Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:And who's going to pay for it? (Score 1) 263

So all those inventions and innovations you listed weren't TRUE inventions and innovations (i.e. cool new stuff) because they had precursors and other applications were found for them? What are you going to say next, no one is TRULY from Scotland? Teleporter or GTFO?

Comment: Re:And who's going to pay for it? (Score 2) 263

The round trip time for a Mars mission is around 2 years.....

...with present technology. Didn't we get a bunch of cool new stuff out of the last space race? You know, like present technology? Maybe someone will get the ion drive to work at scale and cut the trip time and resources down by 10. Given the time and resources, humans usually get stuff to work.

Comment: Re:Wow ... no kidding (Score 4, Insightful) 232

by CaptainLard (#49776257) Attached to: Elon Musk Establishes a Grade School

Sounds like a prototype. It takes a lot of money and effort to make the first one that usually only works under ideal conditions. The next step is to make it work every time (or at least more than once). You certainly don't want to start out with 50M users because there might be a fatal flaw (i.e. every complex problem has an obvious, simple, and wrong solution). How would you begin a program that eliminates something as fundamental to US education as grade levels?

Comment: Re:Earthlings? (Score 2) 78

Overall I don't think there's be any reason for them to suspect that we were once here.

True but possibly because they may never make the leap now that all the easy fuel is used up. Wasn't there a story on here a few days ago about how difficult it would be to restart industry after a civilization collapse because there would be no infrastructure that can drill 10000ft underwater, etc? It took a lot more than 5M years under very different surface conditions for all that oil and coal to collect. The fact that we've burned as much fossil fuel as we did makes me think that there hasn't been a prior intelligent species (or at all?).

Comment: Re: News for nerds (Score 5, Interesting) 866

by CaptainLard (#49682253) Attached to: Religious Affiliation Shrinking In the US

What's most interesting is that it's usually the most religious people who buy into the Republican Party's ideology, which includes "grabbing whatever you can get" and espousing Ayn Rand-style objectivist philosophy.

Check out this story on npr:

Basically it would appear religion is in politics for the same reason anything else is, fat cats want more money. Whoda thought?

Comment: Re:"an emotional buffer for consumers as well." (Score 1) 278

Just had a thought...Assuming agriculture has complete domain over the water on their land only, if residential, etc users end up with a 100% sustainable system from reprocessing, conservation and non farm sources, agriculture users can go fuck themselves when their wells dry up! Sure the price of food will double for a generation while everything gets resorted but hey, that's way easier than addressing the issue ahead of time.

Comment: Re:Never pull a job without proper status (Score 0) 133

Ok 1% a year may well be shabby....but the US (and the world) still has an economy so there's that.

Yall can argue TARP wasn't executed in the best way (agreed) and might not have fixed the underlying problem (agreed) but none the less, it happened at a time when everyone agreed we were in a worst case scenario and now we're not. If you add that in, its more like 10000% ROI.

Comment: Re:Deniers (Score 2) 525

If a hypothesis built on 100's of years of physics and real world observations from the top of the troposphere to the bottom of the ocean by tens (hundreds?) of thousands of logic minded individuals counts as "wild speculation" in your book, I highly encourage you to check the definitions of "wild" and "speculation". Even if it is all a conspiracy/hoax/any other denialist bullshit, AGW certainly does not qualify as wild speculation.

Another fun game would be to hold yourself to a standard of: results less than 100% in any activity = failure. 98% on a math test in 3rd grade? You failed school. That seems to be how you came to your standard of "wrong".

Neckties strangle clear thinking. -- Lin Yutang