Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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

Comment Re:over-simplification of economy (Score 1) 358

Nonsense. Economics is the study of how people exchange goods and services.

Yes, but apparently a 'successful' economy is one which is always growing...

Sure it is. But the AC assumes that growth inevitably means increasing consumption of natural resources. It can mean that, but that actually only works in a context where the natural resources in question are abundant. Once they become scarce (perhaps artificially), then growth comes from finding ways to use resources more efficiently.

A successful economy is one which is improving the standard of living of the people in it. There is no reason why that process cannot be endless... though the definition of what constitutes improvement absolutely will change over time.

Comment Re:Question (Score 1) 358

So unlike what Marxist said central planning actually works best to quickly grow backwards, agrarian even, economies rather than improving advanced economies.

That actually makes perfect sense if you study Marx's core economic theory, the labor theory of value. In that view, all production is about organization of labor, with some attention to the sources of raw materials. There is no discussion at all of the role of innovation, or information, and the theory is focused on a world in stasis, in which the materials, processes and outputs are all well-known, and unchanging.

But progress comes from the creation of new ideas, ways to make new goods, or make old goods with less labor or less, or different, raw materials. An economy organized on communist principles has few mechanisms for encouraging innovation. The Soviet Union made a big deal of identifying and nurturing smart people and giving them the resources to invent new science and technology, but that is perhaps the least important part of the innovation that moves an economy forward. Not that new science and technology isn't hugely important, but the aggregate impact of millions upon millions of small improvements in processes and business models is larger, especially on the general standard of living. So, the Soviet Union was able to stay in shouting distance, more or less, of the United States in terms of technological progress... but was unable to keep the grocery store shelves stocked. That is in the inevitable result of a system that doesn't incentivize and reward small-scale innovation.

Comment Re: Not entirely true (Score 1) 110

Posting something about your employer without being anonymous is just plain stupid!

Depends on your employer. I post stuff about my employer all the time, under a slashdot username that is the same as my corporate LDAP username, and have gotten kudos for it. I've also gotten a couple of calls from legal, asking me to be careful about commenting on legal issues, but the attorneys apologized effusively for doing so, and pointed out that they recognized I was being careful but just want to reiterate that it was important.

But my employer is particularly open-minded, and particularly confident in its employees' judgement. You need to understand your context, and YMMV.

Comment Re:I know where I stand (Score 1) 330

Leave people alone? Are you delusional? Liberals believe in the power of government to affect people's lives. They want you to have a "relationship with your government", like it's a girlfriend or something. They expand, expand, expand the power of government because they believe it to be positive and NOT subject to corruption or any of those yucky things. If We The People were left to our own choices, we'd just choose wrong! Look at Brexit! The people were presented with a clearly correct choice and a clearly wrong choice, and they screwed it up! How can you trust people like that?

In reality, giving the government more and more power just leads to corruption. Example #1: Hillary Clinton, and we need look no further. Clearly corrupt, clearly belongs in prison, the evidence is overwhelming. She cuts a deal with the Attorney General to keep her on after she's elected and the charges go away, POOF!

Comment How does he say this with a straight face? (Score 2, Interesting) 330

And I decided that by reason of character, by reason of background, and experience, but also especially by reason of results, she would be the most qualified person to be president in January of 2017.

What the fuck? Seriously? Anyone else who said this would burst out laughing. Hillary has zero character. Her background is rotten. Her results? Like what? Starting an undeclared war in Libya so her buddies could make money? This just doesn't pass the giggle check. How can educated people DO these things?

Comment Re:Google giving the Business.. (Score 2) 95

That does suck, though...introductory rates and such are never guaranteed. Still, it beats my Comcast by a pretty wide margin - $70 gets me 30/10, and that's consumer-capped. I'd jump at the chance for 100/100 (or even 50) at $75.

And you're only getting a consumer service level agreement which is, basically, that if it doesn't work they'll fix it when they get around to it. I'm sure the Google Fiber business class service includes a more typical business SLA, with defined maximum response times and compensation for excessive outages. That sort of SLA typically triples the price vs a consumer service with the same bandwidth.

Comment Re:Google giving the Business.. (Score 1) 95

So, with the price change, that means we'll have to pay, basically, double to maintain our 1 Gbps, otherwise we lose 75% of our speed to pay the same price.

Or, you could drop down to the consumer tier and pay less per month than you currently do... but give up the business-class service level agreement that you have.

If you're getting 1Gbps with a business SLA for $125 per month right now, that's an *amazing* deal. Comcast would soak you for twice that for 100 Mbps. I currently pay $120 per month for 15/3 (Mbps) with a business SLA, though that's because I'm out in the sticks where there are very few options available.

Comment Re: drone ship landings require a lot less fuel? (Score 1) 101

I don't need to stand by the rotation theory. However, the 2.5 degrees that the Earth rotates are about equivalent to the downrange distance.

The first stage is going about 1/5 of the target LEO orbital velocity at separation. While you might well model the trajectory as a parabola over flat ground, given the lack of fuel I would expect that SpaceX puts a lot more care into their trajectory. So far I've failed to attract the attention of the person responsible for Flight Club, the most trusted modeling of SpaceX flights, but I'll message him directly.

Comment Re:Public Admission of Stupidity (Score 1) 219

So a pedestrian in dark clothes, at night, not hearing an electric car, and jaywalking by stepping out from between vehicles means the driver drives like "a moronic asshat."

you do know that electric cars are almost silent, especially at low speeds, right?

I don't know about the Model S, but the Nissan LEAF isn't. It has a speaker in the driver's wheel well that makes noise when the car is moving at less than 20 mph. Over 20 mph tire noise is loud enough to be quite audible.

Comment Re: Wow... (Score 2) 219

Show of hands: who thinks Elon Musk is above having a staffer make up this email or making it up himself?

I think they're too smart to do something like that. The probability of it being found out is low, but the PR damage caused by such fraud would be extreme. On balance, the expected risk of such a move is way too high. Plus, there's every reason to expect they have received some emails like this.

Tesla does not have a good record of repeat customers


Comment Re:A pattern emerges (Score 1) 161

I understand the concern, but there's really no evidence for it. Your examples of what Samsung and Microsoft have done aren't evidence... and Google has little more control over Samsung than over Microsoft. Could Google decide that it no longer cares about openness? Sure. But we're actually working quite hard to push it the other direction, and I see no reason to expect that to change.

What is the thing you're saying Google has done "in firmware" for Android for Work, but hasn't "flipped the switch"? Android for Work does nothing in firmware, it's all in Android; the only thing remotely close to that is the use of TrustZone for authentication and crypto key management -- and I'm the engineer responsible for those TrustZone components, and I can't figure out what "switch" you're talking about.

Comment Re:why not do this (Score 1) 161

A warning is what we've had for several years now, and it's proven to be inadequate.

I understand this. What I was saying is that there should be a way to disable the new behavior (perhaps a setting in the Developer Options, where ordinary users would never see it) for those who don't need such a muscular approach.

The problem with that approach is that someone selling/giving you a pre-compromised phone would just flip that switch before they give it to you. If you're not going to be bothered by a big warning during bootup, you're definitely not the sort who will dig through the settings and find that problem... or factory reset the device to reset all of the switches.

If the new method really doesn't get in the way, all this is moot.

I think that's the case.

Slashdot Top Deals

1 Sagan = Billions & Billions