×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Scammers Lower Comcast Bills, Get Jail Time

Karmashock Re:Irrelevant??? (101 comments)

It is though.

And if you're going to tell me that it isn't, that's fine.

You get to be wrong. The world is full of people that believe stupid things. You apparently are determined to be amongst them.

So be it.

What we have now is a compromise between people like you that are clueless and people like me that are realists.

You want double taxation. I say "fine" but the combined double tax will not be much higher then a single tax.

And that is where it stands until you're prepared to pull your head out of your ass.

You do not have the power to move people like me one inch beyond where we are prepared to go. Because we care more, know what we're talking about, and are invested in the process.

So here are your options.

1. Accomplish nothing.

2. Negotiate rationally.

You have no other options.

2 hours ago
top

F.C.C., In Net Neutrality Turnaround, Plans To Allow Fast Lane

Karmashock Re:Down the river... (391 comments)

You can have net neutrality without giving the FCC control.

Just make it illegal. The tech community is capable of policing hte issue. And if a company violates it, then we can take the ISPs to court.

That is what I want.

Not the FCC in control. They should NEVER been in control of the internet.

They were established for regulating radio spectrum. That is their job. Not one fucking inch beyond.

4 hours ago
top

Skilled Manual Labor Critical To US STEM Dominance

Karmashock Re:LOL ... (361 comments)

L. O. L. indeed.

Tell me, what was his point... in your own words.

*gets popcorn*

If you don't realize there's nothing there now, you'll soon realize it when you try to turn his post into an actual point.

Its Styrofoam. Without substance.

yesterday
top

Scammers Lower Comcast Bills, Get Jail Time

Karmashock Re:Irrelevant??? (101 comments)

Excuse me, I did just explain it.

What you're not getting is that the profits are taxed TWICE.

LISTEN MOTHER FUCKER.

TWICE.

2

TWO

TWICE.

Once at the corporate level

Again at the investor level.

Okay, if a corporation makes 1 million dollars in profit and 40-50 percent of that is taken by the various government taxes. That leaves HALF the original profits to be divided amongst the investors.

Okay, now upon receiving those profits, each of those investors has those profits taxed again at a rate that could be about 40-50 percent. Which means of the initial 1 million dollars in profit, the effective end profit will be 250,000 dollars.

Now compare that to a limited liability partnership where taxes are ONLY paid by the owners/investors and not at the company level. In that situation 1 million dollars profit after tax would be 500,000 dollars. That is the corporate model under your idea would be HALF as efficient as a partnership or other organizational models.

Do you understand now?

Lets increase the numbers so you can understand why ratios matter.

Lets say the company makes 10 billion in profit a year. Okay, after tax that's 5 billion. And after the second round of taxes down to 2.5 billion. Where as if you avoided the penalty you're trying to impose you'd make an additional 2.5 billion a year.

This is why corporations tend to pay something between 0 - 10 percent income tax. They would not be viable if they paid half their earnings every year. What is more, they are still paying full property tax, full sales tax, and all sorts of other fee related taxes.

And beyond that without them you wouldn't have as many people getting paid that themselves will pay the 40-50 percent taxes.

This notion that corporations don't pay their fair share is a view seated almost entirely in ignorance.

No offense.

If you want to tax corporations at 50 percent, you must negate the capital gains tax entirely. That is, no taxes on profits earned by investing in companies because the taxes owed were already paid by the company.

That would work if you wanted to do it.

But you can't tax the money twice.

Right now the corporations don't really pay much income tax but investors DO pay. THEY pay. The INVESTORS PAY.

But if you don't like that and want the corporations to pay. Fine. Allow the investors to stop paying and the corporations can start paying. Then its the same thing only it likely appears differently to people not paying attention.

Again... truly... no offense.

yesterday
top

F.C.C., In Net Neutrality Turnaround, Plans To Allow Fast Lane

Karmashock Re:Down the river... (391 comments)

True. However, if you think the FCC would stop at that you're a gullible little kitten. Because if you should have learned anything about large government agencies, there is mission creep... and bleed. And one thing justifies another which in a different light or taken to a different extent can have VERY different consequences.

The relevant factor here is not what the FCC's intentions are at time X.

The relevant factor is instead what CAN the FCC LEGALLY do once they get this power. And legal here means what can they do without the supreme court stopping them.

And if you've learned anything about the supreme court as regards censorship, regulation, taxation, etc... its that they tend to take the path of least resistance. Which means if the government nibbles at your rights and every time it comes up for a trial the government yells in the court's ear "WE NEED THIS"... and the general public says "but... we don't like it"... the court will side with the government. Pretty much every time.

They're supposed to be unswayed by public sentiment and politics. But they are... quite extensively.

So no my decorative fruit cake, the FCC cannot be trusted with that kind of authority unless at the same time powerful legal limits are put in place to restrain mission creep. A constitutional amendment might literally be required here.

