Some kids are motivated by good grades, some by getting a good job, some by money, some might even be demotivated by those things.* Setting up a one-size-fits-all system (grades) and then inventing punitive solutions for those that aren't thus motivated isn't addressing the root problem.

The only people that have the knowledge and ability to motivate the children are the parents. The problem then is how to motivate the parents. There are probably a hundred ways to do that but my ideology would suggest tax breaks/penalties for each child that does well on yearly SATs. I'd suggest that the incentives should be balanced by disincentives, so that its cost neutral, or nearly so.

Even if it did cost the government more upfront, hopefully that would get offset by higher tax revenue once the children graduate...

Setting up a system like this would be relatively simple. The tricky parts are properly handling the edge cases (learning disabilities, etc.) and hardening the system. (better motivated children might feel more pressure to cheat)

* http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2467658&cid=37660992

This is a shameless plug for their own book. (required course material) Is this legal? At any rate, if this is the ethical standard exhibited by their professors, then how can I how can I in good faith hire their students?

yup, excellent point. Although another poster correctly stated the similarity with solar sails its also close in concept to the Mini-Magnetospheric Plasma Propulsion concept or M2P2.

All analogies are flawed at some level, often proportionate with the author's level of understanding. :)

wait... some one counted all the grains of sand? The discrepancy is likely that you are filtering based on sun-like stars. A technological civilization may need a sun-like star, but algal lifeforms probably don't.

Posting propaganda from the websites of the companies in question is not a great way to further an argument on Slashdot. I don't disagree with you statement that TFA is trollish, however BPs token investment in renewable energy is minuscule in comparison to it enormous revenue stream. a ratio of about 4:1000 or 0.4% To call BP an "alternative energy company" is disingenuous and really just green-washing; which is especially irritating given BPs history of environmental transgressions (illegal dumping on Alaska's North Slope, Prudhoe Bay oil leak, Texas City chemical spill, and the recent deep water horizon catastrophe)

Since we are alluding to popular references to Brian Greene, I thought I should insert an obligatory, and relevant xkcd link: http://xkcd.com/485/

Calling it a kill switch is disingenuous, something that is 98% dead isn't really.

Traditional propaganda doesn't work on the internet. (Thus the attempt to shut it down)

News organizations rely on the internet to receive images/video's testimonies for first hand witnesses which are still very important to getting the message out. (Thus the silencing of AlJazeera)

I'd submit that the effect of the 'net cannot be overstated.

Honestly, this is the best analogy I've ever read on slashdot.

--Why on Earth do you think we haven't considered business continuity?

Fully considered? You haven't no. By co-locating everyone you are increasing the impact of otherwise small events.

--Is there *any* business which doesn't tend to put large groups, if not all of their people in the same place for most of the time?

Businesses which have proper risk management strategies. Most militaries and NGOs, organisations that regularly deal with risk

--You should really get out of your basement.

Zing. Nice ad hominem. Point to you. I'm cut to the quick... I'm off to find my encyclopedia, maybe it has an entry for boondoggle...