* Posts by Beridhren the Wise

14 publicly visible posts • joined 16 May 2013

140,000-plus drivers sent $60m in compensation checks after Amazon 'stole their tips'

Beridhren the Wise

Re: Once again

According to the IRS personal wealth estimates of top wealth holders had a combined net worth of $9.4 trillion, which was 10.7 percent of America's wealth total of $87.7T, in 2016 dollars. Of course they are a small percentage of the total population (0.32%), but to say that most of the money is at the top is simply incorrect. For details see here: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p5536.pdf

For me the main problem with your assertion that most money is at the top is that it assumes that the total amount of wealth is fixed, and it is not. Wealth is created by capitalism, so yes the rich get richer, but that does not require the poor to get poorer. As a matter of fact the poor are are doing better then even the richest person who lived a century ago.

You assert that the "system" is designed to keep the poor from achieving any kind of wealth, what is your source for that? What benefit is there to the rich to keep the poor down? I truly don't understand that way of thinking. And if you look at the richest people in the US, none of them inherited it. Musk, Gates, Bezos, Zuckerberg etc, all started with nothing.

I did look at the Pew articles you referenced, and what I find most curious is that they never really go into the why of it, yes the gap is widening between the richest and the poorest, but is that by design? If so, as you seem to think, whose design?

Beridhren the Wise

Re: Once again

Actually about half of U.S. adults (52%) lived in middle-income households in 2018, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of government data. Roughly three-in-ten (29%) were in lower-income households and 19% were in upper-income households.

So while amusing in a "lets see how stupid I can be" kind of way what your rant really shows is your own ignorant and ill-conceived notions of America.

Or put so simply even you can understand it, stupid is as stupid does.

Stiff upper lip time, Brits: After bullying France to drop its digital tax on Silicon Valley, Trump's coming for you next

Beridhren the Wise

Re: @ Beridhren -- Trump is great for Europe

"false whataboutism that makes all you autocrat lickspittles"

Now, I don't normally allow myself to get into a battle of wits with an unarmed man as it is usually a waste of my time, but your reply amused me so I thought I would make an exception.

You are unable to refute my position using logic, facts, or history but cannot admit (heaven forbid!) that I am right so you resort to a personal attack in an emotional and fact free rant. That''s how I know I am right and that your position is indefensible, because if you could defend it using facts, reason and history, you would have.

So I will keep my handle, thank you very much.

P.S. Your emotional and fact free rant proves beyond all doubt that you are a eight ulcer man on four ulcer pay, and at least four of your ulcers are working overtime. I highly suggest you go to your doctor forthwith and get some much needed medication before your condition worsens.

Beridhren the Wise

Re: Trump is great for Europe

So all Trump supporters are idiots? That is an easy position to fall into if you don't like President Trump, but as with all stereotypes it is also wrong. I remember when Hillary said that Trump supporters were a basket of deplorables, as if no liberals were deplorable, and look where that got her.

And you speak of his lies as if he is the only one who does that, don't UK pols lie as well and are still elected? So before you accuse someone else of a fault, I suggest a good look in the mirror. Or as someone once put it, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Cops looking for mum marauding uni campus asking students if they fancy dating her son

Beridhren the Wise

I'm from Baltimore

And no one here reads the Baltimore Sun either so for those of you across the pond you are not missing anything.

How to solve a Rubik's Cube in five seconds

Beridhren the Wise

Re: I wonder how many people have actually solved the cube?

Back in 1981 I was actually in competition with my father to solve the cube, and he beat me by 2 weeks, and even then once he figured it out he refused to show me, I love my father, but sometimes he is a real pain! (yes he is still alive at 91)

So I figured I would get even with him, when they came out with a 4x4 cube I got a couple of them and we re-started the competition, and he beat me again! Ugggg! But I did solve the 4x4 eventually, it took my father about 4 months to figure it out, and it took me 6 months.

Two years ago my adult daughter got me a 7x7 cube for Christmas and I have yet to figure it out. It is devilishly hard, or maybe my brain is getting worn out, but I refuse to give up. Getting old sucks, but I guess it beats the alternative!

Clueless do-gooders make Africa's conflict mineral mines even more dangerous

Beridhren the Wise

Send in the Marines

There is an old saying… “Difficult, complex problems have simple, easy to understand, wrong answers”. Mr. Worstall, your solution is just such an answer. And let’s not forget that your solution has its own unintended consequences, which you ignore.

