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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Tell me why I should care.. (Score 1) 285

Part (nowhere near all) of the problem is that when a hospital writes off millions in uncollectable bills, what they're doing is saying "Well, we can't collect on this. We still have to pay our bills though, so being unable to collect on this means incremental increases in other prices to cover the shortfalls. Or cuts in staff. Or both."

Comment What nonsense (Score 4, Insightful) 539

First and foremost, "Freedom of the press" applies to the government not restricting the press. If a private citizen tells a reporter "Get off my property", it's not restricting freedom of the press. If a web forum says in their terms and conditions that you can't talk about topics X, Y, and Z, it's not restricting freedom of the press.

And if an ad-blocker blocks ads, it's not restricting freedom of the press.

Comment Re:Ia my impression wrong? (Score 1) 510

You're confusing my statement of "I've never heard of it" with "It doesn't exist."

I never said that the term didn't exist. Merely that I hadn't heard of it. Now I have.

Also, compare the length of the wikipedia articles for RINO and DINO. While, clearly, neither are of the length of, say, the article on Optimus Prime, RINO is more than just a stub.

Comment Re:Academic freedom? (Score 5, Insightful) 510

When comparing churches and schools, church is the more appropriate venue for religion, and school is the more appropriate venue for education.

You want to religion taught in schools? Outside of religious schools, the problem becomes "What religion gets taught?", and there's a bundle of problems involved with that.

A few years back, Louisiana's state legislature was trying out the use of school vouchers for religious schools (in addition to secular schools). All well and good until, shock and horror, non-Christian schools applied to be included in that.


That's the problem. If you allow religion and religious ideas to be taught in schools, you have to allow them all, not just the ones you like. Which tends to cause the same people who are pro-Creationism to have screaming fits and chew holes in the carpet.

Comment Re:Dead last? (Score 1) 510

Actually, I think state GDP (which is called GSP) is not necessarily the most accurate metric to use.

I mean, yes, Vermont is last in state GSP, and California is first.

But if you look at GSP per capita (okay, using 2012 numbers here, not 2015 numbers, but I doubt the 2015 per capita numbers are out yet.)

California drops to 17th. Vermont rises to 32nd.

Oklahoma was 29th in GSP, but in GSP per capita, (again using 2012 numbers) Oklahoma drops to 37th.

Comment Re:You sound like a "Science Justice Warrior". (Score 5, Insightful) 510

Here's the problem.

When creationists do after the theory of evolution, they're saying "your science is wrong, because we believe it's wrong."

And while you certainly can attack science that way, as far as the scientists are concerned, that's not a valid argument.

It would be like someone saying "The moon is made of cheese." The logical reply to that is "No, it isn't. We've sent men to the moon. They've brought back moon rocks, which surprisingly, aren't cheese."

But that doesn't work, does it? That person will still insist that the moon is made of cheese, or that the earth is flat, or that they don't believe in that some of science because of their religion or whatever.

Real scientists accept the possibility that they could be wrong. That's part of science. That wonderful moment of "Whoa, that's interesting" when something doesn't go as the models and theories predicted and you try and find out why.

Religion is the exact opposite. If you don't believe the same way, you're wrong. Depending on how fervently they believe, the response to that "wrongness" differs. Look at all the religious wars we've had over that sort of thing for proof of that.

So, excuse the hell out of me for not wanting non-science in my science.

Comment Re:Ia my impression wrong? (Score 5, Insightful) 510

I would say a small part of it is that there is no equivalent to the Tea Party among Democrats. I mean, I've never heard anyone describe a politician as "Liberal in Name Only" (LINO), but you hear the calls of RINO all the time from the right.

It's like they're trying so hard to prove that they're more conservative than the next guy, that it removes options from the playbook (to mix my metaphors a little), because using one of those options, why that means you're a RINO.

So they have to cater to the ultra-conservative core of the party who espouses these views.

Comment Re:Strengths and weaknesses (Score 2) 510

Because these politicians are wanting to teach the non-science in science class along the science and pretending that it's all the same.

It's not. The very nature of science is that we accept that we just don't know. Proof and counter-proof. Falsifiability.

Religion, however, has a long history of "the True Faith", where you cannot question the doctrine.

Comment Re:Trump just says stuff (Score 2) 875

Yep, we're all living under the effects of those nasty executive orders that flat out took away our guns. All our guns. No matter what kind of gun.

Of which, as it turns out, there are precisely zero of those executive orders.

Or how about the imaginary confinement facilities that Obama was supposed to building to round up people during Jade Helm?

More people are worked up over the shit that Obama hasn't actually done, (but it's going to happen, honest!) I swear.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Oh what wouldn't I give to be spat at in the face..." -- a prisoner in "Life of Brian"