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


Forgot your password?

Comment: It happened to me (Score 3, Informative) 949

Then being told any sexual act with a girl could end up with you in jail.

I was pretty literally told that at my college orientation - 10 minutes after it was pointed out that campus security was entirely handled by local police with arrest powers, and orders to enforce campus policies, we were taken to the dorms and it was casually mentioned that the university policy on sexual consent allowed the female partner to revoke consent retroactively, and one had to get verbal permission every time some new kind or level of intimacy was reached during a sexual encounter.

Standards were relaxed twice in my last two years, but I sure wasn’t interested in dating on-campus - any time I had any passing interest, I flashed back to the dorms, and the interest quickly passed.

Comment: Re:Four times the speed not twice. (Score 1) 204

by Chrontius (#49332753) Attached to: Apple Doubles MacBook Pro R/W Performance
Strictly speaking, Apple shipped 4-lane PCIe2 SSDs in the Mac Pro. The Macbooks' motherboards are wired for it, in the name of future proofing perhaps, so the switch to 3x4 is only a single doubling over the state of the art, even if most people didn't realize what the state of the art was.

OWC provides proof!

Comment: Re:Kill dogs, why not people??? (Score 1) 179

by Chrontius (#49318089) Attached to: WHO Report Links Weed Killer Ingredient To Cancer Risk
Glyphosate's mechanism for harm is really quite interesting; it seems to work by preferentially killing the gut bacteria responsible for digesting potentially harmful molecules that are frequently - big surprise - carcinogens. Normally, they're safe and non-toxic because they'd be oxidized before absorption, but ...

Also, I've read things suggesting that it suppresses the Cyp450 system; again, an enzyme system focused on detoxifying incidental environmental poisons. I haven't chased down the study in question, but I'll definitely do so in light of the recent announcement.

Comment: Re:Uh... They're not required to go to that school (Score 1) 323

If the kids have nothing to hide, then release it. If not, pull the kids from the school. They're not obligated to go, and they're certainly not obligated to be abusive assholes either. We don't need more enabling of bullying and peer enforced sociopathy.

Actually, I'm pretty sure they are obligated to go, and in some states parents' drivers licenses can be revoked if their kids are truant.

Comment: Re:Uh... They're not required to go to that school (Score 1) 323

if it wasn't a public school? Sure. Don't go snooping around my shit. Even if i've got nothing to hide I have a lot to be embarrassed about or just don't want people to know about.

What if the accused bully has entirely unrelated facts to hide? Say, closeted gay?

I suspect that knock-on effects mean this won't actually reduce bullying all that much, just spread the fun around. Also, to run with that theory, there's a reason kids tend to stay in the closet until they're out of their parents' house. In extremis, to avoid child abuse. In milder cases, they may otherwise end up sent by well-meaning parents to some hellhole of a "pray the gay away" camp or boarding school. Further, there are laws on the books protecting children in some states from having to disclose certain medical conditions to their parents - abortions, and in certain proposals I haven't heard about having gone anywhere (but I haven't heard go away) contraceptive implants may be added to that. I wonder which law will have an exception carved into it for the other's footprint?

Second point - why are public schools different?

Comment: Re:Uh... They're not required to go to that school (Score 2) 323

Because it IS a public school? Yes. The rules are and should be different.

Why? How can your rights magically vanish by virtue of the fact that you attend public school? Especially your rights regarding your life OUTSIDE of school.

So only people who have enough money to attend private school have civil rights?

... Actually, that explains a lot.

Comment: Re:Safe nuclear energy? (Score 1) 148

by Chrontius (#48869909) Attached to: Paris Terror Spurs Plan For Military Zones Around Nuclear Plants

I'm not even going to try to calculate the size of the ash pond, but here's what we have for the mountain of coalâ¦

I used the Embalse nuclear plant as a baseline, because it was the first thing I found on Wikipedia.

A coal-fired power plant producing the same 2109 MWt output would burn 2,463,620,940 kilograms of coal per year, for a fuel stockpile on site of 24,636,209,400 kilograms. If you prefer tons, Wolfram says that's 27,160,000. - 27 megatons and change. Since uranium in the core is the form it is used in, we shall assume this is powdered coal magically prevented from blowing away, perhaps with a water mist, or plastic sheeting.

The specific energy of coal is 24 MJ/kg; of TNT, a mere 4.6 - a 5.2-fold difference.

Allowing for this, the coal pile contains 141 megatons worth of energy.

While it might be infeasible to efficiently detonate this mountain of coal, odds are once a fire starts, it would be impossible to put out, forming a firestorm effect which may aerosolize enough powdered coal to cause a thermobaric explosion.

Even failing that, the result would approximate a particularly bad coal seam fire, and the surface area involved in combustion, as well as the open-air nature of the fire, would expose the local population to a manmade âoeevil windâ - substantial portions of the coal's mass would be released in the form of CO2 and other combustion gases, asphyxiating anyone unfortunate to be downwind of it. Assuming only 10 million tons of the coal is released in the form of CO2, the result is 3.932 cubic kilometers of heavier-than-air gas rushing downhill from the fire. This will not be released all at once, but instead will sustain the event, perhaps long enough to kill even the vegetation that isn't incinerated by the firestorm or simple radiant heat from an unexpectedly well-behaved fire that doesn't spark secondary blazes - which is a rather likely eventuality.

Granted that storing ten years of coal on-site at a powerplant is vanishingly unlikely, but when apples-to-apples comparisons are made the law of large numbers suggests that any calamity at a fuel dump of this magnitude - of any kind - is likely to be severe, if not a mass-casualty event.


My math, for verification:

27 kJ / gram for bituminous coal

0.027 mJ/g

80620 kJ / gram for uranium

80.62 mJ/g

2109 MWt for the Embalse nuclear power plant

2986 times denser power

3.154Ã--107 seconds per year


2109/.027 = 78,111 grams per second


2,463,620,940 kilograms of coal per year

P.S.: You're an ass.

Comment: Re:Safe nuclear energy? (Score 2) 148

by Chrontius (#48863631) Attached to: Paris Terror Spurs Plan For Military Zones Around Nuclear Plants
A coal plant with ten years worth of coal stockpiled on site, plus a similarly sized ash pond, would be just as juicy a target.

We just don't have the technology to detect the toxins released by that remotely - except in so far as the coal ash is itself startlingly radioactive.

Comment: Re:Hypocrisy (Score 1) 136

by Chrontius (#48854621) Attached to: Drug Company CEO Blames Drug Industry For Increased Drug Resistance
Or, perhaps, the doctor guessing wrong about antibiotics' necessity - we can either bitch about over-testing, or about doctors guessing wrong when it's not the most likely culprit, but not both without becoming hypocrites.

Also, when the testing involves allowing a disease to become more advanced while waiting for confirmation, that's a Bad Thing. When the test involves biopsying your testicles, that's also a Bad Thing. :-p

Comment: Re:Two options (Score 1) 190

by Chrontius (#48713717) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Best Options For a Standalone Offline Printing Station?
You may have missed the part about how he has no internet connection save for the Chromebook's integral LTE modem.

If not for that little hiccup, your solution would be quite adequate. If you do that this way, you run the risk of having to courier all of your father's print jobs to him. :p

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary saftey deserve neither liberty not saftey." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759