Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
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:Cry me a river (Score 1) 257

File this under who gives a crap. I make a fraction of that money. I go home exhausted, work frequently out of town. Work long hours for no extra money. With this guys credentials he couldn't get another job? Give me a break.

I'm surprised that you have to work that hard and travel so much, just to be an asshole. And really, I wouldn't expect being an asshole to pay all that well. Plenty of people are willing to do it. You probably just love the job, eh?

Comment Re:"Neural signal diversity" (Score 1) 288

I can see that higher diversity might be some kind of "super awake" state.

Talk to people who've practiced meditation for years. "Super awake" is a way to describe it, but it doesn't quite do it justice.

"Super awake" does not accurately describe meditation; "Self-delusion', on the other hand, does.

I'm always a bit amused when someone feels they have the authority to tell someone else that they are not experiencing what they are experiencing.

Whatever floats your boat. I'm always amused by people who feel that their spiritual and religious experiences are objective.

I'm not sure they do. But it is still their experience. I'm not sure on what basis you can claim it isn't what they think it is, having not experienced it yourself. I think what you're really expressing is that someone's experience doesn't comport with your concept of reality, so you reject their experience and conclude they must be delusional.

Comment Re:"Neural signal diversity" (Score 1) 288

I can see that higher diversity might be some kind of "super awake" state.

Talk to people who've practiced meditation for years. "Super awake" is a way to describe it, but it doesn't quite do it justice.

"Super awake" does not accurately describe meditation; "Self-delusion', on the other hand, does.

I'm always a bit amused when someone feels they have the authority to tell someone else that they are not experiencing what they are experiencing.

Comment Re: "Neural signal diversity" (Score 1) 288

Marijuana had never, in the history of mankind, caused those events to occur.

No, of course not. As I said, marijuana has absolutely no effect on anyone. It's just coincidence when someone smokes/eats weed they suddenly behave completely differently than they always have and jump out a window or shoot themselves or drive really, really slowly or drive the wrong way on a road.

Nope, no effect whatsoever. Speaking of idiots. . .

I think the point was that the vast majority of marijuana smokers do none of those things. Those behaviors are outliers. So while they may happen, it's not accurate to characterize the effects of the drug that way in general.

Comment Re:Statist assault on free enterprise (Score 1) 90

You give the government license to weigh in on a contract as soon as you rely on the courts to help you enforce it.

Frankly, I don't see, how the two things are related in the slightest. A judge may think a contract was unfair (or stupid), but it is still valid — as long as entered into willingly and in good faith by both sides...

Oh, so you do think the courts should be able to weigh in on a contract.

Comment Re:Free enterprise assault on liberty (Score 1) 90

Either way, be it the warlords of the dark ages or armed enforcers of the modernity, the distinct attribute is violence. And Uber manifestly does not use it — nor is it even alleged to use it.

You think the only type of violence is physical? Uber recently increased their percentage of each ride while dropping the price. I'm not saying that's violence necessarily. But it's kind of a crappy thing to do, and the drivers have no say about it.

Comment Re:Free enterprise assault on liberty (Score 1) 90

No, it is not, actually. What is illegal is to hold anyone as slave (except as punishment for a crime) — contract or not. But Uber is not doing anything of the kind, the contracts are "at will", breakable by either side.

In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges.

Comment Re:The Jig Is Up On The "Gig" Economy (Score 1) 90

The law does not deserve any respect, why shouldn't it be broken? The law stopped deserving respect once the law became compromised. The law is not based on a set of strict rules (the Constitution), instead it is open to interpretation to the benefit of those currently in power and those buying the said power.

The law today does not warrant respect.

The law is so much more than the Constitution. The Constitution provides a framework for the delegation and separation of powers between the branches of the Federal government and between the Federal and State governments. There are no regulations in the Constitution. Most laws and regulations have nothing to do with Constitutionality.

Comment Re:The Jig Is Up On The "Gig" Economy (Score 1) 90

I think you're missing something important, which is the value of being able to work whenever you damn-well feel like it and take a vacation whenever you damn-well feel like it and not be accountable to anyone else's schedule.

Let's do an experiment, take a worker in any other sector: retail/food/engineering/medicine, you name it. Now tell that person that they are going to move to a system where they can chose when to go to work and when to leave, with 15-minute granularity and no advance notice whatsoever. Of course, their wages will scale only with the time they actually spend working. Now ask them what that sort of flexibility would be worth to them.

Want to take the afternoon off to watch your nephew's baseball game -- it costs you exactly one afternoon of wages. Want to take the weekend to attend your college friend's wedding -- it costs you exactly one weekend of wages. Want to sign out of your job for 3 months while you backpack SE Asia and then come back and continue like nothing happened -- it costs you exactly 3 months of wages.

I'm quite fortunate that my boss is understanding, and I could probably do the above if we weren't swamped with work and if it wasn't too overlapped with my teammates (6-person team, so 2 of us leaving for the same week would be bad but not fatal). Most workers, especially in retail/food sectors closest in wage level to Uber can't dream of it. If your boss at Starbucks says you work on Saturday, your sister's birthday party will just have to wait (or you can swap).

Hell, even with my understanding boss and cushy job, I would absolutely love an arrangement where I make my pro-rated salary for every week (!) I want to work and can take unlimited pro-rated vacation without a single thought.

The difference is right here in your post. A job that you can walk away from with little consequence or inconvenience is a job in which you have little value or responsibility. You personally can't just do that because you are on a team, with responsibilities and deliverables. You are skilled and are probably well paid. I would like to have more flexibility too. But I can, with some notice, take time off without giving up any money. I don't have to choose between watching my son's baseball game and making money. And I make enough money that I can go do fun things in my spare time.

In short, any job that you can walk away from at a moment's notice is a job in which you are easily replaceable. Those jobs tend to not pay very well. Considering the way America is set up, I'd rather have a higher paying job with less flexibility.

Comment Re:The Jig Is Up On The "Gig" Economy (Score 1) 90

I am happy for the people who found a way to avoid oppression by moving their businesses somewhere far away from those who want to oppress them.

You think it's business being oppressed? They move their manufacturing to third world countries with lax labor and environmental protection laws, so they can make an extra billion on top of their 10 billion in revenue (note: numbers pulled right from my ass, but you get the idea), while buying off, I mean lobbying congress people to enact business friendly trade deals, and you think they're oppressed. Got it.

You are saying "greedy fucks" while talking about people that produce but you are not saying "greedy fucks" while talking about people who want to take away from those who produce. This shows a certain ... level of agenda that has nothing to do with the word or concept of greed, it has to do with the concept of entitlement to other people's productive life.

I'm sorry, who's doing the producing here? Are the top level managers, owners and stock holders doing the producing? Or is it the ground level workers who are doing the producing? You know, the ones whose wages are under constant downward pressure due the greedy fucks needing a bigger bonus and higher stock price.

Look, I know not all business is like that; not even every multinational. But the fact is that almost all of the economic gains of the past decade have gone to those who are already the richest. They are not being oppressed, nor strangled by regulation. They are doing quite well. It is the people at the bottom, like Uber drivers, who are getting the shaft. They are the ones who are to be protected by those pesky regulations. One of the functions of government should be to protect the weak from the powerful. We seem to have forgotten that.

Slashdot Top Deals

You're using a keyboard! How quaint!

Working...