Printing funny money is clearly not the problem. If there is an overproduction, then THAT is what needs to be spread around. People fixating on the UBI are whining that the rules of society are changing while forgetting that the rules about money will probably change too. The concept of money as we knew it will probably be equally obsolete.
Handing people money just sounds like an easy solution when presented to people who can't think anything through or see the big picture (which is unfortunately most people).
UBI is a solution to a future problem that lacks any imagination.
He's probably responding to an ignorant git like you that will happily be the pawn of the 1% that sow intra-class warfare by fueling class-jealousy between groups of people that really aren't all that different. Once you buy into the socialist nonsense you will actually make it HARDER for a normal guy to get ahead. Meanwhile, the expansive meddling in the economy will ensure the position of the aristocracy.
Socialists are the same kind of dupes as ditto heads.
You're an idiot. The price of meat is not the issue. The question is whether or not you can make a completely artificial process that's cheaper than letting Elsie fend for herself in the pasture or feed Porky leftovers from the Ben and Jerry's factory.
So far, vat-o-meat hasn't worked out yet.
Perhaps when we've got the flying cars thing worked out....
> You're seriously trying to compare an SD card to internal storage? Really? Even as an Android user I can see this is a sad joke and the only way you got modded up was because you were making a slight at Apple.
I don't know what kind of meth you are smoking, but I use internal and external storage interchangeably on my Android devices. I am really trying to see what all the fuss is supposed to be about here. What exactly are you trying to troll about.
> As he said, a niche requirement. In the overall market for phones, no one does that.
It's funny how the conspicuous consumers cling to this idea of ubitquitous mobile networks. You would think with all of that money to waste that they would often find themselves off the beaten path where the network isn't working that well.
> We are now spending $300 - $600 for a cheaper device that we normally keep for just as long.
And it's still just as upgradeable unless you go out of your way to find something that isn't. The modular devices still remain cheaper because the more compact ones are inherently more expensive. "Smaller" is harder and modular has been the industrial standard for over 150 years.
Typically, you have to go out of your way to gimp something.
> In my opinion, what has made it SD cards niche is Android's crappy storage model which makes using your external card more complicated than it ought to be.
I'm shocked at the idea that rent-a-goons get as much as $35/hr. It's more like minimum wage. I would expect the math of this to only work in places like San Francisco or Tokyo where the cost of everything (including labor) is ridiculously overpriced.
Plus, they're renting two of them. So that's $14 per hour. I don't think this idea is going to work at all in the flyover states.
Except you've diverged from the domain of clunkers into classics where the car itself has some intrinsic or extrinsic value to it regardless of how much of a bother it is to keep running.
There's more to basic maintenance than "brakes and oil".
Thinking like this is why you can't trust a used car. The previous owner was probably some cheapskate that never properly maintained the thing.
This is OK if you have some clunker that you're using as a "burner car" but some of us want cars that are more modern for basic structural and safety reasons without even getting into gadgets.
If you ignore the "shiny shiny" you can get a safe, reliable car for less than 34K.
Used cars are a total crap shoot. You have no idea how well that vehicle has been maintained. They could have done zero maintenance leaving you with a ticking time bomb.
You could also be too young or too poor to appreciate properly maintaining a car of any price.
If I am going to drive a "used car", I prefer to drive one where I can trust that it's been properly maintained. There's only one way to do that really.
Buying quality is difficult but it eventually pays off. Crap breaks and needs to get replaced.
...and a lot of that music was distributed for free.
Free distribution of media has pretty much existed since the beginning of time for the sake of this discussion. Commercial supported content began about a week after the first radio station went on the air.
There are bands that I have enjoyed for years without pirating or paying one red cent. That's because "free music" is in fact nothing new. The only reason that Pandora is having a hard time is that the music industry decided to be leeches this time rather than paying to promote artists.
This whole getting paid versus paying makes a big difference.
Some of the best, most classic music, was produced with nothing more than a microphone and a tape recorder. When you have real musicians, that's all you really need. The rest is just fluff that adds little to the end result. The labels don't care because they push all costs off on the musician. They have no interest in being efficient or being the adult in the room.
