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! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 25% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY25". ×

Comment Re:Godwin (Score 1) 593

Only someone totally ignorant of history can seriously think that this is what you are looking at today. Hitler is what we'll get, in 10 or 20 years, if we don't get Trump now.

Here are the three options:

1) The American dream dies. The Anglo-American people lose control of their homeland. (80% of the rest of the world dies of starvation shortly after when the replacements discover that the USA wasn't built on magic dirt.)

2) Something similar to nationalism asserts itself in the US. So far, Trump looks like our best shot. He may not believe it, but he is saying all of the right things, and pretty much no one else is. The Anglo-American people retain their homeland. Globalists are offended and some people are relocated, but essentially no one dies.

3) People like you make quasi-nationalism impossible, and the Anglo-American people decide, finally, when they reach the point of collectively having nothing to lose, not to allow their own genocide. Something similar to ultra-nationalism asserts itself with rivers of blood and mountains of corpses. Think of this as Hitler 2.0.

If you think that Hitler rose to power by whipping the German people into a frenzy of hatred against the jews, you'll think I'm nuts. But consider this, they kept the holocaust mostly secret, even from their own people.

If you managed to learn some history despite your education, you'll see the parallels pretty clearly. The German people turned to their National Socialist party because they were the only people strong enough to stand up to the international socialists (aka Communists).

America 2025 is not German 1925, so there will be differences. But the core story is the same, people facing the loss of their country and the death of their nation rarely go peacefully.

I said quasi-nationalism before because I don't think that we will be looking at Nationalism, exactly, but something like it. The threat appears to be facing all of the west together, and I expect the west to be somewhat unified by it. I say somewhat because I don't expect the EU to survive, nor the meddling internationalist institutions around it.

I personally prefer option #2 by a very wide margin, but I think #3 is more likely. If anyone has a 4th option, I'd love to hear it, as long as it doesn't involve magic dirt.

Comment Want your freedom? Oppose importing terrorists (Score 1) 291

If you want your freedom, tell your elected representatives to stop importing terrorists and the populations that they hide in.

It seems to be that we can pick not more than two from the set (Security, Freedom, Multiculturalism).. Find me another culture, anywhere on the planet, that respects freedom the way we do, or at least once did, and I'll reconsider. Until then, I'm sticking with the evidence at hand.

We have freedom, and we have multiculturalism, and people are realizing that we don't have security. We want security, so we need to choose. Do we get rid of the people that hate us? Or do we get rid of our freedom?

(And yes, I'm aware that "get rid of the people that hate us" includes a lot of people that don't hate us, but are otherwise indistinguishable. Some may be willing to trade their freedom or security for them, but I suspect that most will not.)

Comment flight management (Score 1) 366

Too many tail strikes, and they are 99% avoidable, maybe 100%.

Most likely, in the next generation aircraft, the computer will override the pilot when too much pitch is requested too low.

The plane knows it is taking off, and it knows where the runway is (or a small radar can be added to the tail). "Stick back" will stop meaning "nose up" when the tail gets too close to the ground, and will instead start to mean "moar power". As the ground falls away, it will transition back.

Might not even need to wait for the next generation of planes. This could easily become a mandate shortly after the next tail strike that results in loss of life.

Comment Re:India, Kenya, Paris...where next? (Score 1) 965

If the ATF can get your gun to fire more than once with a single pull of the trigger, they consider it to be a machine gun. Neither the statute nor the regulations allow any exception for damaged, worn or missing parts.

If the disconnector fails (or is modified or removed), as long as you are on the trigger, the hammer will follow the bolt carrier. The recoil of the carrier is what resets the hammer, but the rearward position of the carrier also holds it down until the carrier is nearly all the way forward. When the hammer is held back by the carrier, the condition is called "hammer follow".

Most civilian bolt carriers are milled to expose the firing pin shaft in hopes that a hammer following the carrier home will catch the pin under the head, jamming the action.

If that doesn't work, or if your carrier doesn't have that feature, the hammer will hit the head of the pin when the carrier is nearly finished with forward travel. This is not a full force strike, and the rifle is not necessarily in battery when it happens. The results are unpredictable. Best case is a light strike that leaves you with the hammer down on a loader chamber. Second best case is for the round to fire, which repeats the cycle, but faster than the gun's designed rate, leaving you sooner or later with a spent casing that can't get out of the way fast enough, or a new round hung up in the action, or both. Third "best" is catastrophe: disassembly of your BCG and/or upper.

