Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment Re:Fuck precious metals- propellant all the way ba (Score 1) 61

...but propellant mining is the one that all the other things rely on- it's the equivalent of oil in space.

Oh, NO!


Why, oh *why* did you have to say *that*!?

Good grief man, did you *have* to use the "O"-word!?

You *know* what's coming now, right?


"Ehrrmahgerhdd!! Ehrmahgehrdd!!

Now Big Space Oil is gunna cause Orbital-Warming CO2 Terrorists In Spaaaace!!"

Way to go, man. Way to go.


Strat :P

Comment Re:buh, bye (Score 0) 494

You are not seriously comparing Trump to Obama, are you?

Heavens, no!

Trump actually has experience successfully running something, whereas all Obama had previous to his entry into politics was "community organizing" and the 'Choom Gang". Although to be fair Obama was very successful at whitewashing his past regarding his schooling etc, so there's that.


Comment Re:Danish article (Score 1) 244

5 months ago, the danish news site Ekstra Bladet had an story about Popcorn Time (in danish):

Is that article illegal as well? I guess a LOT of people learned about Popcorn Time that day...

One step at a time.

The news service likely has lawyers on retainer which means a lengthy legal battle and the outcome is less than certain.

Therefor, you go after the low-hanging fruit like these two poor slobs who are without such resources in order to build a string of solid legal court precedents.

*Then* you go after the news service(s), libraries, bookstores, universities, etc.


Comment Re:Won't do a thing. (Score 1) 168

Neither. I get the point, it's just so horribly made it doesn't follow at all from the events in her books.

The point may seem horribly made to those to whom the concept is foreign and antithetical to their way of thinking, yes.

And it seems you conveniently missed the title of one of her stories. "The virtue of selfishness".

I quoted Atlas Shrugged, and specifically for the authoritarian point made. You're welcome to start another thread where Rand's other works could be discussed in relation to other concepts like capitalism vs collectivism. I preferred to stay on-topic.


Comment Re:Won't do a thing. (Score 1) 168

If that's what you took away from Atlas Shrugged then you missed the point or simply refuse to acknowledge it for ideological/political reasons.

Where she goes wrong is in assuming this means that only selfish people should lead the world and then everything will be all right.

Wanting to not have the fruits of your labor stripped away and redistributed to those who have not worked for it (but who would otherwise be capable) is NOT "selfish". It's the story of the ant & grasshopper, only these grasshoppers come armed and take from the hard-working ants at the point of a gun.

As was her writing on that point; it's hard to find more selfish people than the ones she so strongly despise in her stories. They just happen to not be written as heroes, and therefore their selfishness is bad, while that of the heroes is good. Simply because her stories make it so.

The villains in Atlas Shrugged seek power & control by robbing other people of the fruits of their labor through the power of an authoritarian government, and making it so that everybody is guilty of breaking *some* law/regulation so that selective enforcement allows them to have leverage on anyone they wish.


Comment Re:Won't do a thing. (Score 5, Interesting) 168

Mod parent up; even the death penalty wouldn't stop it, it's so commonplace that once half the population is in jail; a military coup would ensue.

The point isn't to put everyone in jail, the point is to put anyone in jail.

Turn everyone into criminals and you legally put anyone of them in jail when they are inconvenient for whatever reason.

"Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

- Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

Yeah, yeah. "Objectivist", blah blah blah.

For being so wrong she is proving to have been remarkably prescient.


Comment Re:Way to encourage responsible disclosure. (Score 2) 87

Two years? That's outrageous. Any vendor that takes that long to patch their holes *deserves* to get zero-day'd.

Things like this, and that nonsense that the court in Boston pulled wrt/ to the researchers and their DEFCON presentation, really sour me on the idea of "responsible disclosure." If the result of my courtesy is going to be a lawsuit and a gag order, I'd not be particularly inclined to offer vendors the courtesy in the first place.

Easy fix.

Just make it a high crime with onerous penalties to perform security vulnerability testing, release vulnerabilities, or to be complicit with either or both without both the manufacturer's and government's prior approval, either of which may withdraw consent/approval at a later date and leave researchers et al legally liable & open to prosecution ex post facto if things don't turn out to the manufacturer's and/or government's expectations.

Problem solved! /s


Comment Re:It'd be hilareous if not so sad... (Score 1) 338

it's 191Km away it not fucking close at all!!..

Coz of course, lava and ashes are gonna take roads and tolls... Distance is about 140 km, which is very close for a volcano that big.

Hey, hate to rain on your roll, but if a volcano 140km away erupts on a scale that it's a serious threat to a reactor installation at that distance, seeing how we're talking about an island with limited area, chances are very good that the presence of a reactor installation will be the least of their problems!


