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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Nonsene, both of you! (Score 3) 463

The one thing that you two probably agree with, the one thing that polls have shown like 80% if Americans agreeing with, is that the Patriot Act is nonsense and needs to be repealed. Yet, over 99% of the elected representatives seems to want the Patriot Act passed.

What do you imagine this is all about, then? Why do you think there's such a discrepancy?

My running theory is that it has nothing to do with political parties or oppression. The elected officials support the PATRIOT Act because they're cowards. They believe that the American people are stupid and fickle, and that even if 100% strongly support repealing the PATRIOT Act, those same people will still blame their elected politicians for "not doing enough" when the next terrorist attack comes.

And they're right to believe it. There will be another successful terrorist attack. There will. Someday, under some circumstances; it's only a matter of time. And when it happens, no matter what the circumstances are, the general populace will panic, and they'll do all kinds of stupid things. And the funny thing is, you might not realize this unless you really pay attention, but the general populace has no memory. It doesn't matter how much they disapprove of the PATRIOT Act now. As soon as there's a successful terrorist attack and they're scared and confused, they'll be absolutely irate that we aren't spying on more people more often. They won't have any idea why the NSA stopped monitoring all of our phone calls, but they'll be angry at anyone involved in putting an end to it.

I mean, if you talk to people now, nobody was ever in favor of invading Iraq. Go ahead and ask people, and they'll get upset and say they don't know why we went in, but it was a big mistake, and they always knew it was a mistake. Or they'll say they were tricked. But back when it happened, it was popular enough that representatives were afraid to oppose it. At least some of those people are mis-remembering. Same thing with all of the deregulation going on during the Clinton era, which everyone seems to have conveniently forgotten happened during Clinton's presidency. Everyone remembers that they economy grew under Clinton, but everyone forgets all the deregulation and Walmartization going on at the time.

People have no memory and no principles, so they're just running off of whatever they're feeling at the time. Our elected officials tend to base their policies on irrational fear and bigotry because those are the most consistent and trustworthy feelings.

Comment: Re:suckers (Score 1) 127

Does the "relatively small amount that we do know" include how adding CO2 warms the Earth's surface?

Did I say anything of that nature here?

Your despicable habit of attempting to attack me at every turn, and trying to turn everything into a discussion of "Greenhouse Effect" will not be forgotten.

By the way... what ever happened to your comment to me here on Slashdot that you only expected to live a few months? That was many months ago. Dishonest much?

As I stated to you before, my position on the physics from long past may not necessarily be related to my current position... but your insistence on persistently dragging up bullshit from 5 years ago only serves to muddy the waters, and makes me not want to discuss it with you.

As I told you very clearly, on many occasions: I will not debate this topic with you, because you refuse to discuss it impersonally, logically, or even honestly. I have many recorded examples I could cite, if I cared to do so. But I'm not going to bother. It will all be written up, eventually.

Comment: Re:Exodus (Score 1) 680

by Jane Q. Public (#49806809) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Happens If We Perfect Age Reversing?

When more cosmic rays leaked in, the climate didn't change.

I concede that nucleation via cosmic rays is at this time theoretical, but heck... so is warming via CO2.

But that's all irrelevant. The point I was making was that cosmic rays and solar irradiance have (on average) a very different makeup of components.

Comment: Re:Not a snowballs chance! (Score 4, Informative) 209

by Jane Q. Public (#49806051) Attached to: The Patriot Act May Be Dead For Good

"... it looks like the Patriot Act will be gone by Monday morning."

Correction: key provisions of the Patriot Act. What most people call "the Patriot Act" was actually a collection of bills and laws, only some of which were part of the Patriot Act itself.

So yes, technically most if not all of the Patriot Act would expire... but there are other sibling laws that need to go down in flames, too, before the damage done will really be repaired.

Comment: Re:It won't die (Score 2) 209

by Jane Q. Public (#49806029) Attached to: The Patriot Act May Be Dead For Good

not that i see a problem with that in the slightest

Let's also not forget that Obama ran for office on a platform that included "I will stop domestic spying."

And as soon as he got into office, he did the opposite. As OP states, he called on Congress to pass the so-called "Freedom Act", which was really anything but. It was worse than the original in some ways.

Comment: Re: And...and... (Score 1, Insightful) 148

by Jane Q. Public (#49806007) Attached to: Let's Take This Open Floor Plan To the Next Level

Thus combining rigid control with a complete extraction of personal dignity. Sounds about like what upper management is aiming for.

