Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:jessh (Score 1) 397

by Martin Blank (#48918307) Attached to: "Mammoth Snow Storm" Underwhelms

You're not factoring in the number of workers who would not have gone in anyway, the lost productivity from being late due to weather for at least some of those who did go in, potential losses to businesses that didn't shut down completely for paying employees to show up but who had little to no business that day, and the costs associated with personal and property damage due to accidents. It gets complex quickly.

Without government intervention, a lot of people would have simply gone in to work because they were afraid that if they didn't show up, they could be in trouble with their employers. When the city makes the call, it's easier to point to that as a justification, and it's more likely to be accepted by the employer.

Comment: Re:Science by democracy doesn't work? (Score 2, Insightful) 496

by Alsee (#48877703) Attached to: Science By Democracy Doesn't Work

if the same data has been used to claim a warming trend and the same data is used to say otherwise I'd call that invalid data.

The same data has been used to claim men landed on the moon, and that the moon landing was a hoax. Therefore all data related to the moon landing should then be ignored. As it's proven flawed on both counts.


Comment: Re:A question for all the"deniers". (Score 1) 496

by Alsee (#48875839) Attached to: Science By Democracy Doesn't Work

earth is primarily a self regulating eco-system leading to stability

Gaia is living, breathing, self stabilizing organism. Gaia actively maintains optimum conditions for live to thrive. If the sun fluctuates hotter, Gaia will keep us cool. If the sun fluctuates cooler, Gaia will keep us warm. We have released two quadrillion pounds (2,000,000,000,000,000) of CO2 into the atmosphere and the laws of physics say that will trap heat.... and Gaia will.... umm I dunno... but Gaia will do it's super-smart-Gaia-thing to to actively counter it and keep us in a loving protective embrace of shielded stability. If we have a nuclear war, Gaia will cleanse the environment and protect us from that nasty radiation-stuff. Gaia loves all life, gaia loves us and protects us. Gaia loves broadway shows and long walks on the beach. Gaia has profiles on and


Comment: Re:Curiously familiar (Score 5, Insightful) 248

by ColaMan (#48834865) Attached to: SpaceX Landing Attempt Video Released

Firstly, it was considerably easier to do it on the moon. Low orbital speed, 1/6 the gravity, no air resistance on descent, very light lander (as it wasn't pushing 40+tons of second stage to orbit).

Secondly, this stage was doing Mach 8 to 10 at about 80km altitude when it separated from the second stage. They did an extra burn that briefly popped it out of the atmosphere, reversed its course, then did a hypersonic re-entry tail first and (nearly) landed on a 50x60m barge.

Nobody has done that before. Not the guys with the shuttle SRB's, they just fell back to earth (and were strong enough to withstand the tumbling in the atmosphere, being SRBs). Not Boeing with it's dinky little hops of 10,000 feet in a continuously-stable attitude at subsonic speeds. Nobody has gotten this far before with the return of the first stage of a liquid-fuelled booster. Seeing as those things are enormously complex and very expensive, it'd be great to get one back in one piece to use again.

Comment: Re:Predictions have been pretty good, actually (Score 2) 786

by Alsee (#48786009) Attached to: Michael Mann: Swiftboating Comes To Science

temperatures have not significantly risen in the last 18 years.

18 year graph, yes temperatures have risen over the last 18 years.

What you were trying to cite was the was this. If you look at that graph you'll see that the earth has been on a cooling trend line (the straight lines), every year since 1965. Obviously the graph is rising, and obviously all of the cooling trend-lines are completely fictional. That's exactly how denialist websites try to quote that warming has "stopped", when it obviously hasn't. The genuine long term warming trend always breaks the fictional short-term trend lines after a few years.


Comment: Re:Yawn (Score 1) 556

"Science is self correcting, meaning it is flawed. "
no. that's why it isn't flawed. Science is self correcting based on new data. A scientific field isn't complete, but science as a field and method isn't flawed. It would be flawed if it didn't change based on new information.

Comment: Re:Yawn (Score 1) 556

haha. no, read the references. They are pretty much excuse making and cheery picking to confirm their belief.

" And wouldn't the existence, and even the sometimes contradictory accounts of the Gnostic gospels, provide a more evidence of an actual historic figure whose image was "stomped over", rather than one made up out of whole cloth?"
No, why would you think that?

Comment: Re:Yawn (Score 1) 556

Nope. In fact it looks like 'Jesus' is an combination of at least three people. Based on dates of events, location, from different letters.
Of course the bible was written by men how said 'These 12 people are honest, wouldn't lie or make things up, and never checked them.
If you look at cults* and their behavior, you see striking similarity with the apostles, and other religion older the Christianity.

Then it gain political power and the rest is bloody history

Which is why it's alarming that the religious right is gaining so much power.

*for brevity, cult will be short hand for small start up religion

Comment: Re:How to handle crazy (Score 1) 556

But we do not have anything similar when it comes to what caused the Big Bang, ranting about 14D planes colliding and creating ripples like on a pond, without any idea how those planes existed in the first place does not really strike me as a particularly sane argument

If you walked out an say the side of your car smashed in, would it not be reasonable to conclude you had been hit by a car even if you can't 'prove' a car did it?

It's like that, but with math. The fact that you can not understand it, doesn't make it insane. It makes you ignorant in that area.

You can measure a programmer's perspective by noting his attitude on the continuing viability of FORTRAN. -- Alan Perlis