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:How is this different from arbitrage on the NYS (Score 1) 212

Conservatives have been out of power and influence for so ling, this is stupid. But you're excused,since most assume Republicans are Conservatives.

They are mostly not. And to stomp out the flames in advance, neither is Trump. But he's not part of the Establishment, so we can hope for some minimal changes.

If we had elected any Establishment candidate, we would have no reason to hope.

Comment Re:How is this different from arbitrage on the NYS (Score 1) 212

Oh, dear, let's go to this now.

Computer buying of performance tickets enhances liquidity in that market. Instant sales, the venue and exhibitor are guaranteed sales, the artist(s) are ensured of their fee, all is well. The market then is extended as buyers pile in and buy at markup, and only the original seller(s) suffer in not sharing in the markup.

Or do they? Perhaps there is a raging business in brokered resales, and the venue/exhibitor/performers are the ones most cheated, if none of them share in the markup?

HFT is pure arbitrage. Liquidity isn't the primary feature. Automated ticket purchasing is even worse, in that the systems purport to open sales to buyers at a point in time, but the truth is very few human buyers are *permitted* to purchase - the bots win.

This is a good thing, enhanced only if the law could permit bot sales when disclosed in advance by the original sellers, putting you and me on notice that we are wasting our time queuing up to click and fail. At least be honest, so I won't bother, but will know that those tickets to the concert I want to go to won't cost $65, they will cost $125. Each. No matter.

Than I can make choices in an informed manner. And know that I'm actually enriching the scalpers. Then i can choose.

Comment Re:ummmm .... (Score 1) 276

I've thought this through a few times. Same conclusion each time.

For humans, women are the selectors. Men are cheap. Women are the required and scarce resource, that is, willing women. Most any man is willing, with few exceptions.

Unfortunately, women today are using different criteria, the most important change being that they no longer have to put up with the man even for the duration of the pregnancy. They also need not even pretend to choose a man able to support them and their child(ren). Being 'willing' is less a part of this than ever.

Extending the freedom of choice and independence to even the means of delivery can only increase the incidence of Cesarean deliveries.

This also will result in significant divergence of the population between affluent and impoverished women. No money, need a man. Money, no man. Cruel, brutal, and simplistic, but true.

It does not bode well for our species. We should also be looking at the evolution of the family.

Comment Re:Pratchett and Baxter already predicted this (Score 1) 276

And in the US at least, Obstetricians do schedule C Sections for their convenience.

It doesn't matter why. Cesarean delivery has consequences, and some of those may well be genetic manipulations.

And all this explains a multitude of things for me, while leaving several others unexplained, and exposing an inconvenient truth. Darn. I was hoping not, but so it is.

Comment Oh, sure, this willwork (Score 1) 50

Especially the updating over Cellular vs, WiFi thing.

I regularly get updates (yeah, some of us do) that try to force going over WiFi, despite my having set updates over both Cellular (Mobile) and WiFi and expecting these to happen. Whether the carrier, Google Play Store, or the app dev do this, they try to force these over WiFi, size not being an obvious factor.

So I have to manually trigger these.

Morons. What fun it is to have WiFi enabled on my phone during lunch, when I walk by 6 different 'open' hotspots, each of which wants me to accept some T&C whatever, and each latches onto my phone and prevents it from even receiving SMS until I do something. Yes. T-Mobile. Probably due to WiFi Calling, I bet.

It's not all kittens and glitter out there. Stuff sometimes doesn't really work like ti was expected to, and I should not complain. Much. I get paid to deal with these sorts of problems, and if I were not, or they did not happen, I would have to work for a living.

It's not hard work to point out the obvious, just annoying.

Comment Re: So distributing Kiddie Porn is fine? (Score 1) 373

Don't bother, I'm already or of that corner. Whistleblowers serve society more often than not. Secrets are a necessary part of modern society, but exposing abuse and crimes may not be popular. Protecting whistleblowers may not even be an all or nothing thing. But I support them, and pardoning them more often than not.

None of our current crop of well known whistleblowers earns anything but my support. My government should not be secure from oversight be it organizational, legislative, or vigilante.

Comment Re:EU is not Democracy (Score 3, Insightful) 373

Freedom of speech is the essential civil right, second only to freedom of thought, which when lost describes total oppression.

Without free speech you cannot:

- Say what is true.
- Say what others are thinking and do not realize they are not alone in that.
- Say what true and so expose lies and fabrications, thereby rejecting falsehoods and those who publish them.
- Expand the debate beyond what the majority say.
- Offer alternatives to the accepted and protected norm.
- Choose, for yourself, your direction and intentions.
- Ask others to join with you and oppose.

Speech is critical.

And next, after that, nearly (pr perhaps) equal, is self-defense, which is necessary to your right to life. First, to claim your right to live, then to reject in speech (ideas for you who struggle with some plain talk) those who would deny you life, and then to defend that life.

From there, to be left alone to do as you wish, insofar as you deny no one else that, is the beginning of liberty. To defend others ensures their rights and collaterally yours, preventing oppressors from merely outnumbering you.

Speech. Without this freedom, you would not be able to present your demands for this and the others. You would know it, in your heart, you would just not be able to exercise it and others, and defend any.

And balancing rights against each other is a lie. Balancing your exercise of rights is necessary, sometimes, in current civilized society, but such accommodations are properly limited and focused.

Comment Re: Will this apply to slashdot as well? (Score 1) 373

0. ALL posts on /. are created with moderation no lower than 0. That's the logic. So anyone seeing offensive posts before they are moderated down is triggered, and harmed, and has a grievance to be addressed. It can never be undone.

1. The overwhelming majority of extensive, deliberate hateful speech is, in fact, merely trolling, a joke that is only lost on the extremes. The overwhelming majority or /.ers recognize these for what they are and a) ignore them, as they are insincere and deliberately provocative for no other reason and b) avoid anything more than moderation to deny the authors any further encouragement, recognition and reward.

2. Hate speech is the term du jour for the Left to denounce the Right, for anything. As such, while the EU has fewer protections for free speech, the EU is hurtling down the path of censorship, and while ostensibly for the sake of hurt feelings, it is in fact backlash against what is now becoming a global backlash against the left, centralized control, financial manipulation, and socialist expansion. Whether you think these things are real, or correct, or to be opposed will be useful in understanding your beliefs and actions.

More reason to rebel against the EU, distance America from Europe (we began this in the 1700s, and for good reason, read any history lately?), and forge ahead not on a new course but on the course that set America apart and above.

Comment Re:That can't be right (Score 1) 533

Under the heading of "well, at least the garage didn't burn down"/

No, it was merely left without a roof. The house, a total loss. 7 years later, the house is rebuilt, but smaller, less wonderful, because there was less left to do with. The garage has a roof, but still smells, and is emptier, since the second car was forgone to pay for the house repairs. And the new mortgage is more than the old one. Insurance didn't pay off like it was promised to.

And all this because the neighbors built bonfires with no concern for the wind or sparks. A wind that miraculously spared some of their houses, the ones that could afford yuge yards, but built the bonfires on your property. Why would they risk being burnt? What kind of business model is that?

Slashdot Top Deals

Never say you know a man until you have divided an inheritance with him.