Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:What? (Score 1) 61

Why does the market bear so much?

Because it's a bear market. And Microsoft is a has-been who can't make anyone want to "upgrade" to their newest OS even for free. So their future, if they are to have any, is in acquiring other, possibly relevant companies, and that's best done in a bear market when they're cheap.

Comment Re:Communism. Right. (Score 1) 439

With any hint of self interest (enlightened or otherwise), and the system eventually breaks down.

So has every other system so far. Capitalism itself only managed to survive it's previous near-fatal crisis by taking a huge step to the left. And it seems to be undergoing a slow-motion collapse of ever worse conditions for ever greater amounts of people stuck at the bottom as those at the top confiscate all the resources for their own use.

Comment Re: competition (Score 1) 439

The point of a basic income is to get power over those receiving it.

How do you use unconditional, inalienable entitlement to wield power over someone? You can't revoke it because it's unconditional and inalienable, after all.

If anything, basic income will make it harder to wield power over anyone, especially the poor. And that, of course, is the real reason why it's opposed.

The idea that its purpose is to help the weak is propaganda for suckers.

"Sucker" here meaning anyone who cares about the fate of the weak, or entertains the notion that they might ever be one.

Of course, in a more socialist society - such as one with basic income - it just plain doesn't matter as much whether you're a "sucker" or not, because the consequences of losing aren't as severe. You'll have a roof over you head, clothes on your back and food on your table no matter what. And that'll make it harder to use FUD for propaganda purposes, like you're doing here.

Comment Re:Welp, I know what I'm going to do. (Score 1) 439

So you're telling me I can get ~everything~ I want and need to consume. Even if I put the bare minimum effort (or no effort.) However no matter what I do, I can not become more than "middle class."

No, you'll get a guaranteed minimum share of the whole pie. If you want that share to be larger in absolute terms, you'll have to grow the whole pie. You can't benefit yourself at other people's expense, you can only benefit yourself by benefiting everyone else as well. On the other hand, all effort you put into growing the pie actually grows the pie, rather than get confiscated and moved to a tax haven by a fat cat.

You can't become more than middle class, but you can make "middle class" mean "my own star system".

In the long term, no one will work, and the whole thing will collapse on itself. As socialism and communism always does.

Russia seems to be failing at capitalism and democracy just as hard as it failed at communism, or perhaps even harder since at least the Bolsheviks did succeed at industrializing the country and beating the Nazis. Should we declare those things hopeless pipe dreams too?

Comment Re:over-simplification of economy (Score 1) 439

Money is NOT "control over other people", and it differs from a whip and shackles in that I can tell you to take your money and stuff it.

Of course you can tell your slavemaster to take his whip and shackles and stuff it. You'll simply get whipped for that. In the case of chattel slavery the whip is made of leather, in the case of our glorious capitalist system it's made of poverty. Either way you'll keep your mouth shut and do what you're told, after a few sessions at the whipping post if not from the start.

Comment Re:Question (Score 1) 439

Countries covered with snow a large part of the year have an annual reminder that sloth leads to death, and it's strongly ingrained in the cultures of many It's harder to destroy their work ethic, but nevertheless it's still happening.

I live in Finland, and I've never even heard of this association. No, the reason for Nordic work ethic is simply that society is seen as a shared project where everyone does what they can for the common good. If you're lazy and do just the bare minimum you must, you aren't stiffing just your employer, you're stiffing your country and everyone who lives in it. That's also why Nordic countries are relatively non-corrupted.

And yes, this work ethic is dying, not because of socialism but because intrusion of the right-wing idea that everyone is responsible only for themselves, not for other people or for their society.

Comment Re: Question (Score 1) 439

Oh really? So Joe gets paid $500 on Sunday as wages from his job. He spends $300 on booze and lobster at a strip club on Monday. He then gets mugged attempting to by weed on Tuesday and loses $200. He's starting to get pretty hungry by Thursday, and on Friday his landlord is getting pretty anxious about his rent. Question: do we let Joe go die? No? Then letting people make economic choices is a pipe dream.

Fixed that for you.

Pass UBI without the backbone to let people Darwin themselves and Joes might come out of the woodwork. Hell, I might be one.

Right. So how comes you are not dead yet? Or do strip clubs only admit people on welfare where you live?

Comment Re:Prove it! (Score 1) 439

If given a choice between sitting on your ass and getting paid and working and getting paid, the _majority_ will sit on their ass.

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that that's true. Let's further assume that it makes a difference, that the economy needs these unmotivated people to do jobs they hate and will do worse without them. With those assumptions made... Which one is more important, Freedom or economic efficiency? Because you can't have them both.

Comment Re:The Verge is 100% wrong (Score 1) 52

History has also shown us that most new ideas fail. Even good ideas.

I agree that the idea of accessories per se, attractive as it is to me, isn't enough to make a product a success these days. However I should point out that back in the day of PDAs it was normal for mobile devices to have a CF or SD slot that could also be used to add features. This was in the day when mobile devices didn't have cell data connections, GPS or even wi-fi, and it was quite common for people to add memory cards, wi-fi, bluetooth, and GPS. I have a box full of accessory cards in my attic.

Handspring, a company that made Palm Pilot clones, initially did very well with their Springboard modules which allowed you to add any kind of functionality to the base system, just like what we're talking about here. Then a few years after introducing the Springboard module Handspring stopped making PDAs altogether in favor of what was then called a "converged device" -- aka a smartphone -- without the slot. It's all about timing; Handspring was perhaps a little ahead of the curve on convergence, but a lot of manufacturers were getting pushed that way because of falling hardware retail prices made it attractive to put more stuff in the base device to keep the price high.

The standard inclusion of GPS + Cloud + Camera + Bluetooth built-in means that there really isn't a need to physically connect a device to a mobile device. The only exception is battery; there is a real need for a more elegant and secure way to extend the operation of a smartphone than plugging it into a powerbank via USB.

But I may be wrong. Maybe there's a compelling use case for a modular architecture that I just haven't thought of yet. That's why I like to see vendors trying something different, although I usually expect them to fail. I've watched tech long enough to realize that success isn't just about an idea being right, it has to come at the right time.

Comment Re: Read some Engels (Score 1) 439

Decentralised communism? There is a need for a self-starter regulating set of rules governing a mass of human so that beneficial self-organisation is likely. Selfishnessand, greed and the love of money and power (sglmp) are the enemies here. Neoliberalism basically dresses those enemies as unquestionably good idols to worship, bringing us to a larger more abstract version of early caveman religious cults. Communism in the Soviet style is what happens when these self-same human tendencies (sglmp) run amok in the corridors of government. The problem of ideal societies is that they tend to asume away the problems of building such societies out of real humans.

Comment Re:Old stuff "discovered" by the ignorant (Score 1) 439

While I don't necessarily disagree with you, let me point out that orthodox economic models are also based on assumptions that are not entirely true. For example you don't necessarily assume that any one agent (e.g. the central planner) has all the information relevant to making decisions, but you do assume that all relevant information is available to parties making decisions about transactions they'll take part in. That's not true, but it's close enough to being true that the models have practical utility. Oh, and there's the bit about people being rational in their decision-making.

Slashdot Top Deals

VMS must die!