Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score 1) 1318

You do realize that he was a fighter pilot protecting the highly contested air space of Texas, right? Also, do you really think that his daddy didn't pull strings, twist arms, and break kneecaps to get little dubya the fighter pilot role he really really wanted? One gets to be governor anywhere by raising money and having the team that can pull/push/coach one through to a victory. The politician is the face/sock puppet of a well-oiled machine. Again, daddy had the connections to help get that team together, hell Cheney was probably on the team already at that time.

I was disappointed that Obama did not do more for blacks and minorities in general. For fuck's sake the very least he could have done was legalize marijuana. I think it was extremely disingenuous of him to allow it to stay classified as a Schedule I drug especially given how it was a significant part of his early life. Him and Clinton both, probably dubya too but he was too much of a puss to admit he used it often. Obama's IQ is probably in the 130-140 range and dubya is in the 90's he was a true buffoon: "fool me once, fool me twice, ... he! he!"

Comment Re:Not a single time traveler? (Score 1) 1318

Who gives a flying fuck about a war? We are quite capable of destroying anyone in any sort of war. Of course if it's a big nuclear war then we're looking at a Mad Max future but with no hot women as they'll all be deformed due to radiation poisoning. Back to my point, a war is the least of our worries, we'll probably fight it with drones and just work on destroying infrastructure so HallitosisBurton can get in there and rebuild for fat profits on our tax dollars. Our biggest worry is that the country will shut down on his watch. I mean the nation will end and he will probably wrap it up badly.

Comment Re:So what. (Score 1) 304

If I am right about the situation when the trust already exists, I think I would also be right about transferring the asset into a trust. As I stated, there is no transfer of property created when moving property into the trust. This is a law that the rich take advantage of with reassuring frequency so one has to imagine that the hole is large enough for a camel to fit through it.

Comment Re:So what. (Score 1) 304

I read the link. However, your extension of the logic would mean that corporation could not buy a license and then said corporation be sold and along with it its assets including any software licenses it currently "owned". That example is what I was referring to and as far as I can tell is not covered by the ruling you cited. It is an interesting and chilling one, but I don't agree it nullifies the solution I proposed.

Comment Re:Human brain is NOT a computer (Score 1) 153

Wouldn't it be ironic if we are ultimately incapable of understanding the complete function of the brain, and it required an AI to comprehend it all? :)

Yeah, and to top that off, the AI won't be able to comprehend itself so it will need to build an AI that can understand it... It will be turtles all the way down dear AC.

Comment Re:So what. (Score 1) 304

If that is so then yes, with that caveat. I suppose you'd then have to have transferred them to a trust which then passes on to a different controller but ownership never changes. It has already been found by the courts that transferring assets to a trust does not create a transfer of property. Neither does changing the controller of a trust create a transfer of property. This is why the only idiots up in arms about a death tax are the ones too poor for it to really impact them. The rich already have it covered with laws purpose built for them such as this one.

Comment Re:So what. (Score 1) 304

I thought we were discussing things that you "bought" digitally the base premise being that ongoing payment is not required. I suppose I had in mind a system which is nominally "free" (as in beer) and on which you can make purchases which are then linked to your "free" account.

Comment Re:Can it beat the doctors (Score 2) 153

So you're OK with death panels and health care rationing.

Just to add to what alvinrod said. We also have them due to economic disparities. Those who choose to be poor (by being lazy and not working 36 hours a day, or stupidly choosing to be born to poor parents) get significantly worse health care. Thus we have self-selection of health care, which is rationing in other words.

Comment Re:We need humans like that (Score 1) 45

I came here to say just this. Thanks for saving me some typing, or not. I agree, in any case. Can humans who literally cannot control themselves design robots that can? Sure people who meditate a lot can control themselves a lot but most of us can't. This lack of control is baked into us as part of being human so maybe all we need to do is take normal humans and remove the part that makes us humans and we end up with the desired robots, or we could just clone off some CEOs (they are known to lack all humanity though they are good at simulating being human).

Slashdot Top Deals

What is worth doing is worth the trouble of asking somebody to do.