Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re: Brought about by the internet? (Score 1) 122

Sure they are. Otherwise, you don't have a populace that can freely participate in democracy. If any form of heresy is tolerable, then the powers that be can just redefine it in a way that suits them.

The whole effort is naieve.

The problem with the Nazis is not that they "said things" but that they "did things" which should have been prosecuted as crimes when they happened.

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 1) 320

Nothing that Poettering is doing now addresses "The problem".

That's any of the usual FUD that are claimed to be problems for actual consumer end users. That is perhaps the single most frustrating aspect of his current nonsense. He's insisted on making sweeping changes to the parts that don't need fixing and are the least relevant to "the problem".

Comment Re:Where in the USA? (Score 1) 84

+1 to this. Verizon almost always has the best coverage (though right now, I'm vacationing in a spot that has AT&T but not Verizon, surprisingly). AT&T has good coverage of interstates and any city of probably at least 10,000 or more. Smaller cities may or may not have great coverage. T-Mobile and Sprint are less expensive, if you're willing to sacrifice coverage, though they're usually good near urban areas.

Comment Re:All bullshit (Score 1) 235

And so long as you're citing medical reviews, please look up some of the work in the last decade or so on development of the frontal lobes and the established physical fact that teens (and in fact up to the late 20s) do not have the capability to make judgements about engaging in behavior which is both pleasurable and risky.

I read those studies. So does that mean people shouldn't have sex until their late 20s, because they can better make risky decisions then?

Teenagers routinely make equally risky decisions, such as following a religion, taking out college loans, joining the military, driving, swimming and playing football. Do you think they should be prohibited from doing all those things until their 20s?

According to Rind, teenage sex is no more harmful than any other activities of daily life. Every situation is different, so the person who is best able to make that decision is the person involved, the teenager. Your sweeping generalizations, like teenage girls have sex because of peer pressure, may not (and usually doesn't) apply to individual cases, so you don't have any right to tell all teenagers not to have sex, or that their consent doesn't matter, just because there is some girl, somewhere, who was harmed by having sex. It's their individual decision.

BTW, according to Rind, the small subset of teenagers harmed by sex generally come from families that follow sexually repressive religions. If you support laws that would prohibit children from being indoctrinated into religion, or entering buildings used for religion, until they reach their late 20s, I would be sympathetic to your argument.

Comment Re: Even if practical technology was 10-20 years o (Score 1) 270

Maybe. My thought has always been that if fusion is close enough to get ballpark figures, we can build the necessary infrastructure and much of the housing in parallel with fusion development. Because the energy distribution will impose novel demands on the grid, it's going to require a major rethink on communications protocols, over-generation procedures, action plans on what to do if lines are taken out.

With fusion, especially, it's expensive at best to learn after the fact. Much better to get all the learning done in the decade until working fusion.

With all that in place, the ramp time until fusion is fully online at a sensible price will be greatly reduced.

Parallelize, don't serialize. Only shredded wheat should be cerealized.

Comment Re:All bullshit (Score 1) 235

The question is not about how many people have had sex by age 18 (or 16), but whether this is really consensual sex in the first place.

While I agree that jail time is almost certainly counterproductive, I completely disagree with the premise that early-age sex is either psychologically or physically healthy behavior. Further, it really is rare that young women are engaging in a fully consensual manner. They may "want" to have sex as a way of "proving maturity," or to be part of the cool crowd, but that's a poor definition of 'consensual.'

A certain overly randy POTUS fired a very well-spoken Surgeon General who had the nerve to suggest that teens would be far better off both physically and mentally if they engaged in autoeroticism. High time we accepted that position and did whatever we can to reduce the societal pressures to have early sex.

The question is not about how many people have had sex by age 18 (or 16), but whether this is really consensual sex in the first place.

While I agree that jail time is almost certainly counterproductive, I completely disagree with the premise that early-age sex is either psychologically or physically healthy behavior. Further, it really is rare that young women are engaging in a fully consensual manner. They may "want" to have sex as a way of "proving maturity," or to be part of the cool crowd, but that's a poor definition of 'consensual.'

Claiming that sex under the age of 17 or 16 is by definition "not consensual" is handing prosecutors a free pass to torment, harass, convict and jail half the teenage population at their total unaccountable discretion.

Sex, starting in the early teenage years, is a normal part of human development. Most of the research that claims that teenage sex is harmful is done by right-wing religious organizations like the Heritage Foundation, who have a long track record of being anti-science. This is global warming for sex.

You have unfortunately been taken in by the right-wing fantasies about the innocent flowers of childhood, the pathology of sex, their atavistic view of guilt, and their belief that they have the right to punish other people for their private life, again at their own total unaccountable discretion (which they don't apply to themselves, for example Josh Duggar or Bristol Palin).

Back in the 1950s, homosexuals were arrested for hanging out in gay bars, teenage girls were sent to reform school for having sex, and abortion was illegal so hospitals were filled with women dying of sepsis from illegal abortions. After the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s, including Roe v. Wade (which ruled that the government had no right to intrude in the bedroom), I thought those days were over, but now it looks like a pendulum swing. In the 1990s the same people created the day care child sex abuse cases, and put bewildered people in jail for years (for what turned out to be fabricated charges). And the right wing is banning abortion again, state by state. It looks like you haven't learned the lessons of those days.