Comment Re:Deliverance? (Score 2) 664

This, of course, could pose difficulties for Amazon or others who wish to use automated drones pervasively if they want to take off and land practically anywhere. And in my opinion, it should. But I can see it being used for remote deliveries to rural areas, or deliveries to significant-sized businesses or tall rooftops where it's prearranged, expected, and not likely to interfere with young children, pets, random passersby, etc. (or for it and its merchandise to be stolen randomly when the intended recipient doesn't pick it up or meet it right away...)

First, let me say that IMHO the guy shooting the drone acted in a hotheaded, impulsive, and dangerous manner. My post history shows I am a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment, but that's for responsible & intelligent handling and use. What this person did was neither smart nor responsible. He should be charged with reckless discharge of a firearm resulting in the destruction of private property. At the least.

Off-topic in reply to your post, matthewv789:

Where small drones would be extremely useful is in transporting time-sensitive (for patients and/or samples) medical/biological samples, cultures, etc between a rural hospital and a lab facility in the city, or even within the city or a multi-building complex,

Larger size drones could save lives by allowing first responders to put an accident victim directly onto a drone carried as standard equipment for emergency vehicles for immediate air evac to a trauma center, rather than wait for a helicopter to arrive.

It will be a fight, as government is not concerned with how widespread adoption of drone technology affects *your* privacy or safety or well-being (besides media optics for propaganda) so much as they are concerned how it affects *their* privacy and ability to hide things from the public while simultaneously monitoring the general public using the same technology.

"For we but not for thee" seems to be a common sentiment from all in D.C. regardless of Party.


Comment Re:Hypocrisy (Score 1) 62

And how the heck is YouTube supposed to know what is 'illicit' and not?
So, lets force YouTube to guess?
Or, perhaps lets force any site to take down data because someone, somewhere, says it is?

Umm, there's elections coming up and many campaign coffers to fill. Apparently TPTB feel Google has not yet done enough towards that end.

What? You thought this was anything else?


Comment Re:Now that's just evil (Score 0) 515

The single thing that is left to keep a Windows install.. are some pretty cool games that are compiled only to run on Windows. This can be remedied.

It *is* being remedied!

Steam has a Linux client. Many current and popular games have stand-alone Linux clients, like War Thunder for just one example. Clients for Windows, Mac, and Linux available (as well as also available on Steam and PS4).


Comment Re:Why Live Like 21st Century "Flintstones"? (Score 1) 466

Wind & solar were untested, wild & crazy ideas as well for a long time and similarly lacked investors. The same thing happens with every new technology.

Some of the reluctance to invest is financial/risk based, but much of it is also politically based as well, as old industries press governments to protect their business from competition, including competition from new technologies.

This is particularly true in the US where crony-capitalism is the order of the day. Cheap to the point of nearly-free power takes away a vector for political manipulation of the population as well as threatens current players in the field.

At one point every counter argument you've made against thorium reactors and solar power satellites were made against current methods of power generation & distribution, and in fact against almost every technology we use today. It's simply a matter of overcoming this financial & political inertia. It's not impossible, current wind & solar projects prove that.

I believe it's simply a matter of time and of gathering enough political support to force the politicians in the pockets of the current players to remove disincentives to investment.

There are always risks. If we waited until something was "proven" we would still be riding horses and bleeding the sick as a treatment, and may still have not yet discovered the "New World" (N. America).


Comment Re:Why Live Like 21st Century "Flintstones"? (Score 1) 466

It's real easy to say that some scheme that's never been implemented will have all sorts of good qualities, but when we're talking about serious power I'd like to see it working first.

The same can be said for solar or wind as a baseline power source. There are basic physics reasons why solar & wind are problematic at best as a baseline power source. Solar power satellites have been well within technological reach for decades, as have thorium reactors (which have been in wide use at smaller scales in military, industrial, & scientific applications for decades as well).

It's simply the political will to invest & build that is lacking for both thorium reactors and solar power satellites.


Comment Re:Oh boy, here we go... (Score 1) 413

That's true only if the goal is *not* to create an almost "Hunger Games" type of scenario where there are only the rich, privileged, ruling-class and an impoverished, heavily-regulated & controlled, serf-class.

That makes no sense at all. And seems completely irrelevant. We can't make real headway in reducing carbon emissions if we don't consider the economic situations of all the countries that can't afford to implement high cost solutions.

It makes a great deal of sense *if* one is able to disconnect themselves from political/ideological loyalties and dismiss political talking points by the pro-AGW crowd. Even if one were to totally remove *all* of the US's CO2 emissions, it would at best result in only a few tenths of a degree change over a century at best.

This is not about global warming. This is about redistribution of wealth on a global scale. It's about creating an unelected global governance and destroying national sovereignty.


To be or not to be, that is the bottom line.