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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:That's not the only way it's inferior (Score 1) 279

AFAIK, the F16 and F15 never had Naval variants. Or STOL.

The F-18 obviously did have a naval variant. We've had exactly one VTOL/STOL aircraft, the Harrier, so that's largely an unknown. Regardless, adding those capabilities to a basic airframe is far easier than designing and procuring an entirely different plane.

The F-22 would have been a great carrier plane, it would have provided both interceptor and strike roles nicely. Sadly, sanity has not prevailed.

All that said, the most basic definition of "multirole" is fighter versus bomber, and in that context what I said is entirely pertinent.

Comment: Re:That's not the only way it's inferior (Score 2) 279

by Glock27 (#48682305) Attached to: Newest Stealth Fighter's Ground Attack Sensors 10 Years Behind Older Jets'

The last major attempts for a "one size fits all" muti-role fighter was the f4 which resulted in the services abandoning the approach in favor of the F18, F-15, and A-10. Like a bad penny the multi-role fighter concept just keeps coming back. We are ending up with a plane that does everything and will not be able to do any of it particularly well.

I see you've conveniently forgotten the F-16, which is the plane the F-35 is succeeding. The F-16 has been a resounding success. Whether that translates to the F-35 remains to be seen, but the precedent is there.

The F-15 and F-18 are also highly successful examples of multirole aircraft, FYI.

I do wish the F-22 production line hadn't been shutdown, it could have been a very successful export to Japan and the US could have bought a few hundred more.

Comment: Re:Mod parent up. (Score 0) 552

by Glock27 (#48677963) Attached to: Paul Graham: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

While I believe that you intended that as a joke, it actually reflects the reality that he missed.

Becoming a programmer requires that a certain amount of infrastructure exist to provide the education necessary. So , no, we aren't talking about 95% vs 5%.

Secondly, the companies pushing for more visas are NOT doing it because they're looking for the best and the brightest from around the world. They're doing it to drive the price of programming down.

It's fucking PROGRAMMING. It can be done ANYWHERE in the world. If company X wants to hire the top 20 programmers in India then they can do that. And those programmers can work from home (in India). They are the best, right?

I have no problem with the idea that bringing the "best and brightest" here to the US is good - meaning the top 10% (or even 5%) of talent. Those folks will innovate and start companies, boosting the overall economy and status of the USA globally. The problem with the current immigration push is it's bringing in millions of basically unskilled people, at great cost to the USA. That's essentially treasonous.

I also agree with you on the point of bringing in "regular" developers to drive the cost down. That's a bunch of crap, and has been for decades.

We need to kick out the current group of political clowns sending us down the drain, and get back to policies that actually help most people here in the USA.

Comment: Re:Let me get this right (Score 1) 839

by Glock27 (#48175505) Attached to: Bill Gates: Piketty's Attack on Income Inequality Is Right

You need to read about the "prebate" aspect of the Fair Tax. It eliminates the regression that concerns you.

In fact, most of what you wrote is so far off base, you should just go read about the Fair Tax at the source, so you can discuss it intelligently.

The current tax code consists of 73,000 pages of regulations, requiring a giant, intrusive bureaucracy, an armada of tax preparers, and a fleet of tax lawyers. It is unfair, and it is broken. Just imagine if all that effort, and all those people were put to productive use instead of accounting.

Comment: Re:Let me get this right (Score 1) 839

by Glock27 (#48167265) Attached to: Bill Gates: Piketty's Attack on Income Inequality Is Right

That's very simply a bunch of crap.

With a consumption tax, it's up to you how much you are taxed. It rewards saving and investing much more than our current tax system. It would also get rid of the inequity between income tax and capital gains tax, which benefits the wealthy a great deal.

It would boost the economy immensely, and eliminate several forms of double taxation we "enjoy" now. It would also eliminate the IRS, and government snooping into every aspect of our economic life - that is a huge win as well. (Not to mention the billions saved on tax preparation and related activities...)

Comment: Re:Headlines for the next week: Global Warming a l (Score 1) 635

by Glock27 (#47912195) Attached to: Extent of Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches Record Levels

Sorry, but El Nino isn't cooperating.

Actually, given the likely solar activity we're going to see for the next twenty years, I fully expect a cooling trend of some type.

The right policy prescription is pretty simple - ton of research should go into cheap, clean energy sources like LFTR. Displacing coal power with clean energy is a win regardless of climate issues.

Comment: Re:How much money are we talking about? (Score 2) 387

by Glock27 (#47862511) Attached to: Unpopular Programming Languages That Are Still Lucrative

Actually I think you're more representative of someone who's making a lot of money working with an unpopular language.

C++ has fallen way down the charts, and I'd be willing to bet fewer than 10% of those writing software today are writing C++, especially using recent/advanced features. You're making good money because you're using one of the more difficult and painful languages out there. :-)

Sooner or later a superior language that fills the C++ niche will come along, then it will go to a truly legacy status...finally.

Comment: Re:LOL SteamOS (Score 1) 294

by Glock27 (#47805689) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Linux-Friendly Desktop x86 Motherboard Manufacturers?

Must be some kind of masochism. I really can see no other reason why people insist on getting wiped by MS time and again.

Right now Sony is eating Microsoft's lunch with PS4 actually.

I think SteamOS has a good chance of doing well, especially given how close Linux is to MacOS. Mac marketshare is picking up, so hitting both with (more or less) a single port is attractive. Various game engines are also making cross-platform a lot easier.

Windows has had its heyday, it's definitely on the decline going forward.

Comment: Re: The Heartland Institute (Score 1) 552

by Glock27 (#47465569) Attached to: The Last Three Months Were the Hottest Quarter On Record

The same process that reduces Arctic ice (warming), increases Antarctic ice (warming).

