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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:What a fucking clueless claim! (Score 1) 370

No, Germany doesn't export when they want to any more than France does.

They can always just turn off 2.5 GW of generating facilities or blackout 2 GW of their country's demand when they don't have enough to go around. So sure, they don't "need" to have a functioning country-wide grid.

And I see that you don't address why France's electricity costs less than Germany's electricity.

Comment: Re:Wow total distopia (Score 1) 327

by khallow (#49564303) Attached to: The Future Deconstruction of the K-12 Teacher

Those who state they hate public education impose costs on public education that don't apply to private, then laugh as people complain about the rising cost of public education.

They don't have the power to impose a factor of three multiplier on public education. You'll have to look elsewhere for that.

Comment: Re:What a fucking clueless claim! (Score 1) 370

It's ABSOLUTELY the opposite.

I disagree. of course. The reason is that these transactions all occur at France's convenience not Germany's. The Scandinavian countries with their high reliance on hydro are really the ones making a killing here.

Morons like yourself and the OP bleat on about how renewables can't be put in more than about 20% because (well, "because", really), but it's really nuclear that can't manage high fractional production.

We are already seeing the problems with Germany's system with huge arbitrary surpluses and deficits that have to be pushed into other countries and an electricity cost double that of France.

Comment: Re:Least common denominator (Score 1) 133

by plover (#49563093) Attached to: Has the Native Vs. HTML5 Mobile Debate Changed?

Connectivity is huge, but it's only one of the ingredients in making this decision.

If you want the app to work for them outside of the corporate WiFi, you have to host it on the public internet, where all attackers are equally welcome without regard to skillz or skripts. Are you sure that server is secure? What about tomorrow? Are you patching it? Are your users securing their devices properly? Uh oh, it's the new version of Heartbleed, go back three spaces.

You also have to consider performance. Is this something that your users will use constantly for their jobs, or occasionally for some rare piece of info? If it's going to add one second to every screen, and you're asking people to tap their way through 600 screens a day, the inefficiency is going to cost you 10 minutes worth of payroll per user per day. Maybe you make that up in hardware costs if you force your users to bring their own smartphone to work. Maybe the sluggishness just makes your users miserable throughout the day. Or maybe it simply costs you a lot of money.

On the other side, if it's used perhaps once or twice a day by 2000 people, poor performance and connectivity issues won't be nearly as important as savings on developer costs and time to market, Or if you have only a half dozen heavy users, perhaps you're willing to eat the payroll cost of an hour per day instead of spending them on development.

It's a question best answered by the money.

Comment: Re:ESPN delenda est (Score 3, Interesting) 277

by mrchaotica (#49562979) Attached to: ESPN Sues Verizon To Stop New Sports-Free TV Bundles

Most of the shopping channels get on your cable system though having a local TV transmitter. Cable companies are "required to carry" any and all local over the air stations. It was the "deal" that was made to allow cable systems to exist, many decades ago. So you are going to get those no matter what.

[Citation needed]

I mean, that's true in theory, but in practice, since the [OTA] digital switchover, the cable company where I live has been getting away with downgrading stuff that would be 1080i with an antenna to 480p (unless you pay an extra bribe for them to leave it HD), and omitting broadcast subchannels entirely.

Comment: Re:Why would a non-sports person have cable? (Score 4, Insightful) 277

by mrchaotica (#49562725) Attached to: ESPN Sues Verizon To Stop New Sports-Free TV Bundles

If I could have gotten a cable package without sports channels (which would have been much cheaper than anything actually offered), I might actually still have it. As it is, the cable company lost me as a customer in part because of their dumbass deal with ESPN.

Comment: Re:But it doesn't work (Score 1) 51

Manning would almost certainly have been caught regardless. All those State Department cables could only have come from someone with access to the entire database. That's a reasonably short list of people, and everyone on it would have been grilled and inspected from head to toe.

His (her) talking about it just made the inevitable happen faster.

Comment: Re:danger vs taste (Score 1) 484

by plover (#49562133) Attached to: Pepsi To Stop Using Aspartame

I'm much more cynical, and I don't think Pepsi is giving in to anyone. I think they're trying to exploit people's fears that "OMG chemicals bad". It's more like they're advertising "We're the only brand that dares to print arsenic-free on our products."

I think the real problem with Diet Pepsi and Pepsi Max is that they taste more or less like regular Pepsi. Their advertising slogan may as well be "Pepsi - for when you can't afford actual Coca-Cola."

Comment: Re:You're not willing to pay (Score 1) 255

Also, yes, we do buy more than we used to buy. That is called keeping the economy running, and if we weren't buying all those gadgets and trinkets and things *you* don't think are necessary our economy would be in even worse shape. As for the credit card debt, if wages were at least keeping even with what they have historically been people wouldn't have to fall back on so much credit debt now would they.

So what happens when credit cards are all maxed out and people have to lower their spending? Why companies will have to lay off people, leading to even less demand, leading to more layouts, and so forth until the economic tailspin turns into an outright economic and social collapse. Yet no company can unilaterally rise wages to ward off this disaster, because even if it made them more competitive due to a workforce that wouldn't hate them quite so much, the shareholders would complain, since the money could be going to them instead.

If only there were a party who could simply order everyone to rise wages, like it or not, to meet some kind of minimum standard high enough to keep the market working. Or, even better, simply pay a minimal income unconditionally to everyone.

Comment: Re:With the best will in the world... (Score 1) 370

If your neighbour starts selling you electricity for nothing it makes your own plant less profitable, but you have to keep your own plant around because your neighbour is not a reliable resource.

[...]

For example Germany is exporting 2.46GW to France at the moment, but between midnight and 4am it was importing about 2GW of French nuclear because there wasn't much wind.

What is the price of the electricity that Germany exports versus what it imports? Sure, cheap power from Germany makes French power less profitable. But buying more expensive French power at other times on an impromptu basis makes French power more profitable. And from what I'm seeing, it's a net profit for France.

France seems to have been given the job of keeping everyone on an even keel.

Which is a typical market maker position and tends to be very profitable.

Nothing succeeds like excess. -- Oscar Wilde

Working...