Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Grassroots reform (Score 1) 198

I agree with your observation about editors. Owners less so. Buffet seems to want to assure each local paper has unique content so that it remains in demand with its local readers and doesn't become redundant with national papers. Buffet is looking at local coverage as a service differential advantage. Sure there could be local fluff, but fluff would seem to operate against the idea of unique content. Fluff, particularly "heart-warming" human-interest stories, is a type of ubiquitous content that national papers already provide.

Comment Grassroots reform (Score 3, Insightful) 198

Local news coverage is abysmal in most American towns. Subscription support would at least allow them to hire a handful of professional reporters, and might even breathe life back into the field of journalism. God knows we need better journalists at all levels. Rebooting the minor leagues might eventually benefit us by trickling up to the national level too -- but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I would be ecstatic if Philadelphia had some quality reporting instead of the wasteland of fluffy features and regurgitated national news service stories.

Comment Re:False dichotomy (Score 1) 194

"Look at the US Space Program. There was a time when that was a well-funded jewel in the crown of US scientific achievement."

Um no, it was a well-funded military program that was wrapped up in jingoistic PR. There was very little "science", lots of engineering though.

To say the space program involved very little science (nice scare quotes btw) is simply wrong and bespeaks a certain ignorance about the program. Your statement is more political spin than it is fact.

"Now due to lethargy, nebulous organizational mission, poor management, and a dearth of imagination,"

The same can be said of 19th century coal locomotives. We don't use them anymore because they make no sense, not because of your reasons. Imagination doesn't move mass, energy does. We simply have hit the limits of what's possible. There are no exotic sci-fi "fields" and bizarre particles to enable the delirious sci-fi "technologies" that sci-fi "promised" us.

The space program involved much more than moving mass, demonstrating again you're not particularly familiar with the topic.

That's why space is dead. Space is huge, it's mostly empty and we've been there. We know, we have pictures. Reality suggests we move on and concentrate on the real jewel, our planet.

Sanctimonious pablum.

Comment Re:False dichotomy (Score 1) 194

There is also the possibility that we shovel more money into these 'big science' projects and physics slowly grinds to a halt anyway. Ingenuity is as likely to drive big discoveries in 'small science' as a lack-of-ingenuity is to thwart big discoveries in 'big science.'

Look at the US Space Program. There was a time when that was a well-funded jewel in the crown of US scientific achievement. Now due to lethargy, nebulous organizational mission, poor management, and a dearth of imagination, NASA has become something of a scientific backwater whose colossal screw-ups garner more attention than any experimentation it does. Arguably it is currently overfunded given the full scope of its administrative competency.

Comment Unique doesn't equal 'more important' (Score 1) 204

What makes you think your personally crafted message deserves more attention than my message that happens to agree with many other people? Do we all need to send unique messages to suit your sense of democracy? Is your opinion more valuable because you've got the free time to write a personal note? So the busy fellow merits a diminished voice in democracy?

Slashdot Top Deals

Garbage In -- Gospel Out.

Working...