That is one hypothesis, and an unproven one.

The difference is that the sea ice in Antarctica comes from the land.

No, almost all of it comes from freezing seawater.

Also there is some increase in mainland ice in Antarctica due to the increased moisture in the air (also due to warming) as normally Antarctic air is dry like a desert.

Right, it never snows in Antarctica...the miles-thick sheets of ice appeared by magic. Got it.

Regardless, both places are losing ice in the long run.

That of course remains to be seen. Also be clear on sea ice versus landlocked ice. Some parts of the antarctic icecap are growing.

Adding Arctic sea-ice coverage to Antarctic sea-ice coverage to say that everything is ok is just trying to spin the facts to suit your politics.

No, it's an objective look at polar sea ice based on the only directly measurable metric. Your interpretation of that is exactly that - one interpretation. Furthermore, you should reflect (oops, bad pun) on the fact that the additional antarctic sea ice increases albedo and thus has a net cooling effect - the same argument used to say that arctic sea ice loss is increasing arctic ocean heating.

The science is quite clear.

No, the science is not clear. What is clear is the desperation of those shouting "the science is settled" while stubborn reality continues to contradict the beautiful theories and models. :-)

Comment: Re: The Heartland Institute (Score 1) 552

by Glock27 (#47465505) Attached to: The Last Three Months Were the Hottest Quarter On Record

Try looking at actual data []. That's the RSS data, which is inherently better than spotty surface station coverage in that it directly integrates the entire lower troposphere. That's a slightly negative trend that's going hard on twenty years...all with CO2 levels worth panicking over according to some.

Ok, what makes the RSS data better than the UAH MSU satellite data? If you're ignoring that you're just cherry picking.

Nothing in particular. Here's the last 10 years (you know, the 10 years with the highest CO2 levels in history) of UAH data, showing a dead flat temperature trend. The point being, warming has definitely paused on around a decadal time scale. Will it last longer? That's a very interesting question. Solar activity, despite being near a maximum in the 11 year cycle, is low. The interesting thing is that the next cycle (forecast to begin roughly around 2020) is predicted to be extremely low - so low that a sunspot will be a rare event for 12-15 years (weak solar cycles are also longer). Such low cycles have historically been associated with quite significant temperature drops. So, we may in fact see flat or declining temperatures through 2035 or longer. That will be quite a shock for the alarmists if it works out that way. :-)

BTW, it may not be only lower solar irradiance that's responsible for lower temperatures, there may be other effects having to do with the solar wind and/or the solar magnetic field.

The fact is that RSS is using an older satellite for their data and may have some issues with deteriorating orbits and sensors that aren't properly accounted for.

Citation? My understanding is that RSS and UAH are two independent analyses of the same data. The relevant Wikipedia article contains no mention of such a thing...

At any rate, this chart shows the close agreement between the two datasets.

Comment: Re: The Heartland Institute (Score 0) 552

by Glock27 (#47461225) Attached to: The Last Three Months Were the Hottest Quarter On Record

I'm repeating a few things others have said in reply to your post but adding on here to help fill up your /. side bar... 1) Like the first guy said, your chart shows sea ice area is clearly near the bottom. The summary says "trending near", not absolute lows. So you proved that point for them.

It can't be "trending near" if the trend is up from the low. Right now it's 15% higher than it was in 2012, or 810,000 km^2 in absolute terms. It's perilously ;) close to 1995 levels.

2)Your temperature graph shows quite a bit of white but on the whole, there is a lot more red tint than blue, especially considering the scale is over +/- 10C. Ask any 5 year old what the main color is for the ocean and they'll say red. Its obviously abnormally warm.

As I pointed out to someone else, almost all of that is well north of the region where hurricanes form - and hurricane formation is what the summary addressed. There is also something called "natural variability" which can cause quite large anomalies at times, and which has nothing to do with humans. Finally, as I said before, the baseline for the SST anomalies is completely arbitrary - there is nothing to say it's "normal".

Every now and then I go down your "informed skeptic" rabbit holes to make sure I didn't miss anything in my personal conclusion that AGW is real and a problem, but every time the data YOU present always ends up refuting your point. Whats your game in all this?

Reality. What's yours?

FWIW, I do support a large scale conversion of coal electric generation to nuclear - I think that's a reasonable point of compromise for the alarmists. :-)

Comment: Re: The Heartland Institute (Score 0) 552

by Glock27 (#47460967) Attached to: The Last Three Months Were the Hottest Quarter On Record

everything you said has been debunked by actual facts.

No, it is NOT true that temperatures have been essentially flat.

Well, putting it in bold clearly means you're right...not.

Try looking at actual data. That's the RSS data, which is inherently better than spotty surface station coverage in that it directly integrates the entire lower troposphere. That's a slightly negative trend that's going hard on twenty years...all with CO2 levels worth panicking over according to some.

The sea ice is only a "rebound" because its being compared to the previous year which was THE LOWEST SEA ICE EVER RECORDED.

2012 was the lowest (due mainly to a weather phenomenon, not climate in particular. 2013 was the rebound year, and this year looks to be continuing the trend. Will the long-term decline resume? Personally, I doubt it based on solar activity, but we'll see...

Thank you for the public service of displaying your ignorance, now go away.

I'll leave it to the readers to decide who's ignorant (or brainwashed:).

As for your Slate link, it's addressing one specific article. It makes the tired "the heat is hiding in the ocean" claim, which has not been verified whatsoever. How has the ocean been heating (imperceptibly) for almost 20 years while the atmosphere stays the same temperature, pray tell?

You might also want to reflect on the fact that while the Arctic ice has been generally on the decline, Antarctic sea ice has been at record extent this year, and global ice as a whole is around average...

I'd rather just believe that it's done by little elves running around.