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


Forgot your password?
What's the story with these ads on Slashdot? Check out our new blog post to find out. ×

Comment By noted sockpuppeteer Lee Siegel (Score 5, Interesting) 1032

Famous for sockpuppeting his own online threads.

Scott Greenfield adds some valuable additional commentary. The horror! He had to drop out of a "small private liberal arts college" and suffer the indignity of attending a public university. And this in an era when tuition was vastly lower than it is now.

I have a fair amount of sympathy for modern college students and graduates who are subsidizing a bonanza of administrators with no attendant benefit to themselves. But for Siegel to set himself up as one with such people is deeply deceitful. He wears his deadbeat status as a badge of honor.

Comment From your description of the problem (Score 3, Informative) 464

I suspect you have a very high correction. My corrections are +1.50 and +1.75 or thereabouts, and I have had progressive lenses for years. They work fine without the problems you describe. My wife, however, has corrections of around +8.0 in both eyes and could never make a go of progressive lenses for the reasons you state. Eventually, she decided on Lasik surgery, which has unfortunately not really gone well -- we're over six months out from the initial surgery and she still needs glasses. She's one of the 1% or so for whom it does not work on the first try.

Good luck.

Comment A blank assertion with no backup (Score 2, Insightful) 720

Maybe the handwaviest hand wave in the history of Slashdot. The author of the introductory text claims McDonald's didn't make the change in response to increasing minimum wage levels, but what is their evidence for this? Citing, for example, banks and ATMs is hardly convincing, because bank tellers are not minimum wage employees.

Comment The obvious solution will meet fierce resistance (Score 2) 488

Pay solar at wholesale rates, or, make grid interconnect a separate fee, and charge them for that. Solar advocates, of course, can't stand the idea they should actually have to pay for the delivery of goods and services, even if it costs them a measely five bucks a month.

The newly adopted fee would translate into approximately $5 for the average homeowner with a solar power installation.

I would be willing to bet that the apportioned capital cost of power plants, maintenance, and distribution alone would amount to a third of a typical power bill.

As long as we're going to reinvent the wheel again, we might as well try making it round this time. - Mike Dennison