Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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:Chinese buying the property, selling all resour (Score 1) 115

I've posted this maybe dozens of times across the internet, I'm tired of shouting it and I'm tired of making lengthy posts with links and evidence.

The country is selling all it's gas, minerals at rock bottom prices to anyone and everyone for a start. In a huge massive way. The mining boom is finally slowing down significantly, at least so I hear.

We are also pretty lax with stopping people buying property. There's arguments why shouldn't we stop them, but seriously, I'm sick of debating it. If you can't see how someone vastly wealthier than the common local, bidding for houses isn't going to mess up the cost for the locals,..... well I don't know what to say. There's a reason Thailand, Indonesia, other smaller second class countries don't let foreigners buy.

We're getting 'Vancouvered'. It ain't about race, it's about economics and the locals (who don't own yet, you know, a LOT of people) are getting destroyed, totally by this.

That's the facts, it's as simple as that. Furthermore, as long as the Chinese can still buy property (and they do it legally and illegally) then I suspect the 'crash' which I've hoped for, for a decade, simply won't come. They'll just see a cheaper place to store their money they want to hide from China.

We're boned. Best benefit to all this would be a property developer in the last 20 years. Rest of us? Well I've held off using expletives but to say I'm white hot raging angry would be an understatement. @$#%^ our governments.

Oh please, spare us your xenophobia. I have heard such sentiments in the late 80's and 90's when the Japanese were on a spending spree. Everyone were concerned by the Japanese buying up American assets while conveniently ignoring that citizens and business entities of the UK owned more assets in America than the Japanese. I wonder why people were concerned about the Japanese and not the English. On second thought, I know why. Those other counties, you mentioned, preventing Chinese from buying property are xenophobic as heck against the Chinese and a sad day if America follow suit. Foreign entities wanting to buy assets and invest in America is a good thing.

Comment Re:Does not matter (Score 1) 142

In my experience with a not-publicly-traded company that decided to create an Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP), it was just a way for the owners to take cash out of the company without selling it on the market. Turns out they allotted shares worth 1/3 of the company to the ESOP, and had the coroporation borrow money in order to purchase those shares from the owners and give them to employees instead of contributing to 401Ks (I called it the "all eggs in one basket retirement plan"). The owners got cash and the employees got non-voting shares that dropped in value every year (especially 2009).

How is this taking money out of the company? Does it matter who owns the shares...employees vis-a-vis the general public?

Comment Re:government regulations (Score 1) 333

For this exact case, regulation isn't necessary. You just need to make it illegal to describe a product as being a certain thing, and then it turns out it isn't that thing. We have a crime for this: Fraud. It's nice and simple. The unfortunate thing is that we probably have regulations that will limit the liability of WalMart when everyone sues them for this.

So you may actually be right. Get rid of those regulations and let WalMart experience the wrath of a million lawyers.

Isn't that the definition of regulation? In your example, the regulation is hard coded into law.

Comment Re:Curiously (Score 1) 174

Curiously, the total money bet favors Clinton, while the total number of bets favors Trump.

In a situation where everyone has exactly one vote, it's not clear which measure has predictive power.

Which do you believe is more predictive (1) big money bets (i.e. smart money...using Wall Street terminology) or (2) the preponderance of bets? My experience in finance is that big money bets on a stocks/bonds, etc are usually indicative of the long term prospect of those financial instruments. I wouldn't bet against big money.

Comment Re:Bring the remake. (Score 1) 457

Loved the book, and loved the movie, each for different reasons.

Would love to see a movie that was very true to the book, though I think a lot of liberals heads would explode at the concept of service meaning picking up a gun and standing between danger and society. That you can't vote or hold office till you serve and as a "civilian" (non-citizen) are only allowed to have 1 child.

Imagine if that was the world today. Nearly all the Democratic part and most of the Republican party would be fired from office/ineligible to vote.

Loved the book, and loved the movie, each for different reasons.

Would love to see a movie that was very true to the book, though I think a lot of liberals heads would explode at the concept of service meaning picking up a gun and standing between danger and society. That you can't vote or hold office till you serve and as a "civilian" (non-citizen) are only allowed to have 1 child.

Imagine if that was the world today. Nearly all the Democratic part and most of the Republican party would be fired from office/ineligible to vote.

And you are a fan of this? You think this level of fascism is a good thing? To each his own...I guess.

Comment Re:Moores Law (Score 2) 116

This is the consequence of the death of Moores Law. A lot of people won't be happy to hear this, but Moores Law is dead and won't be coming back. Digital computers are reaching an endpoint and there are no more leaps to be made technologically here. Essentially digitial computing is hitting a dead end. The computer you have today will look a lot like the one you will have 10 years from know. I know people will go on about 3D microchips, atomic transistors, exotic materials, but that isn't going to bring back Moores Law. We have been spoiled for decades, but the party is over.

I'm not 100% on board with that belief. The hardware aspects of computing may seem to be heading for a dead end because software demands on hardware have plateaued. Hardware innovation was in response to software demands. Absent software pushing the need for cutting edge hardware, hardware innovation will slow down. I have a computer that I built in 2010 or 2011 that is powered by an Intel i5 3.0 GHz processor. So, far my computer has and can handle any consumer software products on the market. This fact reduces my need to upgrade my computer every 2 years. This is one of the reasons (along with the growth of mobile computing) why the demand for desktop computers has declined. Computer manufacturers are looking at consumers such as my self and don't really see a need to push the envelope. Maybe the growth of artificial intelligence and smart homes will change this. Besides, Moore's Law seems to be alive and well on the mobile computing platform.

