Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:You're being a bit naive (Score 1) 236

It would be child's play to maintain artificial scarcity. If you're a member of the ruling class who's power, wealth and prestige depends on that scarcity it's in your best interests to maintain it.

That's where the Cyberpunk comes in. Tribes and groups building alternate societies and cultures utilitzing technology salvaged from the mainstream or built as an alternative to established ways of dealing wiht things. This always happens. Only the revolution in tech is rarely violent in a classic class-warfare sense. It's simply people building alternatives to systems that don't work. As technology get's cheaper that becomes easyer for more and more people. One trait of the age of cyberpunk is that cultural and economic spaces aren't spacially divided but stacked on to each other and basically spread out globall - which is a side-effect of current developments. As further advanced technology gets, the easyer it is to actually implement marxism, because it becomes easyer and easyer to take what I need without taking away from others. See FOSS for a prime example.

Likewise, maintaining artificial scarcity is pointless when what I need can be provided faster and easyer by robots than the people I would want to control. There is no incentive anymore to control people beyond a certain point in such a society. It would be more trouble than it is worth and is much better done by netflix and facebook than with all-out opression.

What I'm doing right now I can do in just about any part of the world thjat has an internet connection. A sign of things to come. Yes, sure, Google or some other megacorp will own everthing but it will be so dirt cheap to use it and so costly to deny it to people that we can very well have an Utopia.

Comment Re:It has its uses (Score 1) 371

Until functional programmers start speaking the same language as people in industry, we'll keep rolling our eyes and ignoring you.

I'm pretty sure maths has been around longer than programming, so who is really redefining the language here?

Also, false dichotomy is false. Functional programming concepts are widely and effectively used in industrial programming. The idea that what we're talking about is some academic, ivory tower idea is decades out of date.

Comment Re:Ontario, largest subnational debtor on the plan (Score 1) 320

Even minimum wage jobs will tend to be more worthwhile. the numbers!

If its full time.
And you don't have to pay for transportation to get there.
And you don't have to pay for daycare services.

Meanwhile lots of employers go out of their way not to let you be full time so that you aren't eligible for stat holiday pay, etc. Walmart, etc... while lots of other jobs like mcjobs and retail etc really often just need people for 4-6 hour shifts...

A mall that's open from 10am to 9pm for example, might, on the off season or slow day, only have 2 'shifts'... one from 10 to 4 and one from 4-9. with that half hour overlap for a bank deposit etc. Even working 6 days a week your still only at 36 hours, and odds are you are lucky to 4-5 shifts, and you are getting 24-30 hours. 24 hrs minimum wage plus transit fare... and welfare starts looking

In ontario a single person on welfare gets 656/mo. Contrast that with working an average of 30hrs a week, at 11/hr -> 1320. less $220 for transit. call it 1100. So worth working... kind of... you are ahead $100 per week... big deal. 30 hours a week work for $100 more than welfare. When it's put it like that its not that much incentive.

Same person has a child? Your employer doesn't give a shit. You get the same shifts and wages as if you were single. So they now get $941/mo from welfare vs $1100 working after transit; so that's even LESS worth it. That's a whopping $38 bucks a week in extra income... but they haven't paid for daycare yet. Good luck finding daycare for under $38 bucks a week.You'd be hard pressed to find daycare that cheap per DAY. Nope, if you have a child, you are actually better off, much better off on welfare unless you can not only land a proper full time job... but one considerably above minimum wage. Good luck landing a full time job with decent pay applying from welfare.

Comment Re:It has its uses (Score 1) 371

That's just bad functional code.

It was a simplified example, but I think the point would still be valid in some more complicated case that doesn't fit one of the everyday functional programming patterns. The state is still there, it's just conveyed by accumulating function argument(s) in recursive, functional code instead of storing it in loop control variable(s) in imperative code.

The other thing is you don't want to be "doing stuff" and iterating. You want to be computing stuff and then "doing stuff" on the entire set of output. The system as it pulls output will drive the iteration on the computation.

I think you're conflating lazy evaluation with functional programming here. In any case, I think that sort of claim needs some qualification. Haskell-style laziness is nice for composition in theory and sometimes it lets us write very elegant code in practice, but it can also become a liability, particularly if you're working with very large amounts of data or anything time-sensitive.

Comment Re: It has its uses (Score 1) 371

On the other hand, if you've used a language that is designed to support functional programming, you probably wouldn't be in much doubt.

For example, here's the all-positive check written in Haskell:

all_positive = all (>0) [1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13]

which is just a convenient notation for:

all_positive = all (\x -> x > 0) [1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13]

where the backslash is Haskell's general syntax for introducing a lambda.

Criticising the ideas of functional programming because, for example, C++'s syntax for lambdas is horrific is like criticising OOP because setting up dispatch via vtables is a bit messy in assembly language. It's just not the right tool for the job, and it's unlikely to give great results no matter what you do with it. You have to look at the underlying principles to see whether they're useful or not.

Comment Re:Unemployment (Score 1) 321

Your claim requires a factory job that could comfortably support a middle-class single-income household is the same as a low-wage service sector job that can not do so even with a dual-income household.