So, in one sense, fiddling with your disconnector could leave you with the type of machine gun that can get you into bad legal trouble, but it will in no way leave you with the type of machine gun that you can rely on the fire one or more rounds.

Comment Re:So much for the gun control and gun free zones (Score 1) 965

Take your blinders off.


And the NRA is not exactly quiet about this. They have a radio news program and every episode includes news stories from around the country about defensive gun uses. (They also cover insane plea deals that repeat criminals get.)

Suicide remains a non issue. Suicide rates by country do not support the gun ownership hypothesis, and even if they did, misbehavior by group A does not justify violence against group B.

Comment Re:India, Kenya, Paris...where next? (Score 3, Insightful) 965

Nothing personal, but it bugs me to see this particular urban legend repeated. Tampering with your disconnector will just make your gun jam. It may fire two or three rounds before it jams. If you want the thrill, and the prison sentence, just leave the disconnector out. No need to ruin the part.

To convert to full auto for real (don't do this unless your find yourself in the middle of a zombie apocalypse, or some other situation that you fear more than you fear spending 10 years in prison):

First, obtain a full auto fire control group. Readily available over the counter. If the rest of your kit is mil-spec, you just need the auto-sear, it's axis and spring. You may need different parts if not mil-spec: hammer, trigger, disconnector, selector and bolt carrier. You may also need to mill out your fire control pocket, or get a different receiver.

Second, obtain the means of locating the axis hole and drilling it square. Jigs are, again, readily available over the counter. So are blueprints, drill presses and CNC machines.

Third, and this is the part that lands you in prison, drill the axis hole. Drill undersize and finish with a reamer if you want it to be nice, but roll pins can tolerate a little slop. Congratulations, you have now illegally manufactured a machine gun. (There are ways for this step to be legal, which don't apply to you.)

Fourth, assemble your machine gun and use it wisely.

Fifth, destroy it when you are done, if you haven't been caught yet. If your receiver is aluminum, use a hydraulic press to fracture the casting into at least three pieces, or melt it in a smelter. If steel, cut in three parts with a torch or some other method that leaves a jagged irregular kerf. Bandsaw won't work now that the ATF considers a receiver to be intact if it could be welded back together.

Consult a lawyer before performing steps 1 and 2. As far as I know, no one who stopped after #2 has ever been charged, but some people speculate that it could show intent.

Regarding American carry, I'll say that they went 0 for 2 at the Draw Muhammed event in Texas. Last night in Paris, 4 attackers apparently killed 100 people, one by one. In many public places in America, 2 or 3 of those 100 would have been armed. Not much can be done about the opening salvo, but armed men don't normally wait for their turn to die while those around them get picked off one at a time. The body count might have been much lower, and the worst case is none higher.

Comment Re:How will that "professional organization" be... (Score 2) 607

First, the unions killed themselves. They became rich and powerful while solving the problems they were created to solve, and then the bosses decided they wanted to stay rich and powerful, so they couldn't fade away when their work was done. They abandoned fighting for their workers in favor of fighting for mandatory dues. Populist organizations, like unions, must support the people that support the organization. When they stop, they weaken. If they also turn evil...

Second, the immigration mess is a central plank of the Democrat platform, and the secret desire of a tiny sliver of the Republican party, which, sadly, includes most of the federal officeholders for the last few decades. It went too far, and now the core of the Republican party is reasserting itself against the "leadership". Note that most primary polls have establishment candidates getting less support than the margin of error.

(If the Republican base is able to drive our their progressive parasites, the country will return to sanity peacefully and in short order. If not, brace yourself for the shitstorm.)

Also, you have cause and effect reversed. The fall of the unions did not enable immigration, immigration eroded the foundations of the unions. Teddy's immigration bill passed in like 1965. Not coincidentally, wages have been stagnant or falling since around that time. The unions should have been fighting tooth and nail against it, but instead were busy shoveling money towards the people who caused it, Teddy and his Democrat friends.

Comment Re:It was that way (Score 2) 167


A major source of cost escalation in some plants was delays caused by opposition from well-organized "intervenor" groups that took advantage of hearings and legal strategies to delay construction. The Shoreham plant on Long Island was delayed for 3 years by intervenors who turned the hearings for a construction permit into a circus. The intervenors included a total imposter claiming to be an expert with a Ph.D. and an M.D. There were endless days of reading aloud from newspaper and magazine articles, interminable "cross examination" with no relevance to the issuance of a construction permit, and an imaginative variety of other devices to delay the proceedings and attract media attention.

