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


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:Why is income equality necessarily good? (Score 1) 474

I don't define achievement as the exertion of power over others.

The Patriots won. It was an achievement. I may not like it; but I'm not oppressed because of that.

Perhaps that's a bad example because they had to exert power over a tiny percentage of the population in order to win. How about a math test? It's not explicitly a competition--getting 100% is an achievement, even if the other students don't know you got it. Many others will not get a perfect score. You did better than them--and it's funny that I have to point this out: there's nothing wrong with that.

Comment Re:Rose tinted glasses (Score 1) 474

Seriously this article makes it sound like life just after a devastating conflict is better than economic prosperity because most people are equally poor.

That's pretty fucked up, and I'm calling BS.

Even the title of TFA, (which it seems you didn't read or didn't understand), contradicts your interpretation: "The Only Thing, Historically, That's Curbed Inequality: Catastrophe". Nowhere in the article does it say, or even imply AFAICT, that "life just after a devastating conflict is better than economic prosperity" - it only says that economic inequality is reduced. Therefore, you are the one making the value judgment, not the article. Nice strawman there.

Comment Re:Why is income equality necessarily good? (Score 2) 474

Absolute equality is probably just as bad as extreme concentration. I don't think anybody is seriously proposing that we target perfect equality, except Marxist ideologues.

The problem with absolute equality is the enforcement mechanism and the way it tends to crush the spirit of anybody who desires to achieve.

The problem with wealth concentration in the upper tiers is that it leads to *power* concentration in the upper tiers--government by the wealthy, ie, oligarchy.

I think it's often the case that the optimal position is somewhere in the middle. When wealth is concentrated in the upper tiers, a move towards absolute equality seems appealing, but only in the way that moving towards a fire seems appealing when it's freezing.

Comment Re:Kowtowing (Score 4, Insightful) 405

... When you can get news that you like from nearly anywhere and for free, why pay for it and why subject yourself to a New York City viewpoint from barely educated and mind warped fanatics?

"News that you like" is the operative phrase there. I'd like to think that it used to be different, bit I'm not sure it ever was. Maybe the majority always gravitated to the news they 'liked' in favour of the news that did its best to be accurate and unbiased, and maybe the generally more accurate and unbiased news of 40 years ago obscured the fact.

There's so much at stake now for governments and corporations wanting to control the narrative. 'News', (and I use the term very loosely), is often a make-or-break thing when it comes to elections, IPO's, product launches, sales numbers, law suits, new legislation, and even criminal cases, (to name a few); so simply reporting the facts and adding a bit of insightful analysis is kind of obsolete. The distinctions among news, editorials, and advertising have all but disappeared. If people already have a tendency to choose the (um...let's call it 'reportage') that they like, regardless of its accuracy or relevance, then the market is ripe for hucksters and con men of every stripe looking to sway the opinions of a constituency or a nation. It's no accident that Kellyanne Conjob coined the phrase 'alternative facts'. She was pilloried for it, and rightly so, but in one sense she was just pointing out the nature of today's reality, which is that, for a distressingly large number of people, fact is no different from opinion, and is simply a matter of preference. Our culture seems to have made 'critical faculty' a pejorative term; for the history of why that's so, read John Taylor Gatto, among others.

In an era when people can hear the 'news' that they prefer, for little or no money, does the NYT have any chance of long-term survival?

Comment Re:An allegation has been made. (Score 1) 903

I'm expecting that whoever does this investigation is going to act in the shareholders' best interest, which among other things means not exposing the company to massive liabilities in court. If the investigation supports the allegations, then those responsible are going to get canned.


Slashdot Top Deals