Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:One solution (Score 2, Interesting) 219

But, think of the implications for upcoming elections! How will the Repubmocrats keep 100% power against independents, tea party and other radical despots competing against the chosen ones? Control! The people obviously need controlled, they don't know what is good for them and the Repubmocrats always will.
Since there is a market, Facebook, who covers most demographics, can help by raising tensions toward sinister interlopers in our one party political system.
Look for upcoming "hour of hate" shows profiling Tea Party advocate Emanuel Goldstein, NRA talking heads, Farmers, Anti-war hippies and anyone without the Hillary Clinton seal of approval on their forehead or hand.....

Comment Re:Sounds about right... (Score 5, Interesting) 441

Remember those politicians are fueled by those of the Koch bros. ilk.
I couldn't help but notice that the wind map used by Watts Up was from some random day and not representative of prevailing winds AT ALL!
Perhaps someone there had a bit of cranial rectumitis when Googling for a wind map for their "research"( first clue, midwest winds prevail from the southwest 90% of the time and the map has north winds displayed, FAIL! I can show you an area in eastern Colorado where the wind nearly NEVER stops) I would suggest their research is not much more than jealous bunk. Anyway, to couple wind with solar power is a common solution to the fear that Watts Up is trying to instill in the reader.DUH! If it isn't windy, the sun shines most days in most places, so if one isn't producing, the other will in enough quantity that your batteries need not be drained. Further, the wind industry is producing jobs and boosting economy in rural areas that need it. Fuck the Kochs and their worry about their and their investors wallets. Plenty of other investments out there.

Comment Re:California also legalized using polished turds (Score 3, Insightful) 162

Bitcon is NEVER mentioned.

It IS mentioned.

The assembly member that proposed it, in the press release announcing the passing of the bill, talks about BitCoin, Amazon Coins, Starbucks Stars, and Diablo II Stones of Jordan*. Of course the legislation itself doesn't mention BitCoin, since the section that it repeals pre-dates BitCoin, and when you're repealing a section, you just say "Section X is repealed", not "Section X is repealed because BitCoin".

*One of these is a lie.

Comment Re:Resell them? (Score 1) 72

Without my glasses, I thought the headline was "Want to resell your body?", no kiddin. It did make me think though, about perceived ownership and rights. What do we really own and what are we licensed to "borrow/operate"?

            From a standpoint of laws designed to protect you from yourself and even recent forced healthcare ; the government has an interest in YOU as a commodity that adds to the Gross National Output thereby increasing the amount of $credit$ available to it with your service as collateral. Kinda like seeing the map of the universe with the little --->"you are here"---- marked....
I think in the end, we just do what we can, while we can, with what we have until it is regulated for monetary interests by someone who claims rights unopposed.

I've heard tales that thin paged King James Bibles roll a mighty spleef, Jah LOVE!

Comment Re:banjo is for poor people (Score 1) 101

Contrast that with high end new archtop guitars selling between $30-60k and vintage ones where the sky is the limit.
Truthfully, you can get most instruments in a variety of price ranges, dependent on your needs or vanity.
The short lifecycle of a $200 instrument usually ends up in a spare parts drawer. Most instruments over $10k don''t see much more action than the studio or a display case. A good all round workhorse guitar for most uses SHOULD weigh in around $3-5k, the higher end of "off the rack".
A good banjo should bring enough at pawn to bail its owner out of jail as a general rule.

Comment Re:Please explain (Score 3, Insightful) 74

If we are looking at the system from "above", like looking down on a plate on which peas are rolling around, then the apparent distance between them is the same as the actual distance between them. If we're looking at them edge-on, then we don't really know how far apart they are. The apparent distance sets the lower bound for the actual distance, but the upper bound is unknown. And yes, there's always a degree of conjecture in astronnomy. All we can really say is that there are three black holes near the centre of that galaxy, and they are almost certainly in orbit around each other.

What people don't seem to understand is, science relies on publishing of un-proven theories. You observe, model, predict, publish, and eventually you will be either proven right or wrong. Without the "publish" step, especially in long-term sciences like astronomy where it could take centuries for a theory to tested (such as, "will that comet return in a hundred years"), you could make a thousand contradictory predictions and then publish the one that happened - by co-incidence - to be correct. If you limit yourself to a single prediction, which turns out to be correct, then you are worth paying attention to. My mum is always saying "Scientists keep getting things wrong, therefore all science is rubbish". Getting things wrong is crucual to scientific progress.

Slashdot Top Deals

"I think Michael is like litmus paper - he's always trying to learn." -- Elizabeth Taylor, absurd non-sequitir about Michael Jackson

Working...