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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:Those who ignore history... (Score 1, Interesting) 160

by Freedom Bug (#48761485) Attached to: What's Wrong With the Manhattan Project National Park

Certainly, the chances of a nuclear weapons attack have lessened significantly, but the danger is still very real.

Over 10 thousand nuclear weapons still exist, held by 9 different countries (assuming Israel still has them). That list includes North Korea and Pakistan. I don't have to say anything about North Korea. Pakistan can almost be called an active war zone. Putin appears to be deliberately antagonizing the States, and has just had his primary income source taken away from him. Incidents have come to light that even the nuclear weapons in the United States are not necessarily overseen and maintained correctly. Maybe some of the other 8 countries take better care, but I doubt that all do.

Historians have concluded that we've been damn lucky that we haven't already had a nuclear incident. Some things have changed, definitely lowering the chance of an incident, but not enough to lower it to zero.

It's a common human fallacy: it has never happened, therefore it's not going to happen.

Some experts place the probability of a nuclear incident in the next 10 years at 29%: http://nuclearrisk.org/3likely... That's a lot lower than the 10 year risk during the 60's and 70's, but it's still damn high. Even if they're off by an order of magnitude, a 3% risk of a nuclear incident is still damn scary.

Comment: Re:Cheaper (Score 2) 349

by Freedom Bug (#48696171) Attached to: United and Orbitz Sue 22-Year-Old Programmer For Compiling Public Info

You're right: the price of (domestic) air travel has nothing to do with expenses or distance. But that's because the cost has very little to do with variable expenses or distance.

The costs of airplane travel are pretty much fixed. It costs basically the same thing whether there is 1 passenger or the plane is full. Given turnover times, there's surprisingly little difference between shorter and longer domestic flights.

Comment: Space flight failure rate is around 5% (Score 3, Interesting) 165

by Freedom Bug (#48309541) Attached to: Some Virgin Galactic Customers Demand Money Back

http://marginalrevolution.com/...

I could accept a 5% risk of death if I was doing something worthwhile: contributing to science or the colonization of Mars. But for a joy ride? Even if it's an order of magnitude better, a 5 in 1000 chance in death is still pretty high. That's a couple of orders of magnitude riskier than skydiving (0.0007%) or driving 10,000 miles. (0.0167%)

Comment: Re:Misleading- Good will is common accounting (Score 4, Insightful) 255

Waiting 15 years is a better deal than everybody else gets. Everybody else gets to wait indefinitely; most have to realize a loss before it can be claimed. In other words, if you overpay for an asset you don't get to claim a loss until you sell that asset to somebody else.

Comment: Re:which idiot is letting these people fly... (Score 1) 372

by Freedom Bug (#48219709) Attached to: NY Doctor Recently Back From West Africa Tests Positive For Ebola

He won't do it because it would be stupid.

Right now if they ask you at the airport if you've been to Liberia, Sierra Leone or Guinea, people have no incentive to lie, so don't. If you make that illegal, it won't stop them from flying out of somewhere else, it will just make them lie to the immigration officials, making the problem worse, not better.

Comment: Re:Why do free contracting work? (Score 5, Insightful) 1098

by Freedom Bug (#46059473) Attached to: FSF's Richard Stallman Calls LLVM a 'Terrible Setback'

RMS couldn't care less if other companies profit off of his work.

What he cares about is some company taking his work, making it better, selling it back to him and then not letting him hack on it, fix it, port it to unapproved hardware, use it for unapproved uses, et cetera.

If I'd known computer science was going to be like this, I'd never have given up being a rock 'n' roll star. -- G. Hirst

Working...