Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


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:BIAS (Score 2) 249

We're sort of stuck, I don't know how we go back. What should happen is about 25% of the Federal government should be cut, and our Federal income tax load cut commensurately, then state and local governments should increase taxes to bring that burden back up to where it is, + or -.

Then we have more control as voters. I have 1/(state population) of a vote over spending, vs 1/(US population) as it is now for most spending (yes, this is simplified but close enough)..

But we're so programmed as Americans to think we have to have this Big Government group of people in Washington to do things that are better done locally that I don't see this ever happening.

Comment Silly. (Score 2) 99

As far as I knew nobody was going to force airlines to allow people to talk on their phones. So this would be allowing the airlines to make the decision, which puts it where it should be - the business side of the equation.

If some airlines, say more business oriented or in first class only, etc.. want to allow it then they should be able to.

The FCC and FAA should be deciding on the safety of using phones, not how annoying they are to some people.

Comment Re:The takeaway (Score 0) 356

No, you don't get it.

Businesses should be in the business of taking care of employees and making sure everything is fair, not making money.

These companies should either eliminate negotiation altogether or just offer PoC/Women more money outright. They should not have to negotiate.

Now, this may sound absolutely fucking ridiculous to you, but that's the current prevailing thought in some circles.

Comment Stupid story. (Score 1) 283

There are people doing real, actual hard labor who wake up and find they can't do it anymore, where are the stories about them? Oh, but this is 'Google' so we're supposed to care?

You work to provide value to your employer, when you cease to do so your job is in jeopardy. And we always hear about the "bad" side of this but what about whoever got that job? They are probably pretty happy about it.

Converse of this story:

My name is Bryce McMillenial, I'm 32 and I've been looking for work forever. I'm young, healthy, and don't have a family so I really want somewhere I can work hard and have a chance at advancement. I recently found an opening at Google X working with drones, it's amazing!

Comment Re:Obsession with "self reliance"? Since when? (Score 2) 476

It's so absurd. If you look at 10k years ago humans probably had an 18 hour a day, 365 days a year "workday" just to survive. 200 years ago, the average person probably needed to work 90 hours a week to have a lifestyle equivalent to a lower (but not lowest) class Indian or Chinese person.

And now people bitch and whine and moan because people who live like kings relative to most of humanity's history have to get by with only enough income to eat, have shelter, and have modern conveniences and entertainment. Oh, the fucking humanity.

The worst are the "but muh wage slaves!!!" people and the "work life balance!" assholes. Oh noes, you have to work in order to get other people to work for you (which is all money really is, a proxy for other people's labor)?!?!! Poor fucking babies.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we should have anarchy and poor farms and shit like that. I believe in a reasonable welfare state, but jesus christ enough whining about needing to work to live like a king vs. merely a lucky American.

Comment Re: then go somewhere else (Score 2) 476

Rubbish. You're just picking winners (e.g. the small number of taxi drivers) over losers (the huge number of Uber or Lyft drivers). And your living wage shtick is fucking risible. It's an analog of the Parable of the Broken Window. Why, if we just make employers pay people more, everyone will benefit because then people will have more money to spend!

Good luck with that in a global economy. I'm sure China and India will be happy to play by those rules and force their own employers to pay people the equivalent of $35k a year or whatever insane number you and your ilk think Americans should be guaranteed. That's so laughable that it has no basis to even be in a reality based discussion. And in reply to your inevitable "but muh services are different from muh goods!!!!" prattling, in 15 years we will have automated cars. If you force the market by banning Uber/Lyft type services it will be in less than 8 years.

Your policies would only hasten us to the inevitable UBI system before we're really ready for it. And yes, I agree at some point some major changes will need to be made like a UBI.

Comment Utterly pointless. (Score 1) 418

This whole discussion is like discussing if there's a God or not - it has no possible point and no possible resolution. No, you can't prove it nor can you prove it's not true. No matter what you think you prove you could say "well, the simulation is just that good!". Absolutely anything.

It's just more modern theoretical physics wank off material.

Comment Re:Because Windows & Linux are terrible? (Score 1) 267

As expected, hand-waving about Windows. That seems to be most of what you and your ilk have to complain about.

Why is Windows so bad, fellow dweeb?

Why, because Windows is terrible!

Windows is great. It boots up, and lets me run the apps I want to run. Not sure what more I need from it as a user.

As a developer, it's awesome, I can develop in any language I want using great tools.

As an IT guy, it's got all the manageability tools you could ever want.

Slashdot Top Deals

The way to make a small fortune in the commodities market is to start with a large fortune.