Short of that, I don't trust the fuckers.

yesterday
top

F.C.C., In Net Neutrality Turnaround, Plans To Allow Fast Lane

Karmashock Re:Down the river... (391 comments)

FCC only embraced Net Neutrality to get control over internet content.

They seriously thought they would have the kind of control over the internet that they do over radio and television.

When it became clear that wasn't going to happen they didn't care anymore.

its about power. And if they sell us down the river they'll at least get influence at the ISPs that will profit from the "fast lanes".

That is why there is a pivot to the ISPs. Power. That is what the FCC wants. And the ISPs are willing to give it in exchange for no net neutrality.

You tell me which is worse... FCC in control of internet content... or ISPs filtering content based on who paid more?

yesterday
top

Skilled Manual Labor Critical To US STEM Dominance

Karmashock Re:LOL ... (361 comments)

If you made no such suggestion then your whole post was meaningless.

I'll take you at your word and assume that yes... you had no point.

yesterday
top

Skilled Manual Labor Critical To US STEM Dominance

Karmashock Re:LOL ... (361 comments)

that's fine... I have no problem with that. But ironically it is YOU that is suggesting that YOUR lifestyle is a model for how to build a society.

You say you don't need much. You say you are happy in your research. You say you won't have children. You say you travel.

Fine. That sounds great. Really. But can we build a whole society around YOUR life?

No we can't.

But we can build a society around someone that has children. Its a core requirement for a stable society.

You are happy? Great. Really. But that means very little in this discussion. Its off topic. Your dig at the bourgeoise Americans with their notions of good paying jobs, a family, a home, and etc is just your own prejudice. The reality is that for a stable society you really do need those things for about 50 percent of the population at a minimum.

What you're telling me is that you're from a non-productive minority and are happy in your irrelevance.

That's great. I'm happy you're happy. You're irrelevant though. Not saying that to offend you... just pointing at the sun and saying "Look its the sun".

yesterday
top

Skilled Manual Labor Critical To US STEM Dominance

Karmashock Re:LOL ... (361 comments)

You're not having children.

Can we assume your life style would not be sustainable if you did have children?

Lets point out the obvious here... for your life style to be sustainable for a whole society you would need to have children if only to replace yourself when you get old and die.

fact

yesterday
top

AT&T Plans To Launch Internet Video Service

Karmashock Re:Netflix fucked up when they paid (43 comments)

they also are known to make poor choices in regards to their business or do you not remember the unbundling of their digital and mail service that had their customers revolting?

Netflix makes bad choices in these areas. They don't understand that they're being watched by the users.

yesterday
top

AT&T Plans To Launch Internet Video Service

Karmashock Re:Netflix fucked up when they paid (43 comments)

Its hard to understand why comcast isn't double dipping here. They were paid already for that bandwidth by the consumers.

Why does it matter where it came from? Imagine if all those people were doing a million different things such that they couldn't categorize behavior and throttle traffic... what then?

I don't know... we may need net neutrality legislation if this isn't resolved.

2 days ago
top

AT&T Plans To Launch Internet Video Service

Karmashock Re:Netflix fucked up when they paid (43 comments)

yep, that's mostly where I am with the issue.

Let comcast answer to their customers. And then when comcast stone walls them, let them answer to congressmen wondering why we tolerate these semi state sponsored monopolies.

2 days ago
top

AT&T Plans To Launch Internet Video Service

Karmashock Re:Netflix fucked up when they paid (43 comments)

Help me understand. You're saying that Netflix is not paying enough for their connection fees?

If so, then it would more reasonable for them to pay that cost up front to their provider rather then pay off every ISP that might receive the content.

Furthermore, I thought they were hosting through Amazon's servers. As such, I would think that the connection fees would be paid by Amazon and then Netflix pays amazon for use of their systems.

No?

that was my understanding of their relationship.

2 days ago
top

AT&T Plans To Launch Internet Video Service

Karmashock Netflix fucked up when they paid (43 comments)

What they should have done is informed their users that their ISP is slowing the traffic that they paid for down intentionally in violation of if not the letter of their contracts then at the very least the common understanding and spirit of the contract.

And if the courts didn't find that behavior to be fraud then the bad marketing and political fallout would do the real work.

By paying, netflix took all the heat off the ISPs and allowed them to get away with it.

Netflix... making bad decisions yet again.

2 days ago
top

Scammers Lower Comcast Bills, Get Jail Time

Karmashock Re:Irrelevant??? (101 comments)

If that is the simplistic depth you're willing to look into on this issue then you're beyond intelligent reason.

You are unfortunately guilty of fraud in this case since you entered a discussion where rational discourse was a presupposed feature. Please either leave these boards or preface future discussions with the statement that you are not a rational player.

Good day, sir.

