Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Corruption? In Russia? (Score 2) 94

You don't like the numbers that have been published but have no facts to support what you would rather believe so you attack the reputation of the source of the numbers as your fallback. Have you considered pursuing a career as a lawyer or politician? You would fit right in.

My point is that you have no facts either, just the rantings of one of the most corrupt politicians in the House (which is ironic, given that we are talking about corruption...) You did not provide any sources for Mr. Issa's claim - and neither did the Post article you cited. In fact, the same article provided another (unsourced) number that was less than half what Mr. Issa claims.

Moreover, the article you linked was not written by the Post itself, but by some "senior principal analyst" at a company that specialises in government contracting! Do you think that maybe claiming that their competitors are missing billions of dollars in "waste, fraud and abuse" might just be a marketing ploy?

Comment Re:Corruption? In Russia? (Score 1) 94

I would love to see your evidence of this as the GAO would be out of a job if they left that much waste.

Have you heard of this thing called a search engine? You should try it.

Here is just one article that came up as the first result on Google: Federal government continues to lose billions to waste, fraud and abuse

If you have any more questions you can ask Darrell Issa who chairs the House Oversight Committee whose committee was investigating said fraud and reported the numbers given.

I have serious doubts that Darrell "Benghazi!!!!" Issa would know corruption if it bit him in the nether regions. And before you go all partisan on me, you should note that the list of dishonorable mentions on the same page is balanced between the parties.

Comment Re:Huh? (Score 1) 278

doesn't conservation of matter pretty much guarantee everything is just recycled?

* internet advises people to drink 2-3 L of fluids per day.
* 365 days per year, 70 year lifespan -> 70k liters -> 70 m^3 over lifetime.
* 7b ppl alive today. Everybody alive today will drink 500 m^3 of fluids.
* the handwavey estimate is that half of the people who have ever lived are alive today. if this is true, then the entire human species has drunk 1000 m^3 of water.
* the volume of the ocean is 1.3 10^9 km^3 -> 1.3 10^18 m^3.

so even if no water has been recycled, there are a billion trillion liters of water in the oceans that have never been drunk by humans.

I think your math is rather off...

7e9 x 70m^3 ~= 500e9 m^3 x 2 = 1e12 m^3

But yes, that is still a tiny fraction of 1.3e18 m^3.

Comment Re:Both own half. (Score 1) 374

Why not ship the frozen fertilized ova to another star system w/o any humans on board? Once they arrive at their destination, robots should be able to handle growing them in a gestational tank and decanting them at the right time.

I have a vague memory of reading about a natural experiment where something effectively like this happened (wolf children?) The children were basically insane because they missed parental bonding.

Comment Re:It's my choice to kill my kid! (Score 1) 616

The issue is also whether you allow society to dictate what medical procedures are performed on your body.

Lets not forget the fine history of unethical human medical experimentation in the United States. And people think we should just give the government carte blanche to dictate medical procedures?

Unbelievable. Something about history, and being doomed to repeat it...

Nice false dichotomy there.

Nobody is dictating what medical procedures you can perform on your (childrens') bodies. Rather, the law prevents them from performing medical procedures (i.e. uncontrolled exposure to dangerous diseases) on unsuspecting victims (i.e. those who can't get vaccinated) in public schools. If you want to perform such experiments, you will now have to do it in the privacy of your own home on victims (i.e. children of other anti-vaxxers) who have consented in some form (i.e. by being ignorant.)

Somehow I find your willingness to subject innocents to known dangers via your private medical experimentation far more disturbing than a slippery slope argument about the government possibly doing so in the future.

Comment Re:So what? (Score 1) 407

and then the worker comp attorneys come out of wood work and sue when some in a job uses drugs like this and things go bad and they end up in rehab

Indeed. Which sounds like a horribly inefficient (not to mention downright dangerous) way to run a society.

Comment Re:Religion and Racism (Score 4, Interesting) 228

"Someone else's land?" I have to believe they own the land there. Whether the natives recognize that or not, however...

You know, the natives might have some legitimate disagreements about land ownership. Just because the traditional religion is used to block projects like this doesn't mean that it is the root cause. Religion may just have been legally expedient at first and then grew into a self-perpetuating thing.

Another poster was referring to the "corruption" in Hawaii, but a brief read of the link above would suggest that US financial interests have been corrupting Hawaii for a long time. And its funny how some of the descriptions of Hawaiians on this thread sound just like descriptions of Native Americans, African Americans, and just about any ethnic group that has been traumatised by rich white people over the last few centuries...

Comment Re:Nutz (Score 1) 442

Your comment has nothing to do with the original claim, that rapid changes does not happen. They do - and the cause is completely irrelevant when it comes to how those changes affect vegetation, animal life or humans. Neither is the paper limited to volcanic cooling events, which you claim, which makes me wonder if you've read it. If you didn't read it - then what is the point in writing a reply?

Additionally, if you claim that there's newer research the last 20 years which disproves the paper then please cite that research.

Sorry, I have read all of it now and poked around a bit. A recent RealClimate summary notes that there is a "well-known tipping point" in the North Atlantic overturning, which is consistent with the findings in the summary paper you linked, but published in 2008. So it looks like we still aren't any less screwed...

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Working...