Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


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:The Brietbart take, whee. (Score 0) 357

Oh okay, you can stay away from Google. So Bing, Duck Duck Go, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, eBay, Instagram, Oracle, Reddit, and Slashdot can also do whatever they want with your browsing history as well. Can you even use the internet and stay away from all of the content providers that are able to do what they want with your browsing history?

Comment Re:The Brietbart take, whee. (Score 0) 357

Maybe you need this explained to you. The FTC and the FCC have different rules regarding privacy. The head of the FCC has said that he will now align the FCC rules with the FTC rules, so there is consistency across departments. Also, Google is allowed to do whatever it wants with your browsing history, but your ISP is not. Why is it okay for Google, but not your ISP?

Comment Re:This is absolutely sickening... (Score 1) 357

So you're completely okay with the fact that Google is allowed to do whatever they want with your data, because they're not an ISP (except in cities where they are), but it's the end of the world because Comcast is now allowed to? And how do you feel about Obama appointee, Ajit Pai, saying it was a good move by congress, because it will allow the FCC to align their privacy rules with the FTC and eliminate conflicts/confusion?

Comment Re:Bullshit! (Score 1) 83

According to this argument, nothing that is used in the design cycle works because it does not work individually. Brainstorming is one tool that you can use in design or engineering work. Like any tool, it is not intended to be used on it's own. So you brainstorm, design, brainstorm, design, build, etc.

One big benefit of brainstorming, when it is done right, it that it gets the bullshit ideas out of the way so the group can dig deeply for good ideas. If there is one person, working on one thing, an entire year might be spent building the dumbest thing imaginable. And while that sometimes leads to a profitable product, I don't think it is the most reliable method

Comment Re:Robots will continue to win: What do we do (Score 1) 346

Yes, and I admitted it's flawed. But the flaws you point to don't nullify the conclusion they just require complications. Has your physics teacher ever mentioned the frictionless surface, or the massless point. These don't exist either. Nor does a maxwell's demon. but all provide insight. Don't get bogged in the weeds.

Comment Re:Robots will continue to win: What do we do (Score 2) 346

I'm going to get yelled at for posting this but there's this science fiction short story called "manna" by marshall brain. For the record I'm not marshall brain. In fact the story is rather poorly written. But it does contain a brilliant insight on this problem so I recommend it in the same way would recommend the poorly written but insightful science fiction of the 40s, 50s, 60s. A must read.

SO anyhow getting back on track here. These robots would not be used if caused the company to make less money or to produce fewer products. therefore someone is profiting from this. At the same time we just freed up some labor. Now if you have ever studied the debate between Hayak and Keynes economics you know that this presents a problem. If new higher paying jobs don't srping up to use that labor then one can enter a stalled economic situation where one hasn't increased the velocity or the total amount of money in circulation but has created dis-employment. the classic example is the 2 person village where the candle maker buys 2 loves of bread everyday from the baker, and baker buys 2 candles from thecandle maker. this cycle repeats every day. One day the baker decided to same some money to send to his sick mother, so he bought one candle. The next day the candlestick maker only had money to buy one loaf of bread. and the cycle now became one of a lower productivity. Everyone would like to be working at a higher level of productivity but there's no way to get there. The baker only has enough money to buy the resources he needs to make one loaf. He can't make 2 if he wanted to. Same for the candle maker. The a Mr Keynes comes to town and loans the baker enough money to make two loves and the candle stick maker enough money to make two candles. They then resume the 2 by 2 economy. In return Mr. Keynes, who was actually the tax man in disguise, gets more taxes in the long run.

Yes you can poke some holes in that reductionist example but the point is there are different nash equilubria in economines and you can through no fault of your own end up in a lousy one.

As we become more productive with robots one can either go to an economy where fewer people are employed and fewer people buy the now cheaper goods while wealth concentrates into the few people wiht enough capital to buy these expensive robots, or you could consider an increasingly socialist econonmy where we the increasing cheapness of goods lets us lead more procutive happy lives or lives with more leisure. It requires preventing excess capital accumualtion to achieve. This doesn't mean everyone has to be equal. But one can realistically consider a miniium basic income economy (e.g. finland is experimenting with this) where industrious people are free to earn more by working. Everyone can follow their hearts once the robots are able to make cheap buildings and grow cheap food and make cheap clothing, without it being a burden on the people who choose to work or create or invest.

Yes you can quibble, but if you extrapolate to infinite cheapness clearly I'm right. So ar what level of finite cheapness am I also mostly right?

Anyhow read marshall brains story to see how this can be made plausible.

Comment Re: Can't blame NASA (Score 1) 157

You're right it didn't start with Trump, but he definitely has become the flag bearer for everything that seems wrong with the GOP and US politics in general.

NASA unfortunately is the toy for the ambitions of many senators. Either they get tasked with missions that are overly ambitious or get critisiced for missions that were dictated by the same unrealistic ambitions of politicians.

Comment So fucking what? (Literally). (Score 5, Insightful) 603

So the guy's a pervert: does that mean his code quit working? Is he trying to fuck other contributors? Has he done anything to anyone without their consent?

I've worked with plenty of people in my time who are into things that I don't approve of, from voting for socialists to trying to be Heinlein characters, but if they don't bring it to the office, it's none of my business. That goes double for an open-source project where they're donating their work.

Enough with the goddamned neo-puritans. There's work to be done, for fuck's sake.


Slashdot Top Deals

"Probably the best operating system in the world is the [operating system] made for the PDP-11 by Bell Laboratories." - Ted Nelson, October 1977