Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



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

Comment Re:No (Score 2) 400

Primarily, I think you've got several screws loose. I think the rich voted for Trump because of things like the estate tax...

This implies that rich and upper-middleclass people are stupid. 90% of Americans have a net worth < $1 million. 99.5% have a net worth < $11.8 Million. Under current tax law, you only pay federal estate taxes on the part of your net worth that exceeds $10.9 Million for 2016, which is automatically adjusted for inflation. That < 1% of the population obviously couldn't have elected trump on their own, so the rest of the rich and semi-rich who voted for him must either be stupid or naively optimistic about their future earning prospects. Even if the Democrats were in power and bumped the estate tax exemption down to the pre-Bush $1 million level, that's still only 10% of Americans who'd pay a penny in estate taxes.

Speculating about the higher order effects of how large structural changes in the tax code will effect the income distribution is akin to astrology, but the 1st order effects are clearly more beneficial for a small minority of the wealthiest Americans.

Note that this post isn't rhetorical. It's entirely possible that Trump voters did vote primarily on personal economics and fall into these three categories:

  • 1. Think Trump's tax policies will directly benefit them, but just can't or didn't bother to do the very simple math.(i.e. the stupid and the lazy)
  • 2. Understand that Trump's tax policies will lower taxes on people richer than them a lot more than it will lower taxes on them directly, but believe the higher-order effects will have a net benefit to them (i.e. trickle-down economics).
  • 3. Are really rich and will benefit from Trump's tax policies

I'm just saying that #3 is far too small a voting block to even move the needle in the popular or electoral college votes. If economics was a deciding factor for a significant number of voters, some combination of #1 and #2 were heavily involved.

Comment Re:No (Score 1) 400

He's already said he wants to get rid of safety and consumer-friendly regulations ...

And there's your answer. He WILL bring jobs back to America. His tariffs will raise prices and cause scarcity. One party control will abolish the minimum wage and the social safety net. Once we're all broke and desperate, deregulation will gut both OSHA and the EPA, making American labor competitive again. Then the incredibly wealthy elite like Trump can manufacture things at home while still increasing their share of GDP even faster than they did under the Democraps (which was pretty fast!)

Comment Slashdot leads the way (Score 1) 186

Slashdot has been making me less productive since before Twitter and Facebook were a gleam in the eye of Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg's eyes. And I've been using "well, it's technical, so maybe I'll meet someone or learn something" as an excuse to read slashdot the whole time. Doh! I'm doing it again, right now, as I type. Screw this trash. I'm done with it. I hereby give up caffeine too, since its clearly just a tool the Illuminati use to control us all.

Comment Re:Charge Apple with contributory neglegence? Morr (Score 1) 152

Probation? He needs a "thank you" from both Apple and whatever IT department manages 911. If they can't handle a 6000-phone oops by some kid, WTF do I pay my taxes for? When ISIS and foreign governments launch such attacks, they will be much larger scale and at much less opportune times that really do cause lots of death and mayhem. He basically just walked into their wide open front door and said, "hey, you left the door open". If he happened to track a bit of mud on the carpet on his way out, that seems like a small price to pay.

Comment Re:Consistent with Semerian sources (Score 1) 232

It's all true, I was there where Nibiru (our mystery planet) and Tiamat (the remnant of which became Earth) collided. And it was a conspiracy too. I know because everyone's home insurance had a interplanetary collision exclusion. WTF! Why would they even put that in there -- unless they knew it was going to happen.

I knew I should have voted for Enlil. He may have been a bully, but at least he wasn't selling influence to the highest bidder like EA.

- Ashurbanipal

Comment Unique (Score 1) 412

Obviously Ecuador is meddling in the US election, but if they hadn't they'd be truly unique among nations. I'm not mad at Ecuador (or Russia if they were the source of leaked info) for hacking or disclosing this that and the other. I expect it. It's just some bits on disk somewhere. It's not like they shot a missile at us. That sort of think occurred long before the Internet, it's just less risky and at greater scale these days.

I just hope to high Heaven that our secret intelligence services have the capability to do the same.

Comment Re:Queue Monty Python (Score 1) 99

No, I meant that I figured there would be so many people wanting to make this monty python reference that there would be a queue to do so. How did I end up first in the queue? Why would anyone need to wait for a cue to make a Monty Python reference on slashdot?

No go back to eating your donuts (or doughnuts, if you prefer) grammar police.

Comment Re:Who cares? (Score 1) 316

Yep, basically the only way I can see it working would be with automated group sharding. Probably not even AI needed, just a system that learn your preferences based on others who behave similar with blocking to you and would allow social predictive blocking.

Comment Re:Who cares? (Score 1) 316

It's barely profitable and the user base has stagnated. Essentially, it's just 'still around' rather than a big thing. And worse, it doesn't seem to have any idea about how to resolve the issues.

Frankly, I don't think it can and remain 'twitter'. I don't think the particular communication pattern that twitter supports is sustainable; it's essentially built to guarantee a devolution of conversation into the worst human communication forms, flamewars, bullying, etc.

Comment Queue Monty Python (Score 3, Funny) 99

Great Barrier Reef: I'm not quite dead yet!
Global Warming: 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
Science: Yes he is
Great Barrier Reef: I'm not
Science: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill
Great Barrier Reef: I'm getting better
Science: No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.

How is it that no one beat me to this post here on slashdot?

Comment Re:Hot air...and that's a good thing (Score 1) 348

Terrorist 1: Why all this bombing? Why not hit the great satan where it hurts -- in the pocket book?
Terrorist 2: We though about that, but with Iraq, Social Security, Medicare, bank bailouts, quantitative easing and now Mars, their own government and federal reserve are simply beating us to it. We'd just be spitting in the ocean.

(Yes, I know poo-pooing a Mars mission here on slashdot will get me moded into oblivion, but really?!? Mars? Grow some crops in the desert first and then let's talk about space.)

Comment Re:The latest fad (Score 1) 121

Uh..fanboy much? Did we forget silverlight? (Yes, I know they've committed to security bug fixes until 2021, but still...)

This is why commercial software is just plain bad -- we buy because we hope to get something near perfect and avoid this type of stuff. But alas, free or commercial, developers have always had the same struggles with an ever-shifting landscape. At very least with FOSS you can take up maintenance of a library yourself if you have to. And a relatively small effort to fix a critical bug or missing feature can pay off big when it brings new users and developers.

Commercial licenses should have a provision that if the vendor ever decides to discontinue future development, they are required to open-source the whole thing for free.

Comment Re:Arrest warrent is being drawn up now (Score 1) 337

The law disagrees. It is called THEFT of services.

Yes, and he's clearly in the wrong because he clearly knew he was using something he didn't pay for. But the world really does need to come up with some logical legal argument that places blame on a party who's negligence in terms of IT security harms some 3rd party. In this case, T-Mobile is the party harmed in terms of lost revenue, so that doesn't apply. But ethical hacking and wistleblower protections laws are clearly non-existant or not enforced, and never will be until the law places blame on the party who could and should have afforded the effort for better safeguards.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Paul Lynde to block..." -- a contestant on "Hollywood Squares"

Working...