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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Where is it? (Score 1) 71 71

That sucks. Jesse Wellens is already pulling in more than a half million a year from his YouTube prankvsprank channel. Did he really need a few extra dollars from extra publicity that he was willing to mess up Hitchbot?

Hey, you can never have too much money!!

Comment Re:American Cities (Score 1) 71 71

You're kidding, right? Sure, there is probably a greater chance of such a thing happening in the USA, but there are plenty of vandalas, morons, and drunk idiots in western Europe too, and it's perfectly likely that some such people would do something similar given the chance. Don't try to make out like Europe is a paradise of civility.

Hey, It's not like the robot got shot or anything....


Comment Re:Mankini (Score 1) 201 201

I think by nature, in general, men are more warm natured than women. I know I've frozen girlfriends out at my home, especially at night when I like it at least 72F at night to sleep well.

But my argument is usually similar to yours. IN that, especially at work......if you (a woman) are cold, you can put on a sweater or something.

But me? I legally can only get just so naked before there's a problem.

Comment Re:Not Totalitarian (Score 2) 69 69

You're confusing "totalitarian" with "authoritarian". Authoritarianism is the lack of limits on state power. Totalitarianism is when the state actually uses that lack of limits to institute a pervasive, total control of the populace in all aspects of their lives. Remember that the word was actually used in its proper meaning in a positive sense by the very people that we recognize as the first conscious totalitarians today: Italian fascists. Mussolini defined it as "everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state".

Comment Re:Why is that illegal? (Score 1) 228 228

Nice try but the NSA has to verify the communications (which they were of course monitoring) were with a real terrorist.

So either (A) you get no money, or they believe you an (B) whisk your friend off to an"unsafe house" for questioning.

You try to find out later what happened to him and you get to visit him in person!

Comment Re:Let the market decide. (Score 1) 436 436

It is not efficient at all to move the whole fire department over to a house just to watch it burn and make sure it doesn't spread to neighbors.

If that's true, then why would they do it if they were privatized? How do you define "efficient"?

It wouldn't be efficient to have two competing fire departments in a small town. It's much better to have a larger one with better equipment.

If it's inefficient to have two competing fire departments in a small town, then why would there be two if they were privatized?

Comment Re:Let the market decide. (Score 1) 436 436

The market will always produce too much energy from polluting sources.

Even a market free of market failures such as negative externalities?

Of course not, but such market doesn't exist.

If it did, would it produce too much energy from polluting sources?

Comment Re:Fun question: (Score 2) 436 436

Unless you can point to or create an objective set of criteria for those "negative externalities" and do so in a way that sets an objective price point for them? It's a nice way of saying that pollution sucks, but way too subjective to actually use fairly.

Here's one example: The cost of air pollution in the San Joaquin Valley is more than $1,600 per person per year, or $6 billion to the region's economy, according to the researchers.

Comment Re:Let the market decide. (Score 1) 436 436

We should also let the market decide if the military and the police are worth paying for.

If we decide that the market should choose the best solution for energy, wouldn't it be a "slippery slope" fallacy to automatically decide that the market should also choose the best solution for national defense and law enforcement?

Comment Re:Fun question: (Score 5, Insightful) 436 436

Or maybe due to negative externalities that weren't properly internalized into the price of energy, energy prices have been artificially low all along, encouraging people to live energy-intensive lifestyles, and now all of a sudden they have to pay the piper.

Nah, that couldn't possibly be true at all.

The gent who wakes up and finds himself a success hasn't been asleep.