1st one required people show up, and work the job, even when they shouldn't have, verses the latter which can't be filled today, because the average idiot can't figure change out in the drawer or pour a latte without fucking it up somehow.

Because the latte maker isn't going to take one of the millions of unfilled blue-collar jobs that require something more than metro-sexual with hair gel problems. You want to fix the problem? Stop promoting "college" as the "only" way to better incomes. Start with promoting trade schools that teach people to do jobs that are actually needed, rather than the "Snowflake Crybaby" degree from university.

Comment Re:start by lowering full time hours / makeing OT (Score 1) 321

Why should jay have to work 60-80+ hours a week doing the work of 3 people for the pay of 1?

Why should you be taking hours Jay needs away, to give to people who won't work nearly as hard as Jay? Who says your view is best for Jay or even the three other people supposedly gaining a job? Have you never worked in a job where someone was paid to fill a position no longer needed (see Oregon Gas Pumpers)? If it wasn't for a state law, there would be no gas pump jockeys AND people would pay less for gas.

Make work jobs don't provide anything valuable to society, The solution isn't more government regulation and market manipulation, it is less. Otherwise, we're slowly moving to "centralized economic management" which was tried and failed in Soviet Union (and others).

Yeah, the feel good ideas of the socialist left have all be tried, and failed. Why do we keep trying? We're insane!

Comment Re: Ontario, largest subnational debtor on the pla (Score 0) 321

Poverty doesn't cause crime. Lack of morals causes crime. There are all sorts of poor people who don't steal, and all kinds of rich people who do.

That being said, the greatest contributor to poverty is removing peoples ability to produce goods and services because of artificial rules and regulations. The number one cause of these issues, is government creating artificial barriers to entry in the name of "safety" and "security".

You want to start a business? Can't because you lack the funding to buy the $150 business license. Want to sell home made foods stuffs (lemonade stands) ? Can't Because you didn't get the proper permits and health and safety inspections, and that business license and the taxes and fees ......

BUT if you happen to have a job, you're taxed and regulated to the point of wanting to quit, because the government has all sorts of programs to help you out, often with "no questions asked".

This is why socialism is always doomed to failure. Eventually, you run out of other people's money. I know, this time it will work, because you've worked out all the bugs. Yawn

Comment Re:Pilots don't work (Score 1) 320

Will a child growing up in a UBI household have a different attitude towards the need to get a job or attend school? Is there even any point in getting an education if you know that the state will provide everything - and that there probably won't be any jobs for you anyway?

Well we have research on welfare clients here in Norway indicates it might be "inheritable", but not massively so. So I think it would be more "as a child in an UBI society..." and as for the latter I assume basic will mean quite basic. Here in Norway you have a basic guarantee (sosialstønad) if you are a legal resident and have no savings or other means to support yourself, for singles it's 5950 NOK + housing which in USD is about $700/month, but since Norway is more expensive it's effectively $500/month. And housing can easily mean a 100 sqft room with shared kitchen and bathroom facilities.

Essentially if you take your basic needs like food, clothes, personal care, a monthly card for public transportation and misc. household articles the budget is nearly spent. You can afford a microwave, cellphone, a TV, a crap PC and that's it. You're not going to any pubs, cafes, restaurants, concerts, cinemas or theaters. You don't have a car. You're not going on any vacations. You exist comfortably, if all you want is a $15/month WoW subscription. Most people want a little more in life...

Comment Re:FSF = not practical (Score 2) 152

When he started there was no such thing as an entire operating system of free software and no hardware you could run it on. This exists today - it didn't then. It's not as readily and easily available as it should be - but it exists. And, as he rightfully pointed out, if he had compromised the ideal of that existing - it would still not exist at all. It only exists because he never settled for less than that.

Well evil tounges would suggest that without Linus we'd still be waiting on GNU/Hurd. GCC forked off and became ECGS. "Linux libc" forked away from glibc and was only later "gnu-ified" again like ECGS. The rest the FSF made seems mostly to be small utilities, for sure having a GNU/free ls, awk, sed, grep etc. is important but hardly the showstopper. His one (admittedly huge) crowning achievement was writing the GPL, but most the projects seemed to refuse his leadership.

And even then the adoption by some of the core players seemed to be more by chance than ideological success, like Linus primarily wanted to see what other developers were doing to learn so he could run it on his box. User freedom was never a big deal for him nor most other Linux kernel core developers, which is why the GPLv3 was met with a "meh". X11 and Wayland doesn't use the GPL. Apache isn't using the GPL. Android isn't using the GPL except the kernel. It is popular? Yes. Is it the only commonly used open source license? Very far from it.

According to Black Duck GPLv3 + LGPLv3 + Affero GPL = ~10% of all projects and GPLv2 + LGPLv2 ~20% so most projects haven't really been following Stallman since 2007. And that's not counting the non-GPL licenses, my impression is that the Apache license has gained a lot of popularity particularly with corporations like Google (Android), Apple (Swift) and Microsoft (ASP.Net). The kernel is the one project that seems to get away with copyleft because you can run any userspace on top. And because it doesn't really crack down on shims and driver blobs.

Slashdot Top Deals

Intel CPUs are not defective, they just act that way. -- Henry Spencer