Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:Money (Score 1) 482

You're making a fundamental error, here.

You can't simply offset those billions of dollars against the number of jobs. You need to look at what would have happened had Ireland not made this deal to begin with. It's fair to say that Apple would never have funneled their profits through the Irish tax haven had this deal not been in place, so the question is really "Are the 6500 jobs, plus however much actual tax revenue was collected, a greater return for Ireland than not having Apple's money in the country at all?"

I don't know the answer to that question, and I won't speculate on the matter, but that's the calculation in play here. Claiming otherwise is either ignorance or bias.

Comment Re:I hate Apple, but no (Score 1) 482

Tax avoidance "schemes" must be registered?

For what it's worth, the use of "scheme" there is not pejorative (which is why I assume you have it in scare quotes), it's just a synonym for "plan" that is in common usage in British English (as opposed to American English, where it typically implies that something underhanded is occurring).

Comment Re:America in one sentence (Score 3, Interesting) 609

There was also a law in the early history of the U.S. which required people to register with the government if they owned a firearm. That way the government knew who they could call upon in times of insurrection or invasion to defend the country and those who would need to be given a weapon in such times.

Of course you'll never hear any of this from the NRA.

Comment Re:Bechdel Test (Score 1) 311

And by that, I mean that certain groups are looking for scalps to collect to prove a point. This is why certain people can get away with doing things without rebuke.

If you kiss the ring, they'll leave you alone, as long as you profess to agree with their belief system 100% at all times. The problem is, their belief system shifts constantly.

In non-political, non-cultural circles we call this a cult mentality. In political and cultural circles, we call it Social Justice.

And woe betide you if you do something that helps the "enemy." Just look at Wikileaks for a hint at that. They were doing god's work until they threatened the Queen's election. Now they're horrific "Alt-Right" monsters under the personal control of Putin. (Note that the veracity of the documents isn't in question, just that Wikileaks are poopyheads for sharing.)

Comment Re:Bechdel Test (Score 0) 311

I get their/your point, but Guybrush may not be the best example. Day of the Tentacle (same studio and within a few years) had a neurotic female (co)lead and nobody got lynched.

That was years ago. Nowadays you couldn't make Day of the Tentacle, for several problematic reasons:

* Ableist: Makes fun of shy, nerdy scientists, which everyone knows represent all Autistic people, and making fun of nerds -- Unless they're Gamers who disagree with you on social or political grounds -- isn't acceptable.
* Sexist: Women are put in danger, are assumed to be wrong, and are drawn showing secondary sex characteristics, all three of which are unacceptable. To wit: The woman is shown to be insane, and that means the writer thinks all women are irrational, overly emotional, psychopaths. For shame!
* Racist: Has no black characters, which means it automatically fails the Social Justice T.O.K.E.N. test, and thus is inherently racist. In addition, the titular Tentacle is purple, which is a racist dog whistle meaning black character, and is shown to be both angry and using a gun -- in short, the Tentacle symbolizes oppression towards black people in Western society, and is the real hero of this story fighting his oppressors. Hashtag: TENTACLE LIVES MATTER!
* Cultural Appropriation: Uses Tentacles, which are well known to be from Japanese culture. Using things from other cultures for any reason is cultural appropriation, which is always wrong.

The problem with professional outrage peddlers is that they can always, always find something to be outraged about. Combine that with social and economic rewards for finding offense with things, and you have a booming industry of Moral Crusaders looking for anything they can get mad and scream about.

Or, as we succinctly call them -- SJWs.

Comment Re:December 30th (Score 1) 308

It was also the "done thing" to lurk for a while before posting. Well, that was the case before Eternal September, anyway...

This. If I would have made an account when I started using /., I'd have a 3 or low 4 digit uid, and given that both of us made accounts around the same time, I'd wager you would as well. There's something to be said for actually learning about a community before you join it.

Comment Bechdel Test (Score 5, Insightful) 311

All this talk about the Bechdel test reminds me of the Galbrush Paradox, a related mess that was codified during GamerGate. During a discussion of noted con artist Anita Sarkeesian -- who has managed to run TWO wildly successful Kickstarter scams stealing close to half a million dollars from rubes -- and her completely unobtainable standards for female characters:

Absolutely not. If you can't tell a two bit con artist from one of your own, you really need to clean up your movement before you start 'suggesting' anything.

But maybe you're just naive and don't understand the problem. Do you know why there's so many white male characters in video games? Especially leads? Because no one cares about them.

A white male can be a lecherous drunk. A woman can't or it's sexist. Sexualizing women and what all. A white male can be a mentally disturbed soldier who's mind is unraveling as he walks through the hell of the modern battleeld. A woman can't or you're victimizing women and saying they're all crazy.

Consider Guybrush Threepwood, start of the Monkey Island series. He's weak, socially awkward, cowardly, kind of a nerd and generally the last person you'd think of to even cabin boy on a pirate ship, let alone captain one. He is abused, verbally and physically, mistreated, shunned, hated and generally made to feel unwanted.

Now let's say Guybrush was a girl. We'll call her Galbrush. Galbrush is weak, socially awkward, cowardly, kind of a nerd and generally the last person you'd think of to even cabin boy on a pirate ship, let alone captain one. She is abused, verbally and physically, mistreated, shunned, hated and generally made to feel unwanted.

