Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:Not that expensive (Score 2) 168

The thing is, unless you have seen everything you would possibly want to see in older movies available for $10, why would you pay $50 for the same home experience? Unless it's a movie you really want to see NOW it will make more sense to just get an older movie for now and wait for the price to come down.

For most movies, I'm content to wait for the DVD from Netflix. But for about 1 movie a year, I want to see it soon. I don't like the theater when it's busy, so I usually wait a couple weeks anyway. I'd definitely prefer my home theater to the cinema.

Comment Re:Just Remember, Folks. (Score 1) 118

if you accidentally crack the screen, or if its backlight goes out or something, you wont be able to get a replacement for any money because they stopped making them 10 years ago, and without that screen you can't control anything in the car.

Heh, that was a (potential) problem with my 2003 Infinity, where the HVAC and entertainment system were on the same board. Very few of these cars were made, so it was $2k to get a replacement. But there's always a replacement somewhere.

but I'd also keep a good ol supercharged V8 around for weekends

Does anyone even make them any more? Superchargers seem to have fallen by the wayside as the engineering on turbos got better for low-RPM power. All the fun sports cars are V6s or heavily-boosted 4-bangers anyhow. It's the high RPMs that make the drama, far more than actual power.

Comment Re:Not that expensive (Score 1) 168

The thing is, unless you have seen everything you would possibly want to see in older movies available for $10, why would you pay $50 for the same home experience?

Yes, I have seen every decent older movie I care to see. Every once in a while I am surprised by an old movie I missed, but it's quite rare. After a couple decades even great movies start to show their age anyway.

Comment Re:Why stop at $50? (Score 5, Insightful) 168

Why not make it $500, at least if you're intention is to charge a wishful price that nobody is going to pay anyway.

You must not have young children (who need a costly babysitter), rarely go to a movie with friends or family (thus reducing the price per viewer below movie theater pricing), or perhaps live in a low cost area where tickets aren't pushing $15 per person. Because otherwise you wouldn't think $50 for this service was wishful thinking on the part of the studios.

I would gladly pay $50 for a dozen or so movies per year so I don't need to spend $50+ per night on a babysitter.

Comment Not that expensive (Score 3, Insightful) 168

Considering I spend about $35 on two tickets plus concessions, $50 is not that bad to be able to watch new movies without leaving the house. I often see blockbuster movies with 2-4 friends or family members, so then its a bargain. And in my current situation I need a babysitter to see a movie in the theater, so this would cut the cost of a movie in half for my wife and I right now.

I certainly wouldn't call it cheap, but the price is about what I expected.

Comment Re:Just Remember, Folks. (Score 1) 118

Some high-end cars are built not to wear out in that way. Any part made of rubber will fail eventually and need replacement, of course, but high end cars with e.g. more than one layer of door seal just hold up better. One selling point of the Mercedes S-class is the the interior holds up well over time, even with kids and pets and whatnot.

The nice thing about an electric car is the minimal amount of drivetrain parts - there's so much less to fail due to age. No water lines or gaskets or vacuum hoses, beyond the odd closed-system engine cooler.

The interior might not be nice after 10 years (but then, Tesla interiors don't start out nice IMO), but the car will be reliable and the interior serviceable.

Comment Re:Just Remember, Folks. (Score 1) 118

Most people rich enough to afford a new Tesla trade their car in every 2 or 3 years. So yeah, not long at all.

Many people who drive a Tesla trade their car in every 2 or 3 years, and from habits like that never become wealthy.

Most wealthy people who can afford a Tesla (just pay cash, not a big deal) got that way by not wasting money. The Model S seems to be setting down to having good reliability, finally. Seems like a reasonable car to keep for 20 years, with only the battery replacements as a significant expense.

Comment Re:Rose tinted glasses (Score 1) 476

A better question rather than bringing up the exhausted "strawman" pejorative, is do you concur with him?

His strawman argument was the crux of his entire post, so there is no better response than calling that out. He didn't add any additional insight into the issue other than calling the article BS so there wasn't much else to build on. If he had actually given potentially valid points to discuss, as you just have, there could have been room for more discussion.

As in I find that it streche scredulity to a breaking point when he asserts how the Communist revolutions in Russia created equality for it's citizens. Could you make a good argument for the income leveling of the Great leap forward in China, which directly caused between 18 million and 55 million deaths by starvation? The dead were equal in a morbid manner, but I don't think Mao missed too many meals.

That is a very valid criticism of the article, since I agree his attempt to include these two Communist revolutions as examples of decreasing inequality damages his central argument. The only real problem I have with his statements is his claim that these revolutions "[leveled] inequality on an unprecedented scale". This is hard to believe when China's level of income inequality is nearly the same as the US, with China's income inequality being a little worse but wealth inequality being a little better. Both Communist revolutions probably did lower inequality for at least a short period, but it would require significant backup arguments and statistics to convince me it was unprecedented.

But I do stand by my assertion that Scheidel is an idealistic far left winger who cherry picks his source to fit his worldview.

This may be true, but in this case it is hard to disagree with the central argument that income inequality is very hard to fight without significant and drastic upheavals in society, such as revolution and war. While not true in all cases, "it takes money to make money" is still quite accurate in almost all cases. Compound Interest is the eighth wonder of the world and it overwhelmingly benefits the wealthy. Without drastic increases in wealth distribution this inequality will only accelerate in the future.

Comment Re: s/drug trials/climate change/g (Score 1) 313

Are you unfamiliar with the phrase "hand waving", or just being deliberately obtuse?

Science is about numerically accurate, falsifiable predictions. We need some of those in the Climate Change debate, but the science isn't there yet. Non-scientists like yourself, however, are happy to substitute hand waving (like a magician, hoping to distract the audience from the lack of substance).

Comment Re:Fake science/sloppy science (Score 1) 313

Your single outlier could be the one paper that has discovered and accounted for the previously unknown factor or discovered some other problem with previous research. You can't just conclude that since in the majority of cases this is unlikely therefore we can dismiss the outlier. You still have to look at it, have a discussion about it, and see whether or not it's worth considering or if it means the other 9 studies need to be rerun to account for new information.

All of that is certainly possible, but once again you have to go with what is more likely. And it is far more likely that the one study made a mistake than all nine studies made the same mistake. But of course 10 studies is not a very large sample size. For comparison early research into climate change consensus looked at over 10,000 research papers.

It will always be possible for one study to invalidate 10,000, but it certainly isn't likely. Even special relativity and quantum mechanics didn't throw out Newton's laws of motion, they just enhanced them in special circumstances.

Slashdot Top Deals

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (6) Them bats is smart; they use radar.