Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Broader implications for health care (Score 1) 626

by fyngyrz (#48889333) Attached to: Should Disney Require Its Employees To Be Vaccinated?

There are those who say we should not be responsible for seeing to it that the least-earners among us have health care, sick days, etc. But that whole petri dish thing... that's the result.

Joe the McDonald's window guy has flu/whatever, but he can't take a day (or 3 days) off (might not be allowed to, but can't afford to anyway so, the former is moot.) So Larry goes for lunch, and comes away with whatever Joe had as a bonus. And that goes on all day, for several days. While everyone else in the McDonald's catches it too, thereby extending the event even further, basically until every employee's immune system have handled the problem. And of course, there will be the occasional person who can't manage it -- for whatever reason... compromised immune system, preexisting disease process that complicates matters, old age, whatever. For them, matters can be much worse.

Either we admit that we need to take care of everyone, for everyone's sake, or we'll just keep running into situations where transmissible diseases have far more chance to spread than would otherwise be the case.

Odds are excellent that the only thing unique about the Disney event is that someone noticed it. Most people have probably been on the receiving end of such "petri dish events" many times. Anywhere you have a person with a transmissible disease in a condition suitable for transmission (usually not the entire course) that faces the public, the potential exists.

Anyone in that state should be in bed, properly isolated and medicated. Every time that doesn't happen, we're just shooting ourselves in the foot.

Comment: Say... (Score 2) 115

If the car is really dirty, the heck with washing it. Just turn it in and have it reprinted. :) Ok, maybe not. But:

Reprint if you have a fender-bender. Hailstorm. Cat climbed in an open window and sprayed your seats.

Just reprint the car. Love the idea of having it melted down and re-using the material(s.)

I suspect the feds will have something to say about safety issues, though.

Comment: Re:Good news (Score 2) 409

by phantomfive (#48886811) Attached to: Disney Turned Down George Lucas's Star Wars Scripts

It obviously won't really be Star Wars; it won't be the story Lucas wants to tell, and will instead be some sort of mass Hollywood shoveled shit designed to appeal to the modal average and draw in dollars.

Indeed, it's hard to see how this will be different than Star Trek, or Transformers.....

The dialog in the three prequels was not the best, but from a story perspective, can you imagine JJ Abrams even attempting to write the story of a nice kid becoming an evil dictator? Then turning it around to show he wasn't pure evil?

Hopefully Lucas will release his proposed scripts.

Comment: Re:More proof (Score 1) 661

by phantomfive (#48886515) Attached to: US Senate Set To Vote On Whether Climate Change Is a Hoax
Given that the models overestimate the warming, choosing the low end is justified.

It's fair to consider the high end, though. Once again, a meter won't have people snorkeling in their houses. As mentioned, continental drift and rebound from the last ice age account for more change to the coastline than global warming (continents move around 2cm per year with continental drift). Add to that natural erosion, sediment, etc, and AGW is not the most important effect on most coastlines.

Comment: Re:They already have (Score 1) 661

by phantomfive (#48886135) Attached to: US Senate Set To Vote On Whether Climate Change Is a Hoax
No true scientist, eh? If you want to find other examples, do a search yourself. It's not hard, I merely picked the first three that showed up.

In any case, the fact that there is a hiatus, and that the models are all wrong shows that there is something in the environment that is at least as strong as greenhouse gases, that the models (and scientists) are unaware of.

Also note that to get the high amount of warming predicted, CO2 wasn't enough (which will add ~1 degree of warming by itself). It was required that there also be positive feedbacks that amplify the warming, in some cases dramatically. The scientific case supporting the feedbacks is not anywhere near as strong as that supporting the initial CO2 impulse, and the initial CO2 impulse is not nearly as dangerous as the feedbacks. CO2 by itself is unlikely to cause any serious harm.

Unfortunately most of the research has gone into looking for positive feedbacks. It's not surprising that scientists have a bias in one direction or the other; the scientific method is a way to counteract that. We predict, we measure, and the measurements tell us if our biases were correct or not. The measurements are crucial.

Incidentally, Trenberth is fairly well-respected as a climate scientist.... he was twice a lead author of the IPCC report, and has won awards and honors in his field. So you can't discount him that easily.

Comment: Re:No way! (Score 1) 502

I will definitely be making a post with my findings. Right now I am focusing on understanding the need that systemD fills. Clearly there are a lot of stakeholders involved in system startup (system admins, normal users, distro packagers, even Android), so I am trying to figure out what each of them want before critiquing the solution.

As for systemD itself, it's patterned off of launchD, which I find interesting. You can see an explanation here. The part I find interesting is how it manages dependencies: you don't have to explicitly list every dependency of a server, but rather when something connects to a service, launchD starts it right then. LaunchD takes advantage of the excellent inter-process message passing abilities of the OSX/Mach kernel.

There are red flags also. For example, Poettering started by converting the build scripts to C, explicitly because it was slow. He said, "grep must get called 70 times in my script. Think how long that must take, accessing disk, loading libraries, etc." This is an example of "the root of all evil is premature optimization." If he'd measured before starting, he would have found that calling grep 70 times takes a fraction of a second (on my laptop, anyway). And indeed, when he was done rewriting everything in C, he was disappointed to find it didn't go much faster.

Also, I think binary logging is moronic, but that's been hashed out in many places and you probably already know about it. Apparently some people like it.

I'm kind of reticent of writing posts as I go along because I may change my mind once I understand the purpose of something, or why something is written in a certain way, but maybe I can put a disclaimer on top that it's a work in progress and don't take anything I say seriously?

"If there isn't a population problem, why is the government putting cancer in the cigarettes?" -- the elder Steptoe, c. 1970

Working...