Comment Re:I am a young person with a family (Score 1) 338

I also have the financial sense to save for a rainy day and not leverage myself to the eyeballs. I've been months without employment in recent years, and my family was provided for quite well despite the disquieting uncertainty.

So what? Most people will put themselves and their family well being ahead of pride. Why should the IT staff quit because they have to train their replacements? Why should the IT staff make a financial decision, that can have serious consequences, based solely on pride? The IT staff received 6 months notice about the change. That’s 6 months to look for a job without using their savings. What you are suggesting makes no sense even if you have the savings to carry you through until your next job.

Comment Re:So then Hillary is the warmonger (Score 1) 531

If Russia is with Trump, then electing Trump will mean we will not go to war with Russia, and we almost certainly will if we elect Hillary (which she is already inclined to anyway because of the DNC and email leaks).

The media try to paint Trump as some kind of warmonger, but he's not even sure about backing all NATO countries! Meanwhile Hillary is no stranger to war, having started the war in Libya from scratch for no good reason, and with even flimsier pretext than Iraq... Libya was slowly opening to the west under Gaddafi, there was no need to take him out and now that country is utterly screwed.

The day has come when Republicans are bowing in fear and appeasement of Russia. Ronald Regan must be spinning in his grave.

Comment Re:It's not as simple as "just switch over" (Score 1) 166

As someone who is on the tail end of a 700 computer migration from WinXP to Win7, I feel their pain. A single critical program that won't run on Win7 can be a showstopper. Not to mention special hardware for which no Win7 drivers are available - all of a sudden that $120 upgrade cost for a Win7 license became $25,120 when you include the cost of a new laser engraver.

You can always run XP Mode in Win 7 Virtual PC. That's what my organization did when we upgraded to Win 7. We had a few programs that were tied to XP; so, we ran those programs in Win 7 Virtual PC-Windows XP Mode. Problem solved.

Comment Re:Netflix has a unique and obvious strategy. (Score 2) 193

Netflix is the first media company with the business model of "Give the customers exactly what they want."

That is what I used to think, until I heard my friends across the ponds cant watch House of Cards, because of geoip restriction. Netflix blocked countries from watching their self produced TV series, because they wanted to make more money though licensing deals. Netflix is becoming yet another old school media company (and I use that phrase with contempt).

I don't see how Netflix would be maximizing profits based on your scenario. Besides, Netflix doesn't really own House of Cards or any of their internally produced content. They own the exclusive rights to their in-house produced shows but the movie studios still own the content. Netflix has to determine which countries will have an interest in the House of Cards before they license the rights to show House of Cards in those countries. If your friends across the pound can't see the House of Cards is because Netflix has determine that there is not enough interest over there to justify the extra licensing costs. Netflix is fighting the studios to get global licensing but studios are resisting moving to a global licensing model. Don't have the player; hate the game.

Comment Re: Netflix has a unique and obvious strategy. (Score 1) 193

So their witch hunt for people using Proxy to gain access to the US Netflix is in the customers best interest?

What do you expect Netflix to do when the studios are forcing them to block Proxies and VPN? If Netflix really intended to go after their customers from accessing regional restricted content then they would block customers from accessing out of region content based on billing address.

Comment Re:Result of brexit? (Score 1) 153

Intel has been trying this for many years. They never succeed because Intel is trying to make chips so Intel can sell chips for phones and tablets. Intel is Intel-focused. If they focused on making chips to solve problems for customers, they might be more successful.

Microsoft has the same problem. Windows 8 and Xbox One were very obviously Microsoft-focused products -- customers didn't want tiles or Kinect or HDMI input.

Memo to Intel and Microsoft: don't make stuff you want to sell, make stuff people want to buy.

No, the problem Intel has in the mobile computing market is that they are trying to develop chips for the mobile market that are based on their X86 design. Square pegs in a round hole as it is. Intel is x86 centric not "Intel is Intel-focused" as you stated.

Comment Re:Worked out for me... (Score 1) 212

Actually, right now I'm paying $0/mo for storage since I got two years free. And even when that runs out I will be paying $7/mo for hosted storage, related services and a full office suite. For less than the two major competitors (Google and Dropbox) charge for less features (and again, no office suite).

I I have plenty of storage at home (around 10TB usable) but OneDrive provides me convenience and backup. I suppose I could go through the trouble of installing something like OwnCloud, then configuring all my devices to use it, but you know what? Not only would it still be difficult to match the feature set, I am far more likely to have power or network go out in my house than in their data centers.

Google has an office suit built into Google Drive. Google office suit can read the latest Microsoft office files and save files in any MS Office format plus act as a PDF Reader; also, Google office suit allows for sharing and collaborating. Google Drive can be set up to automatically back up data from all your Android mobile devices, in addition to any files or folder on your computer. To say that Google Drive is not as feature rich as Microsoft OneDrive, as far as the average user is concerned, sounds a bit like you are shill.

Slashdot Top Deals

The absence of labels [in ECL] is probably a good thing. -- T. Cheatham