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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:A trade balance requires an equal population (Score -1) 203

A permanent trade deficit that requires more and more debt to be printed and sold for the future generations supposedly to pay back (will never happen, the default and inflation will take care of that) is due to a population consuming more than it produces, full stop, period.

When I say a population consumes more than it produces what I mean is this: you can have all of your government offices, government departments, government subsidies, government programs, everything that government does, you can put more than half of your population on various programs, food stamps, welfare, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, whatever. All of those things combined require *more* money than you can generation as an economy. People never vote for someone to reduce spending, spending always grows, government officials get excellent retirement packages, health care paid by the system, etc. This entire thing consumes much more than it is capable of producing.

Sure, you can actually tax everyone much more and maybe you can have a smaller deficit, but actually realize that the demand is so much greater than the supply that probably taxing everybody at 80% won't be enough. Actually *nothing* is *ever* enough.

You can promise everything to everyone, you can even attempt to deliver it. Free food, free housing, free education, free healthcare, free energy, free clothing, free travel, free transportation, free entertainment, free everything. If you do that, there is nobody working, everyone is just getting everything for free, so who is working? Who is producing all of these things, delivering all of these services? That's the imbalance, that's the maximum imbalance taking to 11. But you don't have to take it to 11 to have an impossible imbalance.

Comment Re:Call bullshit (Score 3, Interesting) 180

I'll add that you probably learn more about programming and systems from a C program that goes wrong than a Rust program that can't go wrong (at least not in the same ways) and the former can help you become a better programmer, while the latter doesn't really teach you anything.

On the contrary, just getting a Rust program to successfully compile can teach you a whole lot about all the stuff you should have been worrying about with C or C++, but you were simply ignorant of or implicitly assumed would be OK.

Comment Re:code should be beautiful (Score 1) 35

What makes C beautiful are the rules. Like, having code that can run where sizeof(anything) = 1

Exposing you to multiple corner case bugs

where ints can be 16 bits,

Exposing you to more corner case bugs

where arithmetic can be 1s complement or 2s complement

Exposing you to yet more corner case bugs

where you can have big endian or little endian integers

The corner cases are really piling up

where the character set cannot even be assumed to be ASCII

Now you're overwhelmed by corner cases

The goal of programming is to make beautiful, portable code

That's unavoidably riddled with bugs and vulnerabilities because of all the untestable corner cases.

And this is before you've even gotten to the vast "undefined behavior" areas and pointer arithmetic bugs.

Why do you want to enable stupid programmers?

That's always the C apologists' argument. They think they are logical geniuses, but can't even fathom that having every firm hire nothing but top-tier programmers is only possible in fictional Lake Wobegon. Nor do they understand that the best programmer in the world can't actually always successfully juggle those damned corner cases.

Comment Re: Bring back the draft... (Score -1) 281

For sure, the main problem that is holding men back are the policies that the stupid men have been voting for and supporting. It is just that the actual policies are not what you are suggesting.

Men have allowed feminism to raise its head, that is what allowed women to demand the welfare state over the last 100 years, coupled with the pill this created the real problem for the society - single women, supported by the State, which means supported by the income stolen from men. Single women, who believe they can survive without husbands (and they can as long as the State uses its force to steal from men to subsidize the women).

As to private healthcare and private education - every single service must be private, there must not be any services supplied by the force of the government, taking from anyone to subsidize anyone, that's exactly what creates society that cannot function, because eventually the system must consume much more than it can produce. This happens because so many people start using the system for what it is designed - living without producing, while everyone keeps demanding more and more resources towards their own causes.

This creates an absolutely impossible situation, where the State must provide more than the society can produce. This leads to deficits and debt and cannot be resolved ever without the system collapsing on itself and destroying its credit worthiness and currency in the process (this happens already after the system completely destroys productivity, manufacturing due to the cheap money available to private enterprise at the expense of the debt and government support).

In any case, it is stupidity that causes this problem, it is just you cannot recognize the exact details of this stupidity and you offer equally stupid ideas as 'solutions'.

Comment Re:I'm quite happy (Score 1) 38

The main problem may be that most humans have an extreme prejudice based on the fact that all our senses work via the electromagnetic force. So people conclude "If I can't get it to somehow interact with the electromagnetic force it doesn't exist! QED!!!"

I personally have no problem with the possibility that dark matter particles simply never interact directly or indirectly with the electromagnetic force (other than bending space-time), and we may never be able to detect them through experiments. That would in no way imply that they don't exist.

Comment not enough (Score -1) 71

3% is not going to be enough, expect 3 times as much cuts by the year end, then twice more as much in the following year. The money isn't flowing, once the money is not flowing the cuts start. Money flows when the economy expands due to actual increase of production or money flows when it is handed out for free by borrowing, printing. Once the flow slows down or stops, the music stops, everyone tries to grab the closest chair. Every company will be shrinking this year and in the subsequent years, until the attitudes change, government actually shrinks by a couple of orders of magnitude, rules that prevent productivity become unenforceable and/or are rescinded, gold replaces fake paper as money, then people will start rebuilding.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The hands that help are better far than the lips that pray." -- Robert G. Ingersoll

Working...