As both our countries have discovered to our cost, sending in the Marines is an idea that simply does not work. If it did Iraq and Afghanistan would be peaceful and prosperous places. As soon as the Marines are gone the warlords come back because history has shown, time and time again, that you cannot change a culture by force. All force does is subdue it, as soon as the force is gone the old culture comes back.

That happened here in the USA after the civil war, once federal troops were withdrawn from the south, Jim Crow laws and the KKK rose up and maintained the oppression of minorities for over a century, so real lasting change is much harder, takes time, money and lives to accomplish. And it must be accomplished by those who are oppressed, they must themselves rise up and defeat their oppressors, history has shown that no other option works in any lasting way.

Outsiders can influence things, but that takes a long time and as you have pointed out it can have unintended consequences. The difference between you and the “do-gooders” is that the do-gooders are actually doing something. Criticizing is easy, actually doing something is hard. So while the solution they propose can have unintended consequences, at least they are making an effort at finding a solution that works, which probably explains why people like Mancur Olson have six honorary doctorates and people like you don’t have any.

BOFH: Don't go changing on Friday evenings, I don't wanna work that hard

Beridhren the Wise

Re: Its a small change!

It's Marvin the Martian, not Martin....

Sorry to be pedantic but that is one of my favorite cartoon characters from childhood and I simply had to fix it for you.

Hey, Sand Hill Exchange. Shouting 'blockchain!' won't stop the Feds

Beridhren the Wise

Re: Generalizing 'market'

Tim, here in the USA there is a political party that wants to do away with all regulation for the reasons you state, i.e. they stymie innovation and reduce freedom. However reducing regulation increases risk for everyone, for example if you reduce regulation on how homes should be built then after buying a new house your roof might fall in and kill you, which I think we all can agree would be a "bad thing".

The way the Libertarians answer this concern is that if your roof falls in you (or more accurately your heirs) can sue the manufacturer of your home, and the cost of losing a lawsuit will motivate the manufacturer of your home to do it right. The problem is that while your heirs would get a nice sum of money, you are still dead, so the thought is that prevention is better than cure, hence regulation and inspection of new homes before they are granted occupancy permits.

And the same is true of all industries that face regulation, it is government following a policy that prevention is better than cure, something I personally agree with, but it is also the nature of governments to reach for ever more power so if we are not careful we end up with regulation that protects incumbents (the financial sector is a prime example) because as you state the regulation creates high barriers to entry, which is also a “bad thing”.

So regulation is a balancing act, too little and real people get hurt, too much and freedom is unnecessarily curtailed. So as with other aspects of a government that rules with the consent of the governed, we must be ever watchful of overreach, and curtail government power when it occurs.

The storage is alive? Flash lives longer than expected – report

Beridhren the Wise

About 6 months ago we moved our production database (about 30TB) from disk to SSD. Tests showed that moving to SSD would give us a 30% improvement in I/O performance. We needed that improvement so the solution we purchased not only uses an array of SSD drives, the entire array is mirrored to a backup array, with each array having a hot spare SSD. The device also uses redundant, hot swappable controllers, with a third controller as a hot spare. Even the fans are redundant and hot swappable. Expensive, yes, but speed and availability were much more important than cost. What surprised us was that once we moved to SSD not only are we getting the expected I/O boost, which is reducing the cost of processing each transaction (and we process about 6 million transactions per day so that cost is a serious consideration) but the system uses much less power and requires less cooling then spinning disks so through reduced operating expenses we expect the new solution to pay for itself in about 2 years.

So in short it is my experience that if done correctly SSD is a much better solution then spinning rust.

NIST shows off one-way photon-passing metamaterial

Beridhren the Wise

Re: Useful!

My bad, it was 40 years ago and the old brain bucket leaks more then it used to.... smile....

Beridhren the Wise

Re: Useful!

In the 1970's several defense contractors worked on systems capable of detecting optics used to aim weapons, everything from tanks to snipers, and when detected the system would fire a laser into the optics to blind it. It worked by sensing light that entered the optics, then reflected back off of the sensor, (be it human or machine) and back out the optics. However it was later determined that using a laser to blind a human violated the Geneva convention, so instead it was used to control lethal weapons. I remember thinking how idiotic it was that it was not okay to blind a solider, but it was okay to kill him.

So a material like this could be used to block reflected light from going back out the optics and revealing the location of a sniper, tank, or other military asset.

UN to call for 'pre-emptive' ban on soulless robot bomber assassins

Beridhren the Wise

Re: Here's the thing...

Murder is wrong, killing is perfectly acceptable when it’s the only way to ensure your own survival.

Bing uncloaks Klingon translator

Beridhren the Wise

What? No Elvish?

Shame on Microsoft!