Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment Re:No mention of the internet architecture of cour (Score 2) 47

AFAIK the only thing that ISPs could reasonably do is not filter outbound traffic that couldn't have originated within their network, ie, bogus addresses.

The challenge with DDOS though is that it seems to work best and be hardest to mitigate when the number of sources is high and the requests are legitimate.

What's the ISP to filter then?

Comment Re:WAIT let me guess (Score 1) 233

50 years?

Let's assume they have the science-scale reactor actually working and can run the thing for a few hours at a time at a net-positive power output. They've reached the stage where it seems well understood and demonstrate the technology actually works and they're ready to build a demonstration plant capable of feeding the grid with 100 megawatts.

Figure, what, 10 years for funding, design, construction and then another 5-10 years of operation and the inevitable debugging of minor issues associated with scaling output up to higher amounts.

Now we've really shown it can be done as an actual utility. I would expect at this point they would have the attention and interest of governments and commercial utilities interested in building a plant at true utility scale, say 5 GW.

The still-present risks and inevitable red tape would probably mean that only one plant would be built and probably would take from start to plant operation maybe 10 years. I'll be generous in assuming scaling up involved minor but relatively easily recoverable glitches.

So now we're at 30 years and we have a single utility scale plant. Maybe after 5 years of continuous and successful operation it would really seem to live up to its promises and we'd get a gung-ho, all-in attitude towards it and start parallel construction of more plants.

So it'd be 50 years before we really saw a major amount of power being generated.

Comment Reverse auction (Score 1) 212

No, you do it with a reverse auction.

Offer the tickets at an extremely high price initially, and then lower the price with sales feedback until you get closer to the market clearing price.

The thing is, brokers know that the market clearing price is higher than the face value.

If you offered all the seats at $5000 per ticket when they went on sale, brokers wouldn't be able to snap them up on the first day of sale. There's no markup for them.

As you lower the price, you will find people who are willing to pay high prices for in-demand seats but they would still be at prices brokers would be unable to make money on. Some people would be unwilling to buy them at those prices and would wait until the prices reached a level that matched what they were willing to pay. Most of the time this is going to be close to the prices you probably would pay to a broker, but it's going to be above the prices where brokers will be able to arbitrage them.

People will whine that this will make tickets more expensive, which is true -- more expensive than current face value. But it's extremely difficult now to get tickets at face value because the tickets are priced too low, brokers buy them.

Comment home cinema (Score 1) 336

The main reason left to go to a cinema is that the screen is bigger and the sound system is fantastic. Everything else you can have at home.

With a good home cinema setup, you can come close, and you have none of the expensive popcorn, queues, guy next to you getting on your nerves, obnoxious advertisement and other bullshit. Plus you can pause the movie to get a drink from the kitchen and cuddle your cats while watching.

Cinema is on the way out. Once Hollywood understood the lesson that the music industry had to understand, things will get better.

Comment Re:Be careful how hard you squeeze (Score 1) 322

The equivalent of "stop outsourcing" would be like Wyoming blocking imports of almonds from CA just because it wants its own local almond farmers to have business.

I agree that the question isn't borders. If you are in Texas, northern Mexico is more "local" than NYC. But in either case, China is not local.

People *are* permanently unemployed. Not a large percentage of the population but unemployment has never been 0. Ever. I'd say what well-intentioned tariffs we've passed to try to keep unemployment down aren't working very well. And with the upcoming onslaught of automation...I don't see how you *can* keep people from being unemployed for long periods of time.

The part that's never zero is called "structural unemployment", and was mentioned in the part that you cut. People between jobs, people who are moving, etc.
But unemployment-because-you-cant-find-a-job is not god-given, and in fact in various countries around the world there have been periods when this unemploymend was zero.

"the upcoming onslaught of automation" - the 60s called. They want their argument back.

Rather than cling onto the idea that everyone needs to be employed (when reality obviously isn't letting that happen), perhaps it's time to revisit how we make sure every citizen is taken care of in a post-industrial society and this idea that "everyone needs to work".

Oh, I agree on that. I've had periods in my life without a formal job (self-employed, my own small company, not working very much) that were wonderful except for the not-much-money part. If that were somehow covered, I'd immediately go back to working 20 hours a week, or 80 hours a week on stuff that I love.

Trade and technology are the 2 pillars that create wealth

How we are all caught in the Silicon Valley mantra and the Venture Capitalist religion. Most of the really large and powerful companies in the world are not called Google and Facebook. They are energy companies, food companies, and a dozen others. Trade and technology matter, but you buy an iPhone every year while you buy food every day.

Comment Re:Problem is not liberal vs conservative (Score 1) 263

"if im reading correctly, they are buying the bonds with pre tax dollars."

Foreign earnings are only taxed by the US worldwide tax regime if they are repatriated to the US. Foreign earnings are, of course, taxed by the country where they are earned (generally by a territorial tax regime).

Comment Re:Google, Motorola, Intel . . . (Score 1) 263

Generally the corporations lobby, often with hard cash, for these laws that they've written

The Lift America Coalition (including large corporations like 3M, Cisco, Intel, Walmart, etc.) has been lobbying for a territorial corporate tax system rather than a worldwide corporate tax system, which would allow trillions of dollars of profits to be repatriated back to the US, but to date they have not been successful in getting Congress to change the corporate tax regime (which the majority of OECD countries have).

Comment Sideways repatriation (Score 1) 263

I think the point is that Apple has effectively repatriated their earnings into the next best thing to US dollars, and done it without paying taxes.

It was one thing when they hoarded cash overseas without repatriating it, at least in some ways they were exposed to some kind of foreign currency risk. But since they've bought Treasuries with it I think to a lot of people it feels like they're beating the system even further.

Slashdot Top Deals

You will be successful in your work.