Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Translation: (Score 1) 292

True... except I'd beg to differ on one point. Boycotts against some monopolies (IE) do seem to work.

Yes, thats why I said 'almost', but as far as IE goes, I suspect that our ability to break its stranglehold on the net had more to do with MS's own complacency as anything else (allowing IE's technology to stagnate). By the time they belatedly realized IE's monopoly position was in trouble, they had to restart their R&D on IE's technology/codebase, and that took too much time. By the time they caught up with FF, IE's monopoly position in the market was gone.

Of course, people like you and I helped as well. Like you, I steered a lot of my Win-using family to FF as well. :)

I do agree that monopolies are not *impossible* to break, just that they're very hard to break.

Comment Re:debateable (Score 1) 140

Most electricity is generated in very close proximity to major urban areas;

Only for power plants that can be built anywhere, and they're put near urban areas for the obvious reason: thats where the consumers are.

it's costlier to ship it around.

Not by as much as you're thinking. Otherwise, power plants in the Arizona desert or the Hoover Dam would be uneconomical. Electricity can be transmitted for hundreds of miles before the losses become severe, and in an emergency, or during periods of extreme demand, those losses are still acceptable: there's a reason we have a *national* electricity grid.

They wouldn't have any telecommunications at all except ham radios and satellite phones. They'd be eating only what was in season in their region, and nothing but root vegetables and salt pork in the winter. They'd be lucky if their alphabet went higher than G or H, maybe only D if there was a poor harvest the previous year.

LOL, you have a very quaint notion of who rural people are, but I suppose everyone has to have a least one deceit.

Comment Re:The old nuclear lobby killed itself commerciall (Score 1) 572

I'm sorry you got the wrong impression there but I thought "non US solutions ... AND startups like Hyperion" got the message across.

It got the *wrong* message across. :)

Examples are non US solutions like pebble bed, accelerated thorium and startups like Hyperion

My understanding of English says that this sentence is listing 3 'non-US' solutions: (1) pebble bed, (2) thorium, (3) Hyperion. The 'and' is normally used for last item in a list like this, it does not separate the last item from the previous ones (the adjective used as the prefix to the list still applies to it). Just an FYI.

A lot of the well established US stuff is just a drain on the taxpayer

Hyperion is a private startup, the taxpayers are not involved.

I was also unaware that General Atomics had anything in pebble bed within a couple of decades of implementation

You didn't specify imminent implementations (I don't know of any), only 'solutions'. My only point was that US companies and research institutions are just as heavily involved in PBMR design/research as anyone else.

As for why there are no current implementations, have you considered the possibility that PBMR designs might have issues of their own? Perhaps it just needs a little more work before it can become viable, and that work is being done by many, including US companies/universities.

Comment Re:The old nuclear lobby killed itself commerciall (Score 1) 572

Reading comprehension failure there when you didn't notice "era"

I most certainly did notice the 'era' word. Chernobyl's RBMK reactors didn't have a proper containment building. Nobody in the West has ever built a nuclear plant without one. Nobody in the West, including Westinghouse, has ever built *anything* like the RBMK-1000.

then for some odd reason you decided to wrap yourself in the flag and shout.

The odd reason in this case was that the criticism was BS.

Comment Re:Why wait, we already know the answer (Score 1) 140

It will be just like telephone and now health care. The people who want the service enough to buy it will be taxed to provide the service for people who don't care enough to buy it

Wait, is there someplace thats getting free telephone service? Where? I wanna move there!

How typical.

Hint: the telephone subsidy is much like the expansion of the USPS back in the old days. It was not to make it free for anyone, but just to make it *available* to everyone.

And if you don't get why extending mail and telephone was considered so important, why not read some of the history of those times. A large country thats disconnected and out of touch with itself could never move beyond the 2nd-world stage... never become what we are now.

Comment Re:Understandable really (Score 1) 233

as for how false stuff starts just look at your message and your claim that it was Fox news fault.

Have we forgotten about those 'freedom fries' already? Or DijonGate? And what those spawned?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_fries

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheese_Eating_Surrender_Monkeys

Take note of where that last one originated, not Fox *News*, but close enough.

And Sean Hannity's fit over POTUS's use of Dijon mustard is hilarious, in a sad, insane kind of way. (google it)

Yes, silly and stupid, and it mainly died out fairly quickly, but the trolls and morons just can't let it go.

So its mainly joking (British & American) and partly redneck arrogance (at least American - do the Brits have an equivalent of rednecks?).

Comment Re:Look at QT (Score 1) 131

a kind of licence for QT that contains something dramatically labelled a "poison clause",

Its not a clause of the software license's legalese, they just made the 'KDE Free Qt Foundation' a co-author, in effect, giving that organization the right to relicense Qt if TT ever disappeared, or got taken over by someone hostile to FOSS.

There was, I believe, a separate document, a kind of legal 'memorandum of understanding' or whatever the lawyers call them, separately between those 2 entities that spelled out under what conditions the later could do the relicensing, but it was separate from Qt's software licenses.

And this entire, long story is really moot now, since Nokia has subsequently dual-licensed Qt under the LGPL as well.

Comment Re:QT and Nokia (Score 1) 131

This made embracing the advantages of open source the only viable business decision

You make it sound as if they were forced into something, but they would have not bought Trolltech if they didn't like the Qt license arrangement. This wasn't a shotgun marriage, neither one was brought kicking and screaming to the altar. :)

They did not have to invest all their own time and money that they are doing in leading the now more open & collaborative development of Qt. I'm not an insider, but they seem to be putting *more* resources into its development than TT could have.

A very open & Free Qt is part of their *plan* for their future smartphones, a foundation stone of their (also very open) Maemo OS. Being open & collaborative with Qt will (they hope) help convince devs to support their platform. They're thinking more 'open' right now than Google is with Android, never mind Apple.

They *wanted* to do this.

Comment Re:What does "Acquire" mean? (Score 1) 131

The question is, where is all this hypothetical value? If so, why is Sun struggling bad enough to be bought out by Oracle?

Sun's problems had nothing to do with the FOSS that they supported. This is the other big problem with TFA summary: Sun was never 'focused almost entirely on open source'. They were a hardware company.

They should have left Sun/MySQL out of the summary. Invalid examples.

Comment Re:Do a small scale pilot first (Score 1) 572

It doesn't matter whether something emits radioactive elements but rather how much is emitted.

Understood, the only reason this gets brought up all the time is because that many of the anti-nuclear folks who get obsessed about a nuclear plant's emissions don't fully realize what their current non-nuclear power plants are emitting.

A quick google finds a study indicating that each year 100,000 times more radon is emitted directly by the soil than from coal

Which ought to tell us that most nuclear radiation fears are vastly overrated, if not irrational (its a common natural phenomena), but hey, its got that word 'nuclear' in it, so most rationality usually gets tossed within the first 5 minutes of a discussion.

but until then the radiation argument against coal is bunk

Not exactly. Its only part of the argument against coal. The CO2 and CH4 parts constitute the main part of the anti-coal argument. When you add them all up...

Of course, nuclear has its own issues too. There are no silver bullets for this problem.

Slashdot Top Deals

Be careful when a loop exits to the same place from side and bottom.

Working...