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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Not effective (Score 5, Insightful) 217

This kind of mass data collection on everyone is a huge waste of resources. The more people you add to a database, the less relevant it becomes for anything. People who know trade craft, know how to cover their tracks and pollute big data. So this is basically a giant database of amateurs, stupid crooks and ordinary civilians.

Another problem with big data are the large numbers of errors. I've run big databases where users were motivated to provide good data and there were still gaps in the data, misspelled names, numbers transposed, and some entries locked out because they were trying to enter duplicate primary keys. Travel data is coming in fast, I can't imagine what the exception reports look like every day.

Comment You forgot about Chernobyl (Score 1) 230

230,000 were killed by the Banquiao hydroelectric dam disaster.

Not quite. 20,000 were killed in the immediate flooding. The rest were killed in the epidemics, famines, etc that followed.

Even if the worst nuclear accident in history happened EVERY YEAR, it would still be safer than hydroelectric.

If you're going to claim indirect deaths as you did above, then I'm going to claim indirect deaths too.

http://www.who.int/ionizing_ra...

Chernobyl didn't kill that many people directly/immediately, but it has impacted the health of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people. It will continue to do so, for generations. Nuclear disasters never go away.

Where X is 10-100 times larger than Y: Increasing the cancer risks for X people isn't 'better' than immediately wiping Y people off the map.

Comment Re:Why are you so angry? (Score 1) 77

No, his post is exactly spot on.

", but making the entire RC hobby illegal "
It, in no way, will do that.

I've been an enthusiast since '79, off and on, not hard core.
Also, I'm a thinker, can understand context and regulation, and look historically at how thing have happened.

If you think the proposed regulation will outlaw RC, with then you are being an idiot. Literally., you are being idiotic. Stop it.

Comment Re:both? (Score 0) 77

You are incorrect. The current regulation remove the profit motive from everyone.

". If they did, they would be based on drone weight, method of control, altitude, etc."
They are working on those. Maybe you should pay attention instead of just spew nonsense?

"rather than "commercial" vs "non-commercial""
becasue it's the easiest way to do so until regulation are finished.
They are making regulation and understanding the details.

"The polices appear to be designed solely to ensure that nobody creates any jobs for Americans,"
What the fuck? Are you an idiot or some Fox alarmist?
You're post is idiotic, and contrary to all evidence and history of the FAA.

Comment Re:comments are now underway on just this issue (Score -1, Troll) 77

"The skies should belong to the people, not the government"
Are you fucking kidding me? Yeah, lets just shoot all kind of shit into the air. Lets ignore the regulation are there for a reason. It's only a spinning blade cappale of killing people, lets not regulation. Hell, lets buzz airliners as the land, cause it's are skies not the governments.

Any of you shit land on my yard, I hope you don't plan on getting it back. If any of your shit endangers anyone I know, I hope you ready to loose every thing

Comment There is no "safe" amount of ionizing radiation (Score -1) 230

I'm sick and tired of the notion that it's OK to pollute, as long as you don't pollute "too much."

200+ chemicals found in samples of people's blood: http://www.forbes.com/2010/01/...

200+ chemicals found in newborn's umbilical core blood: http://www.scientificamerican....

http://www.cdc.gov/exposurerep...

These chemicals by and large don't go away...and time after time, we find chemicals that were thought to be "safe"...aren't. When are we going to learn that? When are we going to require chemicals be considered dangerous until proven otherwise, instead of the present situation, where chemicals are only later shown to be dangerous once scientists and environmental groups collect a mountain of evidence?

Slashdot Top Deals

Any circuit design must contain at least one part which is obsolete, two parts which are unobtainable, and three parts which are still under development.

Working...