Gotta say, leftists protesting in favor of keeping national monuments in an ugly, dilapidated state
It wasn't ugly. I have no opinion on whether painting it blue is an improvement or not (will wait until it's finished to collect visual data), but
I've seen the reflecting pool, and it wasn't ugly.
Unfortunately, most people aren't going to take the step to figure out that their conservatism is just like the conservatism of the people rejecting them.
Most of those people don't care. If you see the world as "us against them," you don't really care how similar "them" is, as long as "us" is on top.
It's clan warfare, not logical fairness.
A person is allowed to say baby-killing Satanists are bad. If that upsets the boss, tough.
In the US, you can be fired for freely expressing your opinion (source).
The recourse is to start a union. When employers start policing social media, or opinions in general, it's time to join a union.
Didn't strike me as a productive FP branch. 'Nuff said.
Back to the story. Seems like a really stupid idea. The destruction of the middle class is a long-term problem. Not going to fix it with a one-time bandage. So let's pretend Slashdot is still a place where solutions can get serious consideration, though my memories of such days are so old as to be dubious. (How many editors where there back then? Down to the last one now...)
The current tax systems seem to favor greedy monopolists. How about pro-freedom taxation in competition with pro-greedom anti-freedom taxation?
One of my (too many) fantasies would be a progressive tax on profits linked to market share and niche dominance. Determining problematic monopolies could use various metrics, but here are three examples: (1) Lack of customer choice, (2) Inability of new competitors to enter the market, and (3) Lack of freedom of employees to move to a competing company. There should be a delay before the higher rates kick in, thus rewarding innovation, but the natural path to higher retained earnings after that time should involve splitting your great company into two or more competing companies. Don't think of it as a tax on success, but rather as a mechanism to make sure the good ideas get propagated into more companies.
A few minor thoughts: One is that mergers that reduce freedom should get no delay time, but should immediately trigger tax rate escalations. Another involves the case of natural monopolies (often related to network effects), where one solution approach would be to use some of the tax revenue to regulate the natural monopoly while funding research into ways to break the natural monopoly.
Your better ideas are quite welcome. Also questions triggered by my poor writing. Unfortunately I anticipate less welcome responses, if any.
You got me to do the research. Turns out the major accomplishment of the YOB administration is reviving Sharpie manufacturing in Tennessee. Take that, you foreign adversaries and heathens!
c/I came to mind/came to mind/
Minimal edit, though I was probably thinking of writing something like "came to my mind".
Too bad the longer discussion apparently generated no Funny. At least not according to the precious moderators.
NAK
Valid points, perhaps well made, but undercut by the vacuous AC Subject that you propagated. Lazy? Or just unthinking? You undercut your own position and the main result appears (by the scrollbar metric) to be helping AC "guide" half of the discussion.
As usual, my own thoughts tend to wander into nether regions, but I wonder whether it would be possible to reach any sort of agreement about what constitutes a good discussion. It is certainly my impression that there used to be a lot of them on Slashdot, but these days? Not so much. I also noticed that Slashdot appears to be down to its final editor.
So here's my funny idea how to pollute the Slashdot conversations with AI support. The latest owners (whoever?) should recruit a couple of AIs for editorial slots. Let's go all pie in the sky. Let's include enhancing the moderation system to also evaluate the work of the human and inhuman (dare I say subhuman?) editors. Which editor picks the best stories in terms of producing those "good discussions" we somehow agreed were good? Which editor produced the best summaries that induced the most humans to actually look at the fine articles? Heck, why not even consider which editor was least attractive for AC drivel, with or without AI support for extra slop.
"accuse the other side of the thing you yourself are guilty of".
That's basically what every teenager and every disfunctional relationship does.
"You never pay attention to me!"
"Well, if you paid attention to me, you would know how much I am dealing with!"
It doesn't matter if it's factual it just matters if you get the tone right.
They're too cheap, too lazy, and in too much of a hurry to make sure their products/services are secure before they start selling them,
If the company doesn't have a QA team, if the company doesn't have negative unit tests, if the company hasn't trained their employees in secure coding practices, if the company doesn't have a system to avoid SQL injection exploits, etc
Then the company is at fault.
You should give a 90 day window so you don't become an enabler of crime.
The company that wrote the bug in the first place is the enabler of the crime. In 99% of these cases, if you look at their unit tests you'll only see positive tests. Fail at best practices.
Announcing the exploit publicly allows people who use the software to take proper protections (like putting behind a firewall).
Even more seriously though, California natives both more and less native than me (my father and I were both born here, before that the history gets Mexican, but that covered a lot of ground once) would be perfectly happy if the Hollywood and the tourism went away,
LOL everyone outside of LA hates LA. Dirt bag slutty water thieves.
Anything free is worth what you pay for it.
