Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


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:wars destroy wealth (Score 1) 516

No, I'm saying that its impossible for any government to commit theft -- at least not if they decide to call it a tax.

Sort of like how extortion isn't extortion as long it's called protection money? Theft describes the nature of the act, not the nature of the perpetrator, and glossing over it with nicer-sounding words make it any better.

Comment Re:wars destroy wealth (Score 1) 516

taxation is your payment for services rendered by your government. Army, police force, road maintenance, infrastructure. Your taxes pay for all that shit. And if you really want to bitch about welfare, you can consider that the "service" of keeping beggars off the streets and out of your sight/way.

And before you start saying its not a true transaction because you didn't choose what to "buy" well sorry but you did -- via your elected representatives. You can argue that the price is too high or whatever, or that your representatives are choosing to "buy" the wrong services or whatever, but calling it theft is rather disingenuous at best.

I agree with the rest of your post, but this bit is ridiculous. You're essentially saying it's impossible for (democratic) governments to commit theft, because everything a government does is morally validated by the fact that it was democratically elected. Sorry, but just because a lot of people agree with something, doesn't mean it's a moral action. Historical examples abound.

Comment Re:Rose tinted glasses (Score 1) 516

Marx's original conception of communism wasn't a system of government, so much as it was a state of being.

He considered socialism as a necessary evil - you had government imposing the principle of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", because people wouldn't do it themselves, but the idea was that as people were exposed to this, saw its benefits and became enlightened, they would start acting this way voluntarily. When the population in general had reached this state, the socialist government would become unnecessary and wither away, and the population would be living, ungoverned, as "communist man", the apex of Marx's conception of social evolution.

Unfortunately, this breaks down, because the great benefits of socialism turn out to be mass starvation and poverty, which the people understandably get miffed about and don't embrace, which leads to their government shooting them in job lots. It's also why a lot of Marxists complain that communism has never really been implemented yet, and use that as a defence against the butchery their philosophy leads to.

Comment Re:This is why I went with indie games (Score 1) 77

I recently started playing Stardew Valley, which is a single dev game. Apparently, for a while there, that dev was manually correcting individual corrupt saves for customers, because he felt bad that his game had failed them. Just try getting that sort of service from a mainstream developer.

Comment Re:Twitter as a protocol (Score 1) 284

What you say is true, but I think you have the chronology backwards. There were proprietary network and information protocols before open ones. The open came after the closed. Same with operating systems - linux and the BSDs came after. There are already some stabs at open social media (like Diaspora, although I'm not sure if that project's still viable). The point is, proprietary systems are often the vanguard, because money is good incentive, and when you've got financial backing, you can blaze trails faster. Open protocols usually follow the trails blazed by their commercial predecessors. There's no reason to imagine that, given time, open social protocols will not evolve and come to dominate.

Comment Re:Automation of the military (Score 1) 210

I'd rather send in killer robots after ISIS rather than American (or any other) humans who'll get killed or maimed for life.

Sure, but that's irrelevant to the issue at hand. The headline is, as usual, misleading. This is a discussion of the ban on autonomous killer robots. You can still shoot people via remote control, with your bot taking the fire instead of your human soldier. You just can't staple an algorithm to an assault rifle and set it loose.

Comment Re:Not availiable in most of the world (Score 1) 218

AFAIK Prime Video is only available in United States, United Kingdom, Germany and Austria. Leaving much of the world without a way to watch the new show. I don't consider it an excuse to pirate it

I would. My number one copyright reform would be that any work not available for sale at a reasonable price point* in a given country is not protected by copyright in that country. You want my country to enforce your IP? Then you better be willing to sell it to my countries citizens.

*No offering copies for sale at a million dollars a pop, and claiming that satisfies the requirement.

Comment Re: Regional Presidents (Score 1) 557

They get more representation, but it's not proportional, because every state gets two electors, in addition to the number they get based on population. This gives underpopulated states more oompf - per capita - than overpopulated states. That's why Delaware has six times the population of Arizona, but only twice as many delegates.

Comment Re:dogs did this (Score 1) 277

Yeah, it's English bulldogs. But the reason is pretty much the opposite of what this "study" claims - it's not a case of caesareans allowing genes for narrow pelvises to stay in the population, it's a case of selective breeding changing the shape of the dogs. Deliberate breeding, not a side-effect of too many caesareans.

Comment Re:We knew this going in (Score 1) 588

For example: appointing an unqualified person to a position of power because that person's actions are likely to benefit you, even though those actions may not be best for the country.

But that would be just as corrupt if the person was qualified - it's not their qualification or lack thereof that makes it corruption, its the fact that they're being appointed to benefit you, rather than the country.

Slashdot Top Deals

Thus mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true. -- Bertrand Russell