2 days ago
top

Face Recognition Algorithm Finally Outperforms Humans

Karmashock Re:I really doubt it does... (68 comments)

That's just one type... there are lots. You can wear glasses that break up the symmetry of your face. You can wear hats that confuse it. There are a lot of things.

2 days ago
top

Face Recognition Algorithm Finally Outperforms Humans

Karmashock I really doubt it does... (68 comments)

I'm sure a computer is better at recognizing people that people don't know. That is taking in a database of 10,000 photos and matching them against a population set of 20,000,000. A human being really can't do that. However, face recognition of known faces? I really doubt the computer can beat us.

Now, you might say the computer has an advantage in that it can look at facial statistics and match faces even after plastic surgery but that's just because those alteration technics are designed to work against human beings.

If the primary threat is a computer recognizing you then you can alter your appearance in other ways to trick the machine. And those are technics that are unlikely to be as effective against a person.

Furthermore, using such methods is unlikely to be as taboo in human company as doing something that fools humans.

2 days ago
top

Experts Say Hitching a Ride In an Airliner's Wheel Well Is Not a Good Idea

Karmashock Re:This warning reads like a challenge to me (235 comments)

Right... and yet our ancestors contended with that weather on occasion 20 thousand years ago.

We have tribal communities that live above the arctic circle.

We have communities that live around Everest.

But suggest that a man could survive for a few hours in a plane wheel well if provided with warm clothing, an O2 tank, and some binding and I must be crazy huh?

Its an engineering problem. One that is solvable. People like you gainsay everything. Every time anyone suggests anything complicated or difficult be done morons like you show up to say it can't be done.

You can't fly in the air... you can't go to the moon... you can't make a ship sea worthy if its underwater... you can't drill a tunnel under the english channel you can't build a building that is 80 stories high.

Blah blah blah.

Fuck you and die.

2 days ago
top

Scammers Lower Comcast Bills, Get Jail Time

Karmashock Re:Irrelevant??? (101 comments)

First, corporations are double taxed currently.

They pay taxes as a corporation, then their investors pay taxes on dispensed profits.

It is ultimately the investors in the company that make the company a viable investor. If you tax the company at a higher rate, then the profit from investing in the company will make corporate investment a bad investment.

Second, while any cost can be passed on to consumers, I don't think you appreciate that the cost structure would be such a massive shock to the system that it would cause an economic collapse in and of itself. Suddenly, prices would jump by a factor of four to ten depending on the margin of the business. Workers would not be making enough or have enough saved to pay those prices. There would be mass layoffs. Many companies would not adapt and go out of business outright. There would of course be social unrest, political upheaval, and I wouldn't be surprised that if YOU personally were both known to be responsible and available... you'd probably be ripped apart by a mob.

Not a threat... I don't hold anything against you at all. I'm just pointing out... you do this, people know you did it, and you're there... they'll rip you apart alive.

Third, your idea like most bad social and economics ideas is not sustainable. That is really the big problem with it. If the government were taking true double taxation from a corporation that would mean a corporation would have to be about 40 ~ 60 percent more efficient then a single proprietor. They're not. Corps would die under your idea. Which would mean everything would have to be run by non-corporate interests. So individual business owners, partnerships, etc. These entities are not directly taxed but rather taxed through their owners unlike corporations which are taxed separately.

The problem with single owners and partnerships which used to be the primary economic driver is estate taxes. The government takes a big piece of someone's assets when they die. Imagine if every 30 years half of IBM or Ford was taken by the government to pay for the death of an owner? This is why you don't get many large companies that are owned by a single person anymore. They don't survive.

Beyond that, you also have issues of raising capital. If I'm going to make a million cars I need a lot of money to build big factories and get the supply chain going. Actually finding that much money without resorting to a stock market system is pretty much impossible. What you might get are small companies that produce maybe a hundred cars a year and probably less. And those companies are going to charge a much higher rate for their goods.

The society you envision would be poor and unstable. It might be innovative. There are advantages to having lots of small companies with effectively more independent control over things. So I'll grant you that. But each one will also have less resources so they might just be so hand to mouth that they don't have the time for innovation. Keep in mind that humanity has been in that position in the past. Our ancestors hung out on a beach in africa eating shell fish for about 30 thousand years... we have the fossil record. Not much happened... we just survived.

Don't get mad at me please... I'm not some corporate shadow entity for you to battle with... I'm just a guy. I'm your neighbor. And I'm asking you please not to fuck the world up more then it is already.

I know the world is messed up. I feel you. I really do. If I had a magic wand I'd wave it make everything right. But neither of us have that power. We have to content with the lesser evils because there are greater ones out there ready to eat us all alive. Please. Don't be stupid. Make your bargains with evils you can tolerate. The alternative is not worth contemplating.

2 days ago

Submissions

Karmashock hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

Karmashock has no journal entries.

Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...