Honestly, what it reminds me of is government a la the Progressive Left:

"Hmmm... that didn't work. So let's try more of it."

4 years later:

"Hmmm... that didn't work. So let's try more of it."

Comment: Re:Coding: Language Skills (Score 1) 306

Learning to code is like learning a second language.

As someone who knows (with varying degrees of proficiency) English, French, C#, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, and VB.NET... no it isn't. Human languages are WAY harder to learn, both in terms of having far more information, and in terms of being highly irregular and unpredictable (and that's not to start on trying to understand people pronouncing things quickly and slurredly). I'm still crappy at French after 15 years, but I've learned several programming languages to a decent degree, even as an adult.

Comment: Re:Exodus (Score 5, Informative) 680

by Jane Q. Public (#49797159) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Happens If We Perfect Age Reversing?

As we leave the solar system radiation should decrease the further out we go.

Just no.

You are confusing Solar radiation with cosmic radiation... and they are largely very different things.

The "solar wind" is largely photons and other, relatively low-energy charged particles from the sun. (Note the word "relatively".) Which is GOOD for us here on Earth. Because cosmic radiation has a much larger component of HIGH energy particles. The solar wind interacts with Earth's magnetic fields in such a way as to shield it from the cosmic high-energy particles.

But it's the cosmic high-energy particles that penetrate far enough into the atmosphere to ionize particles of matter, which form nuclei around which clouds form. So... high sunspot activity generally means fewer clouds, which in turn means it gets hotter. When "solar storm" activity is low, more cosmic rays leak in, forming more clouds, cooling the weather.

Unfortunately, it is these high-energy particles which require the most shielding. And in general, cells are more prone to damage than radiation-hardened silicon chips.

Comment: Re:Threatens security (Score 1) 102

by Jane Q. Public (#49793161) Attached to: Do Russian Uranium Deals Threaten World Supply Security?

Again total crock of shit. Australian Uranium export laws Not only is mining totally and strictly regulated (no matter who the hell owns the mine, they can not even stick a shovel into the ground until approval is gained from local, state and federal government), it can only be sold to countries the Australian government has specific agreements with and is restricted to energy use only

100% irrelevant to the topic I was discussing, which was ownership of U.S. uranium interests by Russia. Not only is Australia a completely different continent, its politics are also completely different. Similar in some ways, but definitely not the same.

It is the US government that is seeking to directly control the mining and export of 'AUSTRALIAN' Uranium because 31% of worlds resource and Australia already exports Uranium to China and the US. There are a whole bunch of Uranium resources yet to be touched.

Again, completely irrelevant to the topic under discussion. If I lived in Australia, I'd object to sales to China OR the U.S.... but especially China.

Comment: Re:suckers (Score 1) 127

Nuclear is not the only solution, nor is it particularly attractive when solar can achieve the same goals, without the side effects.

How do you claim absence of side effects?

Solar farms are already observed to fry birds and blind pilots. Not to mention the huge amount of landscape they consume. And in high latitudes, not only to they take up even more (and more ecologically sensitive) area, they aren't even usable a good part of the year. In my area, they don't even come close to competing with other sources for cost.

Comment: Re:suckers (Score 1) 127

This has been studied and the result was that there is a localized heating effect in a small area immediately downwind of the wind turbine which is rapidly lost in the noise of the already-chaotic system in precisely the same way that the butterfly effect is bullshit â" if an entertaining thought exercise.

This causes me to think you haven't understood what the Butterfly Effect actually is. It says that slight differences in the initial conditions of some nonlinear systems can have a profound effect on later outcome. It doesn't apply to all chaotic systems by any means, nor does it necessarily mean a persistent change... just a big one. Nor, just off-hand, would it seem to apply to your windmill example at all.

You might be interested to know that the Butterfly Effect has made a profound contribution to weather and climate modeling. Without it, we would not know even the relatively small amount that we do know.

The name "Butterfly Effect" was intended as an analogy to how it works... it isn't to be taken literally. But it does work, and is observed in the real world. If you doubt that, I strongly suggest you avoid flying in a modern jet.

Comment: Re:Leaders (Score 1) 110

If they don't know what they are doing, then why are they the leaders?

I disagree with others here. If they say they don't know if their organization has the talent to succeed, then indeed they don't know what they're doing.

Especially those who think their IT dept. is incompetent. What that means is (A) they are wrong, or (B) they are right... which in turn says they made bad hiring decisions and should clean house.

What sin has not been committed in the name of efficiency?