I had no idea that in the Soviet Union when you needed an electric drill, you just told your wristwatch that you wanted one, and 120 seconds later a flying robot would drop out of the sky and hand it to you.
If so, Soviet technology is vastly underappreciated.
Re: outside of their core businesses they are generally failures
Sure, I know what you mean!
All that crazy stuff about writing their own web browser - who is going to use that? IE is going to have 90% of the market forever (unless Firefox takes some of it).
And remember when they said they were going to compete against Apple in smartphones? Crazy again, no way they'll even get 10% market share.
And then they said they were going to design their own cloud-based laptops and compete against Microsoft? No way anybody will buy any of those.
And the time they were going to introduce an email service? Ha.
And - I heard they want to make their own maps of the whole world! How will that ever pay, I can't imagine.
Yup, all of Google's attempts to branch out into new businesses are doomed to complete failure.
I'm on the side of Uber and Lyft, too, but this is going too far.
Every time we say "nobody who ever did X should be in politics", we exclude another segment of the population. Now it's drunk driving, but it can be "said something racist", "paid their taxes late", "posted embarrassing pictures on Facebook", etc...
Either we all learn some tolerance of human frailty, or we'll end up with a political class of bland, risk-averse cowards terrified of their own shadows. . . ....oh
You can't have a functional capitalist system without the rule of law (contracts enforceable in court, prohibition on settling disputes by violence, etc.).
But "regulation" (in the sense of special rules applicable only to business), no.
There are very few natural monopolies - most of the "classic" types turn out not to be naturally monopolistic in the medium term.
Ever since the end of the Cold War, the military-industrial complex (Eisenhower's term) has been looking for a new enemy to replace the Soviet Union.
For a while, they were trying to push China into that position, but the Chinese didn't play along (it's difficult to sincerely see your biggest customer as your enemy, even if you try).
I've looked into this. Batteries suck the proverbial monkey balls.
They just don't hold enough energy to keep something with any reasonable payload flying for more than about 15 minutes.
(45 minutes absolute tops if the payload is nothing but batteries).
Until batteries get a lot better, or there's another lightweight, high-power-density way of getting electricity, we aren't going to see practical person-carrying quadcopters.
(And, really, you want a lot more than 4 props in anything carrying a person - you want enough so the thing will keep flying if 1 or 2 of them breaks).
I'm hopeful about fuel cells, but then I've been hopeful about them for decades and still nothing much has happened.
Spending on politics yields protection from new business-killing laws, new laws that hurt competitors, and special tax and regulation advantages.
Once your competitors start doing it, you have to do it too to keep up, or be killed by new legislation inspired by your competitors.
The problem is NOT that politicians are venal. They have always been greedy, and always will be.
The problem is that Congress has the power to pick winners and losers, to pass arbitrary regulations without any justification, and to give tax breaks to anyone they feel like for any reason at all.
Congress has too much power, and power corrupts.
The only solution is to limit the kind of laws Congress can pass, and to provide a mechanism for constitutional review of laws that are unfair, biased, or play favorites.
The courts have traditionally deferred to the legislature, saying that if a majority of the legislature things a law is in the public interest, then it must be so.
On the post: Ferrari 'DRM:' Don't Screw With Our Logos And We'll Let You Know If It's OK To Sell Your Car
Re: a horrid practice
I wouldn't buy a car on terms like those.
But, I don't have a problem with what Ferrari is doing here.
They're using ordinary contract law to do something that IMHO is stupid, but fine - people have a right to be stupid.
Freedom doesn't mean anything if it doesn't include the right to do things that other people think are stupid.
Anyone who buys a car from them sees these terms (they don't appear to be making any attempt to hide them), and agrees to it.
So...why is that a problem for anyone?
On the post: The Interesting Thing About Google's Delivery Drones Is Not The Drones, But Massive Societal Shift They Envision
Re:
If so, Soviet technology is vastly underappreciated.
On the post: The Interesting Thing About Google's Delivery Drones Is Not The Drones, But Massive Societal Shift They Envision
Re: outside of their core businesses they are generally failures
All that crazy stuff about writing their own web browser - who is going to use that? IE is going to have 90% of the market forever (unless Firefox takes some of it).
And remember when they said they were going to compete against Apple in smartphones? Crazy again, no way they'll even get 10% market share.
And then they said they were going to design their own cloud-based laptops and compete against Microsoft? No way anybody will buy any of those.
And the time they were going to introduce an email service? Ha.
And - I heard they want to make their own maps of the whole world! How will that ever pay, I can't imagine.
Yup, all of Google's attempts to branch out into new businesses are doomed to complete failure.
On the post: ALS Ice Bucket Challenge Lands Dumb Criminal In Cuffs
Re: If you want a government that works...
I think it was Will Rogers who said "it's a good thing we don't get all the government we pay for".
If you see government as doing something useful and worthwhile, then I suppose you want a government that "works".
If you see it as a legalized Mafia, then less competence is probably better.
Without any Leviathan "to keep them all in awe" you get the strong enslaving the weak.
With too much Leviathan, Leviathan itself enslaves everyone.
So the question becomes "how little Leviathan can we get away with?"
