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. ×

Comment Re:Sorry - whose car is this? (Score 5, Insightful) 305

If you don't own a license to do whatever you want to do with the car for the lifetime of the car, you'd have to be a complete idiot to buy said car.

Up until 5 minutes ago, I was a Tesla fan. Now I'm saying anyone who buys a Tesla is a complete idiot. What a great move this is for them.

Comment Re:What have they got to show for it? (Score 1) 403

Fair enough if you have no ties to a place. Personally I don't see why I'd want to retire at 50 to move away from my family, kids, friends, etc and start over. Working until 65, having $3 million instead of $1.2 (without contributing another cent to my savings - so living a lot more luxuriously) and then staying near all the people in my life sounds a lot better to me.

Comment Re:What have they got to show for it? (Score 1) 403

When you retire, you're not out buying new Tesla's or a new phone every year, you don't really need to....having things paid off and money in the bank, and with age, your "fun" needs decrease really, no kids to take care of, etc. That's pretty easy in most parts of the US.

Or buying a new Tesla ever.

The OP scrimped and saved and worked long hours until he was 50 to have enough money in the bank to have a meagre existence for the rest of his life. It's so sad it's just pathetic. What a waste of his life.

How about start out the same way, then work until 65 without any saving after age 50. Let the extra 15 years interest turn that 1.2 million into 3+ million. And live well those 15 years with no need to save and no major expenses. Cut back on your hours and have plenty of spare income. Then retire to serious luxury with $3 million in the bank.

Comment Re:What have they got to show for it? (Score 2) 403

From the industrial revolution until Nixon Shock, the standard of living was on a steady rise.

Nixon made changes to monetary policy so that ever since then the standard of living has been basically frozen and all improvements to productivity go to corporate profits.

Even most households going to 2 income still have the same basic standard of living despite contributing twice as much to the workforce.

In Europe, the extra productivity went to a combination of more profits and shorter hours.

A side effect of the American system is fewer people can do the same work, the companies have less need for employment, so much higher unemployment. So not only are you profiting the rich, you're paying higher than needed taxes to support the poor who would have jobs if each person worked fewer hours.

Comment Re:Or, you know... (Score 1) 145

I used to buy surplus electronics for hobby stuff all the time.

I once bought a case of animated christmas light strings that would overheat and catch on fire. They'd snipped off all the power transformers so you'd at least have to know something to power them up. I replaced the transistors on the controller with higher power ones and they work beautifully.

Comment Re:you're partly right (Score 1) 1042

There really is no difference. If the religious concept of God is the creator of the universe, then by their definition, the universe, is an artificial construct created by an intelligent mind for some purpose. In other words, it is a created simulation. Labelling it with words like computer and programming is just a technicality of our language. Obviously it is "programmed" to run on some "platform". Terminology really isn't that relevant. Even if it not a programming language or computer as we (currently) define them, the concept is still right.

Comment Re:you're partly right (Score 1) 1042

Well I did basically call it a creation myth in my post. At least my way there's no artificial morality written by a corrupt clergy who only wants to control the people and take all the wealth.

The nice thing about my way of putting it though is that it doesn't just explain everything in religion but everything in science as well. The quantum substructure of the universe -- why render an invisible level of detail. All the weird stuff in quantum theory. Schrodinger's cat is both alive and dead because it's not rendered yet in the simulation. Electrons are just probability waves because their exact location has no macroscopic effect. Double slit photon experiment -- just render the aggregate result.

Slashdot Top Deals

Basic unit of Laryngitis = The Hoarsepower