Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Immigration policy is not hate speech (Score 1) 1055

I suppose you could get together with some of your neighbors and set up some sort of collective arrangement where everybody agrees on rules for appropriate behaviour and collectively uses force to make sure that outsiders do not violate these agreements, but that that point you've basically reinvented government.

No, at that point what you have is one possible service provider in a potentially competitive market - as opposed to the monopoly system we have now.

Comment Re:Immigration policy is not hate speech (Score 1) 1055

No, under anarchy, you have the right to defend yourself; you just don't have the right to force other people to pay for your defense. So, for example, if you believe you need to go to war against brown people in the Middle East to defend yourself, you could; you just couldn't force everybody who disagrees to support you financially and give their children up for a draft.

Comment Appeal to non-authorities (Score 2) 306

joining with the fast-food, airport, home care, child care and higher education workers who are leading the way and showing the country how to build an economy

Because everybody knows that Uber drivers, fast-food, airport, home care, child care, and higher education workers are the best experts to look to for economic knowledge.

Comment Exposed our jugular veins to predators (Score 2) 141

I don't care how clever you all think you are, you cannot design a system that cannot be hacked.
We've gone far too far, hooking up control and command to the internet. We did it to fire people and save money, or at least divert the money once given to ticket takers to computer companies.
So, this is what the future is.

Comment Re:Solution to stop acquisitions? (Score 1) 117

While I'm no fan of government regulation, I have the feeling that this is part-and-parcel of "too big to fail", and requires government intervention. Companies should not be allowed to grow beyond a certain size. If a company reaches that size, it must divest or split itself into smaller, independent entities.

Surely the main reason we have such monstrously large companies is government intervention in the first place, due to the "too big to fail" mentality.

Slashdot Top Deals

Ever notice that even the busiest people are never too busy to tell you just how busy they are?