Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Urgh (Score 2) 501

The first Christian church in history was a festering den of socialism.

This tells me that a lot of "Christians" need to reconsider their politics, or at least their committment to cut-throat capitalism.

Precisesely and he was also a card carrying pacifist. The really funny part is that I still got modded down as "Overrated" for pointing this out his socialist tendencies. I suppose in the minds of Slashdot modpoint wielding christian conservatives, Jesus Christ must have been a militaristic advocate of predatory corporate capitalism....

Comment: Re:Urgh (Score 2, Interesting) 501

Socialism is simply about people cooperating with one another to work for the public good, which might be via the government, but can equally be in voluntary groups - the cooperative movement, for example, is considered socialist by virtually everyone, be they rabid anti-socialist or red hippie alike, yet has nothing to do with government. And let's not get started on unions... Robert Owen, considered by most the "Father of Socialism", had no government role at all in what he was working on, he'd be admired by many libertarians if it wasn't for that damned dirty S word blinkering

I always figured Jesus Christ predated Owen as a socialist thinker which, incidentally, also causes me to be amused over how so many socialist hating conservatives also claim to be devout Christians.

Comment: Re:My opinion on the matter. (Score 4, Insightful) 799

by Savage-Rabbit (#47751281) Attached to: Choose Your Side On the Linux Divide

Everyone hates X, so lets compare this thing I don't like to X. Even thought its obviously very different from X.

A few loud-mouths hate X. Most people who use X don't even know it exists. Those who use X the way it was designed (i.e. network transparency) can't understand why the loudmouths want to throw that away to build something like Windows, when Windows is dying.

I mostly hate X11 because I have to program for it... It's like eating a cactus and washing it down with a whole bottle of Carolina Reaper Chili Sauce.

Comment: Re:could've sworn this was not the case (Score 1) 129

"Because an institution of higher learning prefers its workers to be dumb and uninformed"

No...because an employer pays for their employee's Internet access so they can do the employer's business. It's not like there aren't multiple ways to access the Internet.

In other words people will switch to using smartphones and tablets to access Facebook, Wikipedia, politically correct websites, etc... and nothing really changes. Censorship is a game of Whac-A-Mole that the censors will always loose.

Comment: Re:The roads are designed for flooding in Iceland (Score 1) 69

by Savage-Rabbit (#47704041) Attached to: Iceland's Seismic Activity: A Repeat Show for Atmospheric Ash?

How do these bridges safeguard the airline traffic in Europe again?

The summary mentioned disruptions to air travel AND flooding and as card carrying nerds some of us are interested in the subject of flood proofing infrastructures. This event has the potential to cause a monstrous flood and it would make a unique case study, so go troll somebody else.

Comment: Re:Already happened to sharks (Score 1, Informative) 180

by Savage-Rabbit (#47693413) Attached to: Fighting Invasive Fish With Forks and Knives

Before "Jaws", there wasn't much of a market for shark meat. Then demand picked up. Now, the shark population has dropped so much that sharks are facing extinction.

Isn't it mostly the fins that are taken? The rest is of the shark is mostly worthless and gets dumped in the ocean... free market capitalism at it's finest. It is a pity that most sharks aren't as toxic to humans as the Greenland shark is. Greenland Shark can be eaten but the treatment required to make it edible makes it stink to high heaven.

Comment: Car reliability ratings... (Score 1) 426

For reliability assessments I found the following sites useful the last time I went shopping for a car:

The first one is run by TÜV in Germany (Technischer Überwachungs-Verein, Technical Inspection Association). The ratings are based on 500 car defect reports each, any less and a model does not make the list. The other site is run by Warranty Direct, a British insurance company that sells direct consumer warranties. This site breaks down the faults by components.The sites mostly concentrate on European brands but Ford and Chevrolet are included.

Comment: What do you mean inequality? (Score 5, Interesting) 254

by Savage-Rabbit (#47666179) Attached to: The Benefits of Inequality

I'll take a meritocracy over a completely egaitarean society any time and I suppose that makes me in favor of inequality but I also reject the kind of society the USA has become where a few have risen to the top and roll boulders down on anybody else trying to rise by his own merit. Now feel free to color me radcal but any meritocracy will eventually become a plutocracy which is why bloody revolutions (pandemics like the black death also work wonders) are necessary at regular intervals to level the playing field. I'm not sure that's quite what Thomas Jefferson meant when he said: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" but it's close.

Comment: Re:What's a reboot? (Score 1) 252

by Savage-Rabbit (#47643379) Attached to: <em>Babylon 5</em> May Finally Get a Big-Screen Debut

I know this is heresy but I liked B5 better than most of the Star Wars and Start Trek stuff.

I officially sanction your position. It is not heresy, it's truth. There is certainly Star Trek which is better than anything in B5, but "most" of Star Trek is far inferior.

What I liked about the B5 series was mostly the fact that it had Maciavellian politics and space battles where the fighters didn't fly like aircraft even though they were located in deep space. They made an honest attempt to respect Newtonian physics. I went off the Star Wars series after the "Battle of the Teddy Bears" in Return of the Jedi although I rather like the animated "Clone Wars" series. I never really watched much of the original Star Trek and the Star Trek NG series just bored me out of my scull. The Star Trek shows I watched the most of was Deep Space 9 and Voyager which I rather enjoyed and which is probably even more heretical than saying B5 is better than ST.

