Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:"Could", (Score 1) 401

So Canada and Siberia are wrong because you say so. Explain to me why the majority of the population of Canada is scrunched up along the southern border... Is it because they don't want to live in the cold or because the availability of light for half the year is unbearable.

As for people being welcome in my culture, I welcome people of all backgrounds, colors, peaceful religions, and means. I am an American and that was supposed to be the whole point.
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"

Comment Re:"Could", (Score 1) 401

No, America has no friends because we torture innocent people even though we know it doesn't do us any good. We act like policemen of the world and thrust our political beliefs and morals on the rest of the world while we shit in our own living room back at home.

Pollution probably doesn't make the top 5 reasons to hate America worldwide.

Also, it's convenient when you get to define pollution to be whatever you want. Considering that the gasses you exhale as part of staying alive are considered pollution now.

Comment Re:"Could", (Score 1) 401

In 500 years, billions of people could be living on the moon. How big was New York in 1500? Do you really think over 500 years people can't MOVE? It's not going to disappear in a tidal wave. If anything, it might turn into a city like Venice which is still managing to survive despite sinking into the sea. Even in the worst predictions of global warming, I fail to see how there won't be enough landmass to support all the people we currently have. In fact, given improving technology, it wouldn't surprise me if we could double, triple, or quintuple the population in 500 years and still have a higher standard of living. I mean well more of the landmass of the world is currently unlivable because it's too cold, not because it's too hot. Antarctica, Canada, Alaska, Greenland, most of Russia... Too damn cold.

Sure most of the population currently lives near the ocean, but that won't change in 500 years, just the location of the coast. People will move inland over generations and I'm sure they won't complain that more latitudes will have tropical weather.

Comment Re:More cooling, then? (Score 1, Insightful) 401

This would get modded flamebait. Warmer periods in earth's history have been more life prolific. I have yet to see studies seriously listing benefits of a warmer climate and actually comparing that to any negatives. It's all catastrophe and death. Because if heaven forbid we might benefit from it, there's no reason to tax or subsidize things, which appears to be the end goal of climate research, to engage social change.

Comment Re: (Score 1) 175

Actually I've managed to avoid goatse... After getting hit with tubgirl, I've always been paranoid about links...

Comment Re:The lesson (Score 1) 329

Actually, gem quality larger synthetic diamonds are becoming more feasible. My wife has a .79 carat fancy blue synthetic diamond in her engagement ring. And industrial diamonds don't compete with gem diamonds. Most diamond veins are suited for industrial use. Due to flaws, small size, undesired color, etc there are plenty of natural diamonds that won't get used for gems. Any that are of gem quality aren't used for industrial purposes due to cost.

Comment Re:So basically (Score 1) 445

What stops the mega wealthy is competition. What prevents competition is the government. As long as you have freedom of association, you can choose to associate with companies that don't exploit you. There is room for basic labor laws preventing child labor, discrimination, and a few other things.

OSHA should be privatized and made to be a safety standards company similar to how Underwriters Laboratories and other safety industries work. OSHA rules are out of date and often absurd.

The EPA should also be privatized. Let the public see what the environmental rules are and boycott companies that destroy the environment. The EPA as is currently set up is accountable to no one and can effectively ban anything based on if they determine it is a pollutant.

The FCC should regulate what frequencies can be used and regulate interference so jamming is considered the same as blocking speech.

Libertarians don't believe in NO government or a ridiculously tiny government. They believe in a limited government (limited by a document, like say the Constitution), an accountable government (fair elections, unlike what we have now), reasonable and low taxes, and personal freedom. History has shown that free people do a very good (but not perfect job) of advancing society and creating wealth for the entire population even if it is unevenly distributed.

Most libertarians believe the government should do a whole lot for society, but at the smallest level of government. Fire departments, police, schools, etc should be manages by the local government, not the feds. Federal officials aren't accountable over local concerns.

Your view is that we need to keep money out of politics. I see that as dealing with the symptom, not the problem. I want to get politics out of money. The problem is that the government is so large and powerful that they can control large amounts of private sector money. Take away their power, contracts, tax benefits, and straight up handouts and then there isn't an incentive to buy politicians anymore. Why spend a billion dollars to win a position that won't return a billion dollars in "influence"?

Slashdot Top Deals

FORTRAN is not a flower but a weed -- it is hardy, occasionally blooms, and grows in every computer. -- A.J. Perlis

Working...