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


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale Extended! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 20% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY20". ×

Comment Re:Building new reactors (Score 1) 148

And that's pocket change, really. War on Drugs is costing us $15B/year. War on terror runs about $100B/year. [forbes.com]

You do realize there is a HUGE difference in money that we all spend through the government (See above) and money that private companies spend because they believe that they will make a profit on it (It is cheaper to produce nuke power than it is other power, otherwise please build the other power plants).

Your guess on solar/wind is way off base. The best you could do is get 10-15% from combined solar/wind, so that leaves 65% hydrocarbon/nuke. Yes there are large scale hydro plants, but they only add up to about 7%, you might be able to get this to 20, but I wouldn't like to see the natural disasters that follow. Interestingly solar doesn't even rate a mention (gets included with "Other" at 2.1 percent).

Comment Re:Thanks anti-nuke extremists! (Score 4, Insightful) 148

Yes it is that bad. Imagine having to replace 40% of your electric load generation for Virginia. This is done with 2 nuke plants, probably 5-10 coal plants, or covering the state in solar panels and going dark at night. Now I can't build a new plant - no permitting has been allowed out of the NRC since 3 mile island happened in the late 70s, you can't shut them down or the state goes dark (heck that is probably close to 1/2% of the power generated in the whole country). You have a small group of people that have made building new/retrofiting old reactors a non starter so we are left with 50 year old reactors powering our country for the foreseeable future. The smart thing to do would be to build modern reactors to decommission old reactors, leading to safer electricity and fewer pollutants in our environment.

Comment Re:Not just Texas (Score 4, Interesting) 67

When I was in Texas 2 decades ago, there was a study:
So Texas Judges stand for election - they have to have a reelection fund. They only people willing to pay for a judge to be elected are lawyers who regularly appear before the judge. The study showed that the lawyer that donated the most money to the judges reelection campaign won cases a significant amount of the time.
I always assumed this was the "Polite" way of bribing the judge. Wonder how big the reelection accounts are for judges in east texas

Comment Re:Pretty standard procedure on a large campus (Score 5, Insightful) 284

I'm not even in a large office building. Imagine you call 911 and say please come to the door of "Company". Firetruck shows up goes to the front desk and they don't even begin to know where to send them. Calling security/front desk lets someone who isn't paniced fill in the details on where to go and how to get them to the site of the problem. Complaining that Amazon says to contact security first is stupid and shows that the person writing the article has never worked in a corporate environment in their life or they wouldn't write it up this way...

Comment Re:Non-career benefits (Score 1) 217

(hyper competitive, low paid)

Don't know what your definition of low paid is... Tech jobs tend to be significantly above average, what do you think pays better, a low level customer support job - or a fry cook at mcDonalds? (Low end of the wage scale there). I can tell you among things that require a 4 year degree, Computer Science pays better than Liberal Arts majors, many science majors, and quite a few engineering majors. Yes, it is competitive, yes there are problems... otherwise everyone would do it.

Comment Dumbest idea ever (Score 1) 217

Along the lines of "Everyone" in the USA drives a car so we should all be required to take an auto shop class in High School. The auto shop class at least helps everyone deal with the cars that they have - only a small percentage of people truly need to be able to code, the rest may need to be able to use a computer, and a few people need to be able to hire computer programmers to take the money that they raised from Angel Investors.

Comment Re:Say what? (Score 4, Interesting) 392

The problem is in how the requirements that they were to implement were written. Lets say for example you get a requirement that says - when the hood is up, flip this switch in software, and someone else gets a requirement that says when this switch is flipped, turn on ultra eco mode. Now the software developer that sees the first requirement will never know - when the car is under test - the hood is up and so goes and sets a flag that he has no idea what it does ( Do you know everything that happens in a million line piece of embedded code - I don't think so). The second guy knows the engine performs well, may or may not know that the engine only passes emissions when it is in super eco mode... In fact probably knows very little about the engine (Do you know how the microprocessor works on the computers you work on? I don't think so). Now should both of these people be fired for implementing a circumvention device by responding to completely different requirements.

That said - if the requirements were written so that it was blatantly obvious they were writing a circumvention device, that is different.

Yes, we will be going to OSI, Mars, and Pluto, but not necessarily in that order. -- Jeffrey Honig