Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale Extended! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 20% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY20". ×

Comment Re:"Civilized discourse" is fucking boring! (Score 1) 76

"Civil discourse" does not mean that you are afraid to say things that some random reader might take offense from. You are thinking of "political correctness".

"Civil discourse" implies not gratuitously and unneccessarily insulting the addressee. That need not be boring, but it requires some thought in order to be engaging. There is some real wisdom in a movie called "Blast From the Past (1999)". My favorite quote is:

Troy - 'I know, I mean I thought a "gentleman" was somebody that owned horses. But it turns out, his short and simple definition of a lady or a gentleman is, someone who always tries to make sure the people around him or her are as comfortable as possible.'

Sometimes insult is warranted. Wisdom is knowing when that sometimes is. I wish I were wiser.

Comment Re:Yes (Score 5, Insightful) 353

Just require that every atomic plant owner makes an insurance, for which you require that they have proper securities.

Fine; you've loaded the cost onto the ratepayers, which is just about everyone, so that's not unreasonable, but you have also made some low-life parasitic scum in an insurance company rich as lords, which there is no need or excuse to do.

Let the society as a whole "insure" the plant owners against catastrophes, as they largely do now. Then it's still the same "everyone" paying the cost, but you've eliminated the parasites.

But I would complete the rationalization. I would make society as a whole the builders and operators of the plants. Then you've eliminated more parasites, and profit motives would never intrude into the operation and create lackadaisical, corner-cutting practices.

Tell me this hasn't worked wonders for France.

Comment Re:Yes (Score 1) 353

There is a report by russia today [] that fukushima has cost $105 bn. Greenpeace (which hates nuclear power) claims a damage of $205 bn []. So, the range of nuclear meltdown damages is in the range of hundreds of billions of dollars. Now, the insurance company munich re reports [] that they had to pay $31bn in 2014. I really think that it is doable to scale their business. So basically, there is one nuclear incident every 20 years world-wide. Lets be generous and say it costs around $400 bn. Now, the nuclear industry would have to pay $20 bn every year for such an insurance, world-wide. With a number of 438 reactors [], that's $44 million per year. Energy companies make much much more with nuclear power on reactors in average than this amount, don't you think?

Great research and figuring, but with respect, I don't think the conclusion is warranted. One nuclear incident neatly packaged into a periodicity of 20 years is only an idealization.

What if chance does not smile, and you just happen to have three of those $400 billion catastrophes happen in one year. Or even one of them, but not 20 years after you begin your project, when you have accumulated all the take to pay for it. What if it happens the first year of your plan, when you have practically no take accumulated to pay for it.

I am strongly disposed to think that liability against catastrophes this mind-numbingly severe (also mega-hurricanes, devastating earthquakes, etc) is only feasable to be remedied by society as a whole - a.k.a., the government. As it always has been.

It is society as a whole which requires reliable and plentiful power; let it be society which insures against the catastrophes. In exchange, society gets to set engineering and operating rules. Maybe society in the form of an "operating priesthood", a governmental operating entity like the French have had such success with, should run such a critical industry. It would be imbued with the highest order of training, professionalism, and selfless excellence, and completely isolated from any influence of profit motive whatsoever.

If this offends the religious faith in free enterprise, we need to adapt and open our minds. After all, nobody denies that SOME THINGS only governments can do justice to. Is this not one of those things?

Comment Re:Finding the needle (Score 0) 138

I hope the governments of Australia and especially the UK take note.

The government of the UK is so primitive they don't even have a written constitution limiting their power. They still have a sovereign monarch, for god's sake. The monarch is head of state and commander in chief. The limitations on the power of the monarch consist nothing more than gentlemen's agreements and ordinary laws and procedural rules which could be changed at any time.

Calling it a "constitutional monarchy" is an absurd lie, since there is no constitution.

Comment Re: Disposable screens for disposable products? (Score 1) 225

Dog-cow is the idiot. Math challenged. An OLED bit that is off has literally zero luminance. The same way a 60 watt light bulb with zero current flowing through it has zero luminance. The ratio of an on bit to an off bit is then literally infinite. Infinite in the true mathematical sense.

You can't get that in an LCD due to basic physical reality. Physically realizable LCDs can never block that backlight 100.0%.

Comment Re:This is why ISIS wins (Score 5, Informative) 594

By the way, Russia has a long history of violating the airspace of other nations.

Ha. The USA made a wholesale business of such violations against the USSR with virtually no retaliation in kind. This little-known secret campaign began in 1946. There were losses, killed and imprisoned, kept secret. B-29s and Lockheed P2Vs were used; later C-130s and B-66s. By the 1950s, B-47 bombers were being repeatedly sent on deep penetration reconnaissance missions. Then came the U-2s. Francis Gary Powers' ill-fated spy flight was far from the only such.

All told more than 40 US aircraft invading Soviet aircraft were shot down. Question: can you identify a single Soviet or Russian aircraft which was ever shot down over US territory? As far as I know they have never violated it; certainly not systematically and purposefully.

Incidents of Russian aircraft probing the US which are drummed up as provocative are no more than Russians exercising their perfect right to range in international airspace "near" (gasp) to US territory.

Comment Re:This is why ISIS wins (Score 4, Insightful) 594

Turkey doesn't like ISIS

Bullshit. The western friendly Turkey as reformed by Ataturk is long gone. Erdogan's Turkey of today is being lurched back in the medeival Islamist totalitarian direction, and mark well that he was popularly elected. Turkey now sees everything through Moslem colored glasses. It has no problem with ISIS at all.

You are right that Turkey hates Kurds with a vengeance.

Comment Re:Fork (Score 1) 352

Heck, the whole program should have been re-written in modern-style C++ 10 years ago.

There WAS no modern C++ until 2011. If you don't believe that, just consider that the (only) official smart pointer was the hideous monstrosity of std::auto_ptr until std::shared_ptr, std::unique_ptr, and std::weak_ptr supplanted it in c++11. OK, you could have used boost:shared_ptr 10 years ago, which is what I did, but you can't assume that all projects would be allowed to do so.

e-credibility: the non-guaranteeable likelihood that the electronic data you're seeing is genuine rather than somebody's made-up crap. - Karl Lehenbauer