Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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:Poor on $100k? Sure (Score 1) 501

Which are *totally* valid deductions

Not when they're (a) optional and (b) used to obscure the point, they're not! It is goddamn dishonest to pretend that Silicon Valley tech-worker take-home pay, with gold-plated health care, a maxed out 401k (and maybe exercised stock options), and a metric ass-ton of other fringe benefits is in any way comparable to normal-person take-home pay that includes taxes, basically zero retirement savings (outside of social security) and fuck-all else.

Comment Re:Poor on $100k? Sure (Score 1) 501

160k doesn't take home 10k a month. It takes home about 6.5k a month.

That's a fucking lie. Not even CA has >50% effective rate (not marginal rate) income taxes.

In order for take-home pay to be that low, there have to be a bunch of other deductions included: 401k, health insurance, etc.

Comment Re:"borrow money to make it through the month" (Score 1) 501

This is life for the majority of Americans who live paycheck to paycheck.

And your point is...? I'm well aware that the majority of Americans are dumbasses who don't know how to manage their money. In fact, one of my hobbies is hanging out on personal finance web forums and trying to help them...

Comment Re:"borrow money to make it through the month" (Score 0) 501

You obviously have never lived in the Bay Area.

Indeed I haven't, because I'm not a dumbass and know how to manage my money. Instead, I work as a software engineer in Atlanta, and get paid a lot less but have a much higher standard of living anyway.

Dont diss the bay area money complaints.

LOL, fuck that. I'll dis what I want, because the remedy for whining is simple: fucking move.

Comment Re:"...disabled by default." (Score 4, Insightful) 245

We can hope, but I'm not counting on it. I think it's just as likely that by the time that happens, having the computer locked down so that only OS maker-"approved" apps can run might be mandated by law because "only hackers would run un-'approved' software" or some other such BS.

Comment Re:Do we need more evidence... (Score 1) 189

You just accept them because you are affiliated with the same party.


See, that's exactly the short of fucked-up false-dichotomy thinking I was complaining about in the first place! I'm a LIBERTARIAN , not a Democrat.

The Clintons, both of them, are every bit as horrible as Trump.

That's the thing, THEY'RE REALLY NOT. The Clinton's are horrible in a "normal" corrupt-big-government sort of way, but they PALE IN COMPARSION to the damage to civil liberties and democracy itself that Trump is doing! The Clintons never (a) kicked the media out of white house briefings, (b) stuffed their administration full of LITERAL WHITE SUPREMACISTS, attempted to normalize lying to the public in a strategy straight out of 1984 or Mein Kampf, or done any of a hundred other ACTUALLY, LITERALLY, AND WITHOUT EXAGGERATION FASCIST things!

Comment Re:Costing to the RIAA vrs Ignoring? (Score 1) 81

You grossly overestimate the cost per notice. To the rights holder the cost is basically zero.

Well, the copyright holder first has to determine whether the content is actually infr-- (snicker, choke, guffaw)

Sorry, I just couldn't get that whole sentence out while keeping a straight face.

Slashdot Top Deals

"If value corrupts then absolute value corrupts absolutely."