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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Not much (Score 3, Interesting) 336

by Rockoon (#49747309) Attached to: What Was the Effect of Rand Paul's 10-Hour "Filibuster"?

While I'm proud of my Senator (Wyden) and Paul for attempting to shine a spotlight on the "USA Freedom Act", they accomplished very little. A symbolic gesture for the Congressional records at most.

They accomplished: shine a spotlight on the "USA Freedom Act"

This has to do with knowledge.

Consider the case where I know that something is bad, and you know that something is bad, but neither of us know that the other also thinks its bad. In this case we are effectively loners even though we are not really alone.

Now the case where I know that something is bad, and you know that something is bad, and I know that you know that something is bad, and you know that I know that something is bad. In this case we are not loners by any measure.

You can't change things when you are a loner.

Comment: Re:It's not that great (Score 1) 394

by Rockoon (#49747257) Attached to: The Reason For Java's Staying Power: It's Easy To Read
Personally I like {}'s
Its the ;'s that I could do without.

I actually think VB got this one almost right, with linebreaks separating statements, but has both an operator (:) to separate statements within a line when thats advantageous, as well as an operator (_) to continue statements onto the next line when thats advantageous.

Its really easy to write a bunch of C-style code and miss a semicolon. Its really hard to write a bunch of VB code and miss a linebreak, or have an erroneous line continuation or line separator. One of these is obviously better overall.

Comment: Re:Wou would have thought. (Score 2) 50

by Rockoon (#49739385) Attached to: Martian Moons May Have Formed Like Earth's

In the case of small bodies (such as spacecraft) the atmosphere can substitute for the third body.

No, it can't.

You have found a way to lose enough energy for the object to remain in the system, but have not found a way to then add the energy necessary to put the object into a stable orbit (one that doesnt intersect your "solution" atmosphere.)

To be quite clear: If the orbit intersects the atmosphere this time around, and you dont add energy at some point immediately after that, then it will again intersect the atmosphere the next time around, and the time after that.... it will only take a few orbits until your "captured" object slams into the planet/moon that you claim is "capturing" it.

Comment: Re:Wou would have thought. (Score 1) 50

by Rockoon (#49736361) Attached to: Martian Moons May Have Formed Like Earth's

But why would one small object not simply leave the planet again?

There is no reason that doesnt defy physics for stable orbits to form in the manner suggested for "capture" of single bodies. A force other than gravity needs to be applied.

Not sure why it is so often suggested that "captures" work. They don't unless there is a 3rd body that can be given the energy difference. If this 3rd body then leaves the system then a stable orbit is possible for the "captured" object, but if it doesnt leave the system then its a 3 body problem where the initial conditions preclude the possibility of a stable orbit.

Comment: Re:In other news... (Score 2) 254

by Rockoon (#49733177) Attached to: Energy Dept. Wants Big Wind Energy Technology In All 50 US States

For a couple of hours after being washed with a detergent? No, it doesn't.

I know science is hard and all, so you might be surprised that detergent doesnt kill any molds.

Detergent is not a disinfectant.

Now explain to us why you are acting like an expert when both we and you know that you arent one? You don't get to claim that you mistakenly thought you were an expert... you knew you weren't...

Comment: Re:My god you people need to think about economics (Score 3, Insightful) 1069

by Rockoon (#49733095) Attached to: Los Angeles Raises Minimum Wage To $15 an Hour

Ok, since you have such a great understanding of economics, please explain to me how it's a good thing that the Walton family has more wealth than 40% of Americans (that's 129 Million Americans) combined, yet pays their full-time workers so little that they can't afford food or a place to live without welfare and foodstamps?

The Waltons wealth did not come from their employees payroll. The Waltons wealth is in shares of the company. The company is worth a lot of money and because the Waltons own a lot of the company that makes them very wealthy.

Your argument seems to be: Owners of a valuable company should sell the company and give the money to the employees. Except who is going to buy the company if they too must then sell it and give the money to the employees?

The reason you made this argument is because you are an ignorant fuck that doesnt understand the difference between wealth and income.

Comment: Re:Bye Bye California! (Score 1) 1069

by Rockoon (#49733053) Attached to: Los Angeles Raises Minimum Wage To $15 an Hour

When California falls completely apart and run out of water we'll see who was right....

Their water situation is going to turn out the same way their energy situation did... with someone outside the State in partnership with someone inside the State exploiting the fact that Californias water isnt priced correctly... Enron 2.0

Comment: Re:Pizza shop worker loves Seattle’s new $15 (Score 1) 1069

by Rockoon (#49732999) Attached to: Los Angeles Raises Minimum Wage To $15 an Hour

The only way this could be a more blatant "Conservative" Propaganda site is if they named it Hitler Youth Life

Funny that Nazi Germany had declared that they too wanted to abolish class struggle, played games with a minimum wage, and had the full financial support of the labor unions.

Look up "Labour Front" and you will find the Nazi's, with a high minimum wage, job security, etc..

Still want to call the conservatives Nazis?

Comment: Re:Hmm... (Score 1) 1069

by Rockoon (#49732877) Attached to: Los Angeles Raises Minimum Wage To $15 an Hour

Yes we do manufacture things still, but we are predominately a services economy now. This is a critical point most people do not understand.

Yes and the thing about service economies is that the claim of a "shrinking middle class" goes out the window. An average person (aka middle class) can always trade a days worth of their labor (directly, or via proxy like money) for a days worth of another average persons (aka middle class) labor.

Of course, it doesnt work so well if you dont have a skill that other people want to trade for. Thats the actual problem. Raising the minimum wage doesnt increase the value of peoples skills. The least skilled have to perform more labor for the same benefits as more skilled people have to perform.

Raising the minimum wage doesnt change the facts, but it seems to trick a lot of dumb fucks.

Comment: Re:Only Two Futures? (Score 2) 602

by Rockoon (#49726967) Attached to: The Demographic Future of America's Political Parties
Part of the problem in the U.S. is that the Senate is just House 2.0 ever since they changed it to a popular vote.

The Senate is supposed to represent the States, not the People:

Article 1, Section 3: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the legislature thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

Lots of bullshit happened in this country between 1900 and 1920 that strengthened the Federal government at the expense of the States, and this is one of them.

Truly simple systems... require infinite testing. -- Norman Augustine