Comment: Re:Might cause a re-thinking of the F-35 (Score 2) 275

by Savage-Rabbit (#47632679) Attached to: Long-Wave Radar Can Take the Stealth From Stealth Technology

If it's the case that the Russians and Chinese now have radar systems that remove that radar superiority, the F-35 now looks like even more of a gigantic waste of money

The F-35 was designed to be stealthy, not stealth. It doesn't need to be undetectable, as it's not a strategic bomber, it just needs to be able to get missile lock on it's foes before they get missile lock on the F-35. That doesn't seem like to change any time soon.

While any new military project whatsoever will be ridiculed as a colossal waste of money by the left ("it doesn't cost anything to just be nice to everyone!"), the main problem with the cost of most of the recent programs is a large R&D cost that isn't spread across enough planes/ships/whatever. I'm not the biggest fan of the F-35, but at least the idea of having one plane that will be used for many roles and by many allies keeps the per-unit cost from being insanely high - it's a wise procurement approach in a time of quickly falling defense budget.

It's no longer all about whether the F-35 can detect a Su-35, J-10, etc. with it's onboard radar first or not. Sure, being able to see the opponent on your onboard radar first is an advantage the F-35 has and it is an important one but modern fighters that operate in an integrated and networked air defense system, situational awareness can flow from many different sources these days other than just your fighter's onboard radar. The Su-35, J-10 (or whatever) can give the F-35 a very hard time if it carries IRTS, is connected to a battlefield networking system, backed by AWACS, ground radars and other sensors capable of seeing F-35s and is protected by modern SAMs. The resiliance of such a system is even greater if the missiles fired by the Su-35 can receive mid-course updates from systems other than the launcing aircraft. The Russians already have air to air missiles whose guidance can be handed over to a nother aircraft or a ground or air based sensor system which can be a long band radar since you only need to get the missile close enough to detect an F-35 with the missile's onboard sensor which is what the article is talking about, combining long band radar for situational awareness with short band radars and other sensors for terminal guidance.

Comment: Re:At least the Russians are being upfront (Score 4, Insightful) 167

by Savage-Rabbit (#47586703) Attached to: Law Repressing Social Media, Bloggers Now In Effect In Russia

Unlike the US/NSA.

No, the NSA is monitoring social media and bloggers, in Russia they have progressed from just monitoring to repressing them. I'm in no way in favor of what the NSA is doing but there is a difference between watcing bloggers and telling bloggers they have to register if they get a hitcount over 3000 or suffer the consequences, whatever they may be.

Comment: Re:Technology transfer (Score 1) 184

That time around 2000 with the tank targeting system was a true moment of black comedy when after that US technology was supplied from Israel to China it was mass produced and on-sold to Iran.
However blaming "Israel" for that one is like blaming the USA for Charles Manson - criminals exist and the thing was apparently stolen.

It's a bit more than that, Israel helped China with air to air missiles (as in license production of the Python-3 which was a quantum leap for the PLAAF) and other guided weapons and is also alleged to have helped the Chinese develop sophisticated fighter and AWACS radars, had a hand in the design of some of the latest generation of Chinese fighters and sold them a whole bunch of other technology to do with miniaturized cooling units, Electro-optics, UAVs, and sophisticate sighting systems. A lot of this technology originated in the USA and was paid for by John Q Taxpayer.

Comment: Re:Gee, isn't Iron Dome supposed to be worthless? (Score 2) 184

Apparently the Chinese don't think so. Compared to the American liberal arts community of experts on missile defense, they must be sadly misinformed.

It depends on how you look at it. Iron Dome costs something like 20-30.000 dollars per shot. One of those home built Quassam rockets Hamas uses costs 5-800 dollars per shot, the Grad rockets probably a bit more. It's the same economy as dropping PGMs that start at 15-20.000 per unit (the Hellfire missiles used by the RQ-9 drones cost $110.000 per unit) on five man Taleban guerrilla groups carrying a grand total of 3-4000 dollars worth of equipment (tops). It adds up pretty quickly. If Hamas hoses off enough Quassam rockets the costs start to pile up for Israel but Israel can pay the monetary cost, the political cost of the slaughter happening in Gaza at the moment is another matter and we haven't even talked about the side effects. I was Hamas, now that they can reach Ben Gurion airport, I'd start hosing those rockets off at Ben Gurion in the biggest volleys I could manage. The rockets as such don't do much damage but the cessation of international flights into Israel does, the fact that Iron Dome would probably start to falter under such a load would be damaging to the politicos who sank all that money into it and the fact that Airlines aren't willing to allow their aircraft to fly though a rain of rocket fire to land at Ben Gurion is doing massive economic and political damage. All you need is to saturate Iron Dome and achieve enough accuracy to ensure that a few of rockets reach the airfield perimeter at regular intervals. If you can do that you have effectively obliged anybody flying in and out of Israel to make a stop-over in Cyprus until other arrangements can be made. It would seem increasingly more sensible to just stop this stupid fighting, get over the idea of Greater Israel and make peace with the Palestinians, but that won't happen until Netanyahu and Liberman have conclusively proven that some problems cannot be solved by bombing them and pretty much the same goes for Hamas and their idiotic obsession with destroying Israel. Not that I think that is likely to happen, both sides have been radicalized beyond recovery by their own fanaticism and intransigence.

The test of intelligent tinkering is to save all the parts. -- Aldo Leopold