where things are headed. But I think the narrative that “humans have become too expensive” flips the real issue upside-down.

Labor isn’t what’s skyrocketed in cost. CEO pay, shareholder expectations, and relentless targets for profit growth are. Companies keep raising prices even while laying off thousands, not because they can’t afford workers, but because they prioritize margins over stability for the people who actually create value.

The biggest missed opportunity here is that automation doesn’t have to be a replacement strategy — it can be a redeployment strategy. When new technology lets humans spend less time on low-value labor, companies can empower them to drive innovation, serve customers better, develop new products, and ultimately create more wealth. That’s how productivity gains should work.

But too many businesses think like accountants, not builders. They treat labor as a line item to subtract, instead of a force multiplier. They cut payroll and congratulate themselves for “efficiency,” even as they shrink their own future potential.

AI and automation could give us shorter weeks, better jobs, and broader prosperity — but only if we stop treating human well-being as an inconvenient expense and start seeing workers as the engines that turn technological progress into shared abundance.

The future isn’t precarious because humans are too expensive — it’s precarious because profit has become priceless, and imagination too cheap.

Comment Re:What am I missing? (Score 1, Interesting) 118

It's coming to light due to the private equity buyout lead by esteemed real estate criminal Jared Kushner. This is likely anti-woke washing to entice a class of customers who have already moved along due to EA sucking for lots of other reasons which won't be addressed.

Why solve real problems intentionally created due to mismanagement when you can just play the culture war card and get a bunch of knee-jerk reactions?

Comment Internet Archive Needs to Think Harder (Score 4, Insightful) 46

The Internet Archive’s fundamental duty is to preserve human knowledge — to ensure that cultural, scholarly, and historical materials are not lost to time, obscurity, or commercial impermanence. Preservation does not mean competing with publishers, nor does it mean undermining legitimate markets. It means ensuring that when something ceases to be readily available, it can still be found, studied, and remembered.

If a book is commercially available, widely distributed, and maintained by its rightsholders, then it is not in danger of disappearing. There is nothing for the Archive to “preserve” in that case; the responsibility lies with publishers and distributors. For such works, the Archive’s role should be standby stewardship — maintaining a secure, non-public copy to ensure continuity of access if and when availability lapses.

In contrast, for works that have fallen out of print, lost their commercial distribution, or exist in fragile physical form, the Archive’s duty is active and urgent. These are the works at real risk of vanishing, and preserving them — including through controlled digital lending — serves the public good and the historical record.

This approach strikes a balance between copyright compliance and cultural preservation:

The Archive would withhold digital access to works that are actively in print or licensed.

It would, however, retain preservation copies in its secure collections.

And it would make these available again only if those works become unavailable through ordinary channels.

By adopting this preservation-first, access-conditional model, the Internet Archive fulfills its mission without infringing upon the rights or revenues of living markets — ensuring that the world’s knowledge remains safe, even when the commercial world moves on.

Comment Re:Congratulations (Score 1) 6

and the boys were already ten and eleven years old when I entered their life

I hope you got a good relationship with them! My son can't even talk yet. So, right now, he's just this cute thing that runs around and causes trou^H^H^H^Hgood things to happen.

 

Comment Re:I can't even imagine kids after 50 (Score 1) 6

Well, some of that is for classes for people who can't see that default 3-pixel wide scrollbar on Windows 11 in high contrast dark mode. :-)

Fair. Just making fun of Windows 11.

Yeah, you're blessed to have one of each. Until they start conspiring against you, which you KNOW is going to happen.
ha!

Hopefully we'll raise them better than that. And let them see us honoring our parents.

Comment Re:I can't even imagine kids after 50 (Score 1) 6

You charge to "upgrade" to Windows 11? How evil are you? :P

For all my pro-life ramblings, we were granted only one child.

Precious. I feel bad you couldn't have more though. G-d has been very generous to us.

Keeping up with two toddlers after age 50 can't be easy.

And yet i wouldn't trade it for anything! Thank G-d, we have a lot of help. Especially, when some neighboring girls come by to take our son for a walk. G-d bless them all.

Slashdot Top Deals

The use of anthropomorphic terminology when dealing with computing systems is a symptom of professional immaturity. -- Edsger Dijkstra

Working...