Unfortunately there is a lunatic fringe of the feminist movement of people like Andrea Dworkin, who was a lesbian and convinced a lot of people into believing that all heterosexual sex is rape and exploitation of women by men. They'd like to see the issue of teenage sex framed as boys raping and exploiting girls, even if the girls actively want to have sex. There's a whole anti-sex industry that has moved into this issue, with its own fake experts and think tanks like the Heritage Foundation.

I'll go to the scientific literature. Teenage sex is normal, it 's been going on since prehistory, and it doesn't do any more harm than any other normal activity (and a lot less harm than driving, swimming or football). Why is it your business to tell a teenage girl that she can't have sex even if she wants to, or that sex is somehow wrong?

Bruce Rind, Philip Tromovitch, Robert Bauserman
A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples
Psychological Bulletin 1998. 124(1): 22–53. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.1.22. PMID 9670820.
Many lay persons and professionals believe that child sexual abuse (CSA) causes intense harm, regardless of gender, pervasively in the general population. The authors examined this belief by reviewing 59 studies based on college samples. Meta-analyses revealed that students with CSA were, on average, slightly less well adjusted than controls. However, this poorer adjustment could not be attributed to CSA because family environment (FE) was consistently confounded with CSA, FE explained considerably more adjustment variance than CSA, and CSA-adjustment relations generally became nonsignificant when studies controlled for FE. Self-reported reactions to and effects from CSA indicated that negative effects were neither pervasive nor typically intense, and that men reacted much less negatively than women. The college data were completely consistent with data from national samples. Basic beliefs about CSA in the general population were not supported.

The Mind-Booty Problem
Rethinking the age of sexual consent.
By William Saletan
Sept. 27, 2007, at 8:02 AM ET
This is the reality of sex with minors: The ages of the parties vary widely from case to case. For more than a century, states and countries have been raising and standardizing the legal age of consent. Horny teenagers are being thrown in with pedophiles. The point of this crackdown was to lock up perverts and protect incompetent minors. But the rationales and the numbers don't match up. The age of majority and the age of competence are coming apart. The age of competence is fracturing, and the age of female puberty is declining. It's time to abandon the myth of the "age of consent" and lower the threshold for legal sex.
The original age of consent, codified in English common law and later adopted by the American colonies, ranged from 10 to 12.

Comment Re:All bullshit (Score 1) 235

>> The answer is, they were unable to prove that the sex was not consensual. That's not quite the same as saying that the sex was consensual.

> In MRA-land, they're identical.

The presumption of innocence isn't just a "bad idea from MRA-land", it also happens to be the law.

Comment Re: It's not about the crime (Score 1) 235

...except this isn't "English", this is law including little things called rights and criminal liability.

If you aren't a full adult, then you're just another variation on the underclasses. What's sadder still is that some people are enthusiastic to go along with that kind of crap.

People are considered "children" and "protected", except when they aren't. People are considered "adult" and granted full rights, except when they aren't.

Comment Re:Because this will be unlike Biosphere 2 how? (Score 4, Informative) 53

To answer your question, smaller habitat, no experiment at maintaining atmospheric composition, outside excursions in "space suits" etc. Its not very much like Biosphere II.

As for why not under the sea or Antarctica I can give at least three reasons. (1) cost of building, transporting and maintaining the habitat; (2) all the support and research personnel live in Hawaii, above water; (3) the research objectives don't require putting the experiment in a dangerous or inaccessible place.

Now someday when we have an actual habitat design along with all the actual support systems we plan to send to Mars, a trial on top of a super high mountain would make sense as a kind of Mars analog. But we don't have such stuff to test so we don't need the Mars analog with all the expense and complication.

Comment Re:Furthermore, Saudi Arabia must be destroyed (Score 2) 270

Not everyone in Saudi Arabia are bedouin; in particular the ruling House of Saud is descended from town dwelling Arabs.

I'll go out on a limb and guess that not everyone in Saudi Arabia is worthless. Even people involved in managing their oil. And as for the elite they don't seem to be worse than anyone else who's inherited oil-based wealth; they've managed that for the long term benefit of themselves and their families. If they're ostentatious with their wealth, well they have a lot of it and it hasn't bankrupted them yet.

So there's no rational reason to want to destroy Saudi Arabia. But there's every reason not to want to be so dependent upon them.

Comment Re:Bogus Nonsense (Score 1) 235

Given that the guy committed statutory rape, yeah, this was good. By the way, the meaning of being below the age of consent is that the girl in question COULD NOT CONSENT.

You are denouncing normal human sexuality. Prosecutors are putting boys in jail for exercising normal human adolescent sexual activity.

26% of females have intercourse by age 15.


What are you going to do? Put half the teenage boys in jail?

You really ought to think through your COULD NOT CONSENT. It makes no sense.

Prototype designs always work. -- Don Vonada