So the recording industry became a dinosaur much like the Detroit auto makers.
That's just another reason to explain the difficulty companies are having at this whole idea of "selling music". Why buy the new stuff when you already have copies of the originals that the modern remakes are based off of?
In any media format, you eventually get to the point where you've seen it all before and you would rather just consume the earlier works.
There are many reasons to have zero sympathy for the music industry. You don't have to be a kid to appreciate that the labels are ultimately reaping what they've sown.
Don't try to kid anyone. Palestinians don't want the same rights and they aren't interested in mutual co-existence. Otherwise, there would have been a negotiated settlement already....and as far as Gaza goes, there are two sides of the border there.
> the key issue here is not your freedom of choosing GMO or not, it's the millions of people who are starving.
That has NOTHING to do with whether or not my food is labeled as GMO. It's a total, irrelevant, red herring.
We have surplus food even without GMOs. We waste a great deal of food regardless of whether it's produced from GMO seeds. Whether or not someone is starving somewhere has more to do with (local) politics than food production.
Besides, corn varieties engineered for Iowa that's meant to be turned into corn syrup or cattle feed doesn't have much relevance anywhere else.
Don't kid yourself.
GMOs are about making junk food cheaper. They have NOTHING to do with feeding the world's hungry. This is just something that Monsanto says so that saps like you will stick up for them.
Slashdot Mirror
Socialism is state ownership. Communism is the lack of a state.
These smug morons don't even know what they're talking about.
Soviet propaganda always talked about "building communism". They freely admitted that they hadn't gotten there yet.
In this case, natural economy activity is being prevented by a law that was distorted beyond it's original purpose.
Printing funny money is clearly not the problem. If there is an overproduction, then THAT is what needs to be spread around. People fixating on the UBI are whining that the rules of society are changing while forgetting that the rules about money will probably change too. The concept of money as we knew it will probably be equally obsolete.
Handing people money just sounds like an easy solution when presented to people who can't think anything through or see the big picture (which is unfortunately most people).
UBI is a solution to a future problem that lacks any imagination.
He's probably responding to an ignorant git like you that will happily be the pawn of the 1% that sow intra-class warfare by fueling class-jealousy between groups of people that really aren't all that different. Once you buy into the socialist nonsense you will actually make it HARDER for a normal guy to get ahead. Meanwhile, the expansive meddling in the economy will ensure the position of the aristocracy.
Socialists are the same kind of dupes as ditto heads.
You're an idiot. The price of meat is not the issue. The question is whether or not you can make a completely artificial process that's cheaper than letting Elsie fend for herself in the pasture or feed Porky leftovers from the Ben and Jerry's factory.
So far, vat-o-meat hasn't worked out yet.
Perhaps when we've got the flying cars thing worked out....
Non-geeks simply won't care. They use a roku or apple tv if that.
What kind of loser used a pc for streaming services these days? You can just get a $50 appliance that works so much better.
Open is always more robust. The tech isn't fighting itself. This nonsense is the perfect example. DRM is sabotage.
> You're seriously trying to compare an SD card to internal storage? Really? Even as an Android user I can see this is a sad joke and the only way you got modded up was because you were making a slight at Apple.
I don't know what kind of meth you are smoking, but I use internal and external storage interchangeably on my Android devices. I am really trying to see what all the fuss is supposed to be about here. What exactly are you trying to troll about.
> As he said, a niche requirement. In the overall market for phones, no one does that.
It's funny how the conspicuous consumers cling to this idea of ubitquitous mobile networks. You would think with all of that money to waste that they would often find themselves off the beaten path where the network isn't working that well.
That's why I dig local storage.
> We are now spending $300 - $600 for a cheaper device that we normally keep for just as long.
And it's still just as upgradeable unless you go out of your way to find something that isn't. The modular devices still remain cheaper because the more compact ones are inherently more expensive. "Smaller" is harder and modular has been the industrial standard for over 150 years.
Typically, you have to go out of your way to gimp something.
> In my opinion, what has made it SD cards niche is Android's crappy storage model which makes using your external card more complicated than it ought to be.
Total bullshit.