But the worst delay came after the Shoreham plant was completed. The NRC requires emergency planning exercises for evacuation of the nearby population in the event of certain types of accidents. The utility provides a system of warning horns and generally plans the logistics, but it is necessary to obtain cooperation from the local police and other civil authorities. Officials in Suffolk County, where Shoreham is located, refused to cooperate in these exercises, making it impossible to fulfill the NRC requirement. After years of delay, the NRC changed its position and ruled that in the event of an actual accident, the police and civil authorities would surely cooperate. It therefore finally issued an operating license. By this time the situation had become a political football, with the governor of New York deeply involved. He apparently decided that it was politically expedient to give in to the opponents of the plant. The state of New York therefore offered to "buy" the plant from the utility for $1 and dismantle it, with the utility receiving enough money from various tax savings to compensate for its construction expenditures. This means that the bill would effectively be footed by U.S. taxpayers. As of this writing, there are moves in Congress to prevent this. The ironic part of the story is that Long Island very badly needs the electricity the Shoreham plant can produce.

Comment Re:Stupid (Score 1) 167

The capital costs are high because we choose to let them be high. The materials and labor of building a nuclear plant are a small fraction of the cost of building one. Most of the money actually spent is spent on delays. No design changes are allowed, no matter how trivial, without regulatory approval, which takes time. But even that pales in comparison to the legal fights. Every challenge, no matter how frivolous, gets their day in court, usually their year in court, and like whack-a-mole, as soon as one case is won, the next is ready.

Note that you cite power plants designed in the "early and mid 2000s" being cancelled in 2010-2012. A plant designed in 2005, for example, should have been producing power for a year or so by 2010. It should take 3 years to go from "we need to build another plant" to generating power. Maybe 4.

This has actually been studied in considerable depth, if you'd care to search for it. The watermelons know that delays kill the economics, and they have scores of friendly judges willing to aid them.

Congress could bankrupts the solar, wind and natural gas industries in January 2017 if they wanted to, just by barring sympathetic courts from hearing the speedbump cases. (Note that this power is explicitly enumerated in the Constitution, but rarely used.)

Nuclear reactors are cheap to build, but very expensive to get permission to build.

Comment Re:That's easy (Score 1) 278

By that logic, is there anything that the federal government would be barred from doing? Or, backwards, why would the framers write a big list of things that the federal government is allowed to do, and include a wildcard in that list?

These were very well educated and rational men. Why would they bother spending all that time debating and writing a lengthy document when "do whatever you want" would have been so much shorter and simpler?

Comment Re:I heard it differently (Score 1) 469

Like you say, the 10mm cartridge was uncomfortable for some, so they were shorting the loads. Eventually someone was going to realize that they could just shorten the case, rather than leaving them half-empty.

Despite my rambling, the point of my post was that it was a political decision, rather than a practical one. The details of how they got to the .40 is interesting, but the only real merit of that cartridge is that it allowed the FBI management to avoid admitting that they should have picked the .45 in the first place.

A 45 frame doesn't need to be much wider than a 40 frame, or a 9mm, for that matter. These cartridges differ by just a few mm in width, like under an 8th of an inch. Multiply that out by a stack, and the single-stack ammo capacity for a given grip length is going to differ by a few.

The real differences show up when you get to the projectile mass, which increases with the third power of the radius, rather than the first power. Getting the muzzle energy of the .40 into the same neighborhood as the .45 means that you need to run very high pressure, which beats the hell out of the gun, and your hand. Even with +P+, the 9mm can't get there safely, and that's with modern metallurgy.

Since this is /., and we all love car analogies, I'll say that it is like ripping a 2x4 with a Dremel rotozip, a circular saw, or a table saw. Any of them will get the job done, but the table saw (the .45) gets it done with ease, while the others will take some effort and cussing.

The 45 has recoil, but it is gentle recoil; a polite shove vs. a violent slap. I can shoot my 1911 clone (steel and thermoset grip, no rubber) all day, but after a couple of magazines of .40 or 9mm, my hand is done, even with rubber grips and pads. I can barely imagine the dedication needed to put enough rounds downrange with one of those to become proficient.

P.S. Thank you for the intelligent and well-written reply. I was groaning when I read the other guys talking about how round X penetrates and/or expands better than round Y. As if that was a property of the brass or the powder instead of the bullet... Hint guys, shoot some water jugs with Federal HST out of a variety of calibers, or at least watch the gazillion youtube videos of people doing that, before you say something silly.

Programmers used to batch environments may find it hard to live without giant listings; we would find it hard to use them. -- D.M. Ritchie