Now, you might notice that I've given the exact same description to both of these characters. But here's where things deviate. While no one cares if Guybrush takes a pounding for being, for lack of a better term, less than ideal pirate, Galbrush will be presumed to be discriminated against because of her gender. In fact, every hardship she will endure, though exactly the same as the hardships Guybrush endured, will be considered misogyny, rather than someone being ill suited to their desired calling.

And that ending. She goes through ALL that trouble to help, let's call him Eli Marley, escape the evil clutches of the ghost piratess Le Chuck, it turns out he didn't even need her help and she even screwed up his plan to thwart Le Chuck. Why, it'd be a slap in the face to every woman who's ever picked up a controller. Not only is the protagonist inept, but apparently women make lousy villains too!

And that's why Guybrush exists and Galbrush doesn't. Men can be comically inept halfwits. Women can't. Men can be flawed, tragic human beings. Women can't. And why? Because every single female character reects all women everywhere.

The horrible truth ls you and Sarkeesian want to craft a box into which you can force every female character into. Some idiotic 'ideal'. Putting aside the stupidity of exchanging one unobtainable role model for women with another, this has the added problem of making all female characters exactly the same. And when all characters are exactly the same, that's boring And boring characters do not sell video games.

And when applied to film, this is why the Bechdel test fails. Because writing female characters is an identity politics minefield, and trying to give them any character development other than talking about the characters you ARE allowed to take risks with or write as less than perfect gets you in trouble with idiots writing for The Mary Sue or Jezebel, who then rile up a lynch mob at you.

Comment Re:RAID is not backup (Score 5, Insightful) 358

Say with with me: "RAID is not backup!"

Indeed. There is also a difference between backup and archive.

RAID = This is running live, and I need a duplicate that is instantly available so I can keep running in case one drive fails. The trick is that if there is an operation that destroys data (e.g. ransomware infection that encrypts your stuff) then you lose all disks. This is why RAID is not backup.

Backup = Just in case the machine dies, or I accidentally delete a bunch of stuff, or a virus hits, I can restore from the backup. This generally follows the 3-2-1 rule: At least three copies, at least two media, at least one off site. Businesses often use D2D2T systems for this.

Archive = I will probably never look at this again, but I absolutely need to keep a copy around for historic or business reasons. Think about services like Iron Mountain or Amazon Glacier. Tape archives that are quite cheap and almost certainly never reviewed again. This is along the lines of "show me the obituaries from a newspaper published 7 May 1957", or similar.

For the original story, it seems like he is looking for an archival solution rather than a backup solution.

Comment Re:Big data is gonna kill small crime (Score 2, Interesting) 85

Because the multiple trillions of dollars we've already spent trying to instill common sense into people, the multitude of social programs designed to try and help people get jobs or a roof over their head, the grants or subsidies to help people start their own businesses and all the other programs who in one way or another have tried to set people on the correct path to life have worked so well we should spend trillions more.

The easiest way to reduce the prison population and those committing repeat crimes is to execute people. Domestic violence. Gone. You don't beat the crap out the woman (or man) you're living with and think that's acceptable.

You don't have multiple crimes against you before you're 18 then get a free pass to start the process over. Rapes, child molestation/rape, recidivists, murderers in general, gone.

Clean out the system instead of coddling and you will see a dramatic improvement in society. With the criminals gone, who will commit the crimes?

Comment Re:Go Kim (Score 1, Insightful) 70

Because allowing people to "buy" products to which you have no right to be "selling" in the first place is something we should defend.

When your company produces a product I'll be sure to "share" it with millions of people while charging them for it. I'm certain your company won't mind me making money off their efforts.

Comment Motivation? (Score 2) 172

When you see something like this your first reaction is bound to be, "Well, stupid ignorant politicians proposing foolish laws that wouldn't work - yet again". And yet... politicians aren't always stupid and ignorant. Many of them have a certain low rat-like cunning, especially when it comes to getting and keeping office, and currying favour with the rich and powerful who can help them. So, just as a hypothesis, what more might be behind a proposal like this?

The obvious starting point is that, rather than pay a tax to content owners in return for doing the service of indexing and making known what they have to offer, search engine companies would simply stop indexing all such material. That would be really bad, huh? Or would it... from a certain point of view. Suppose you own the New York Times or The Guardian or some other boring obnoxious conventional media outlet. Your view of the Web is probably pretty jaundiced. It's full of people who find your stories through search engines and then read them for free - unless you put up a paywall, in which case they just stop coming altogether. Moreover, increasingly they don't even want your lousy stories because they can find so much better and more up-to-date material on the Web, from a thousand independent and dynamic sources. In fact, in the long run your company is probably facing bankruptcy sooner or later because it can't compete with what's available (mostly free) online. Not good. Wouldn't it be marvellous if someone could put a stop to all this "Web" nonsense and take us all back to the good ol' days when you just had to pay for your newspaper and your cable TV and take whatever they gave you? Wouldn't it?

The search engines could just stop indexing such sites, but over time - at least, so the politicians might think - that would shrink the search engines' usefulness so much that they might go right out of business. Oh boo-hoo, the conventional media owners would grin, rubbing their hands happily. What a terrible shame.

And we, who rely so much on the Web, would find it that much less rich and useful. We really should be thinking about how to react to politicians, responding to their rich buddies, who want to shut down the free Web and replace it with a monitored, controlled pay-per-view thing much along the lines of what Bill Gates had in mind before the Web came along and spoiled his day.

Slashdot Top Deals

How many weeks are there in a light year?