I usually upgrade phones for more storage. I am still waiting for modern mobile devices to catch up to my ancient Archos.
Mobile networks are slow, insecure, unreliable, and expensive. They're like the guy bragging about a 35 year old fridge.
Plus phones are also cameras these days. You want ample room for the new photos and videos you're going to create.
You didn't pay Netflix for a permanent copy. That doesn't mean that you didn't pay someone else for one.
I'm shocked at the idea that rent-a-goons get as much as $35/hr. It's more like minimum wage. I would expect the math of this to only work in places like San Francisco or Tokyo where the cost of everything (including labor) is ridiculously overpriced.
Plus, they're renting two of them. So that's $14 per hour. I don't think this idea is going to work at all in the flyover states.
They can still test the software on "better" hardware. They can also run it in a VM. That's what they expect everyone else to do.
It may not be "optimal" but it's certainly possible.
That's not even getting into the fact that they aren't really trying very hard to find 32bit x86 hardware.
Except you've diverged from the domain of clunkers into classics where the car itself has some intrinsic or extrinsic value to it regardless of how much of a bother it is to keep running.
That constitutes a tiny percentage of drivers.
There's more to basic maintenance than "brakes and oil".
Thinking like this is why you can't trust a used car. The previous owner was probably some cheapskate that never properly maintained the thing.
This is OK if you have some clunker that you're using as a "burner car" but some of us want cars that are more modern for basic structural and safety reasons without even getting into gadgets.
If you ignore the "shiny shiny" you can get a safe, reliable car for less than 34K.
Used cars are a total crap shoot. You have no idea how well that vehicle has been maintained. They could have done zero maintenance leaving you with a ticking time bomb.
You could also be too young or too poor to appreciate properly maintaining a car of any price.
If I am going to drive a "used car", I prefer to drive one where I can trust that it's been properly maintained. There's only one way to do that really.
Buying quality is difficult but it eventually pays off. Crap breaks and needs to get replaced.
...and a lot of that music was distributed for free.
Free distribution of media has pretty much existed since the beginning of time for the sake of this discussion. Commercial supported content began about a week after the first radio station went on the air.
There are bands that I have enjoyed for years without pirating or paying one red cent. That's because "free music" is in fact nothing new. The only reason that Pandora is having a hard time is that the music industry decided to be leeches this time rather than paying to promote artists.
This whole getting paid versus paying makes a big difference.
Some of the best, most classic music, was produced with nothing more than a microphone and a tape recorder. When you have real musicians, that's all you really need. The rest is just fluff that adds little to the end result. The labels don't care because they push all costs off on the musician. They have no interest in being efficient or being the adult in the room.
So the recording industry became a dinosaur much like the Detroit auto makers.
That's just another reason to explain the difficulty companies are having at this whole idea of "selling music". Why buy the new stuff when you already have copies of the originals that the modern remakes are based off of?
In any media format, you eventually get to the point where you've seen it all before and you would rather just consume the earlier works.
There are many reasons to have zero sympathy for the music industry. You don't have to be a kid to appreciate that the labels are ultimately reaping what they've sown.
They really are the real thieves here.
Don't try to kid anyone. Palestinians don't want the same rights and they aren't interested in mutual co-existence. Otherwise, there would have been a negotiated settlement already. ...and as far as Gaza goes, there are two sides of the border there.
> 2) It's called Autopilot.
Clearly you don't understand what that means. Is that Elon's fault your your fault?
> the key issue here is not your freedom of choosing GMO or not, it's the millions of people who are starving.
That has NOTHING to do with whether or not my food is labeled as GMO. It's a total, irrelevant, red herring.
We have surplus food even without GMOs. We waste a great deal of food regardless of whether it's produced from GMO seeds. Whether or not someone is starving somewhere has more to do with (local) politics than food production.
Besides, corn varieties engineered for Iowa that's meant to be turned into corn syrup or cattle feed doesn't have much relevance anywhere else.
Don't kid yourself.
GMOs are about making junk food cheaper. They have NOTHING to do with feeding the world's hungry. This is just something that Monsanto says so that saps like you will stick up for them.