On the post: 'Anarcho-Capitalist' Stefan Molyneux, Who Doesn't Support Copyright, Abuses DMCA To Silence Critic
Re: Re: Re: Re: Color me surprised
How much political discourse boils down to differing interpretation of words?
On the post: California Lawmaker Votes To Kill Uber... Then Caught Driving Drunk Just Hours Later
Re: Time for a recall
Every time we say "nobody who ever did X should be in politics", we exclude another segment of the population. Now it's drunk driving, but it can be "said something racist", "paid their taxes late", "posted embarrassing pictures on Facebook", etc...
Either we all learn some tolerance of human frailty, or we'll end up with a political class of bland, risk-averse cowards terrified of their own shadows.
.
.
....oh
On the post: Money And Power: The Real Reason For The NSA Spying On Everyone
Re: Re: The new Soviet Union
I don't think people in the USG are that far gone.
(I've been wrong before, tho...)
On the post: 'Anarcho-Capitalist' Stefan Molyneux, Who Doesn't Support Copyright, Abuses DMCA To Silence Critic
Re: Re: But "regulation" (in the sense of special rules applicable only to business), no.
I see no evidence that governments can do anything about that.
Other, perhaps, than shutting down capital markets altogether. (See, for example, the history of the Soviet Union...)
On the post: White House Finishes Review Of CIA Terror Report: Feinstein Wants To Know Why It's Basically All Blacked Out
Re: Re: Because it works
But a large part of the reason the Constitution is no longer respected is because the courts have been AWOL.
Their job, under the Constitution, is to say "no" to the other branches of government when they attempt to exceed their constitutional powers.
And that is exactly what the courts have refused to do.
On the post: 'Anarcho-Capitalist' Stefan Molyneux, Who Doesn't Support Copyright, Abuses DMCA To Silence Critic
Re: Re: Re: Color me surprised
You'll be surprised - it is not 1985 any more.
I think the proportion of pretty young women involved in any political movement is a leading indicator of its popularity.
We've arrived at a "libertarian moment". I don't know how long it'll last, or how far it'll go.
But there is something new going on.
On the post: 'Anarcho-Capitalist' Stefan Molyneux, Who Doesn't Support Copyright, Abuses DMCA To Silence Critic
Re: Re: Re: Re: Color me surprised
But "regulation" (in the sense of special rules applicable only to business), no.
There are very few natural monopolies - most of the "classic" types turn out not to be naturally monopolistic in the medium term.
On the post: 'Anarcho-Capitalist' Stefan Molyneux, Who Doesn't Support Copyright, Abuses DMCA To Silence Critic
Re: Re: That one creepy dude
On the post: Money And Power: The Real Reason For The NSA Spying On Everyone
The new Soviet Union
For a while, they were trying to push China into that position, but the Chinese didn't play along (it's difficult to sincerely see your biggest customer as your enemy, even if you try).
9/11 was the answer to their prayers.
On the post: Awesome Stuff: Flying Cars, Hover Bikes And Ultrasonic Levitation
Re: Why
I've looked into this. Batteries suck the proverbial monkey balls.
They just don't hold enough energy to keep something with any reasonable payload flying for more than about 15 minutes.
(45 minutes absolute tops if the payload is nothing but batteries).
Until batteries get a lot better, or there's another lightweight, high-power-density way of getting electricity, we aren't going to see practical person-carrying quadcopters.
(And, really, you want a lot more than 4 props in anything carrying a person - you want enough so the thing will keep flying if 1 or 2 of them breaks).
I'm hopeful about fuel cells, but then I've been hopeful about them for decades and still nothing much has happened.
On the post: NYPD Puts Terrorism On The Run By Ordering Twitter To Turn Over Parody Account User Data 'Linked' To Brooklyn Bridge Flag-Switching
Re:
On the post: White House Finishes Review Of CIA Terror Report: Feinstein Wants To Know Why It's Basically All Blacked Out
Because it works
Spending on politics yields protection from new business-killing laws, new laws that hurt competitors, and special tax and regulation advantages.
Once your competitors start doing it, you have to do it too to keep up, or be killed by new legislation inspired by your competitors.
The problem is NOT that politicians are venal. They have always been greedy, and always will be.
The problem is that Congress has the power to pick winners and losers, to pass arbitrary regulations without any justification, and to give tax breaks to anyone they feel like for any reason at all.
Congress has too much power, and power corrupts.
The only solution is to limit the kind of laws Congress can pass, and to provide a mechanism for constitutional review of laws that are unfair, biased, or play favorites.
The courts have traditionally deferred to the legislature, saying that if a majority of the legislature things a law is in the public interest, then it must be so.
That needs to change.
On the post: CIA Spying On The Senate Went Much Further Than Originally Reported
Constitutional crisis?
Sounds like the end of the Republic and start of the Empire...
On the post: Court Says Who Cares If Ireland Is Another Country, Of Course DOJ Can Use A Warrant To Demand Microsoft Cough Up Your Emails
Re:
It's better to get fired than to get imprisoned.
On the post: NY Port Authority Claims To Own The NYC Skyline: Tells Store To Destroy Skyline-Themed Plates
My reply
Ball is in your court.
On the post: Podcasting Patent Troll Realizes Podcasters Don't Make Any Money; Desperately Tries To Escape Adam Carolla Lawsuit
Priority date
Next >>