Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Might as well start calling him President Trump (Score 1) 242

If the contest ends up being Trump vs. Clinton, my vote is automatic Trump, without a second thought.

But how do you know Trump is a good candidate if so far he hasn't proposed a single policy, good or bad. And no, saying, I would go and talk to Putin and get along is not a policy proposal, neither is claiming that Mexico would pay for the wall without explaining how would this come about... I might as well claim you are going to pay my mortgage and solve my debt problems.

Comment You might be right, I was/am split. 3-way, he wins (Score 0) 242

You might be right, I hope so. A solution assumes that sufficient candidates drop out, though. Two or three reasonable candidates may split the reasonable vote all the way to the end. Cruz and Rubio are similar enough that they could stay in to the end and have 40% for Trump, 60% of voters who'd prefer EITHER Cruz or Rubio. In which case Trump wins the nomination, even though 60% wouldn't have picked him in any two-way race.

Trump has been loud enough that everyone either likes him or doesn't, by now. Not a lot of people are going to change (much like Ron Paul was). I don't like him all, but I'm not sure which of the other candidates I'd choose yet. Except for Rubio's stance on domestic surveillance, I could easily vote either Rubio or Cruz, and Kasich may be okay (I haven't checked him out much).

Comment Re:Banks should still roll a joint for you (Score 1) 419

Since when are banks that issue payment cards no longer willing to let a cardmember add a joint account holder?

Why would I want to become an authorized user and have her card show up on my credit report? The current system works very well.

Then perhaps that bank needs to Discover some cardmembers that aren't you.

LOL...with as much money as I've made off them? Not a chance. They've done many things to annoy me, but I've made about $2500 off them in the last 6 months alone. I can deal with separate accounts.

Very convoluted trail you are leading me down to avoid cookies.

Comment has good Mars info (Score 1) 524

Mars is of course getting a lot of attention lately, so the Mars section on is pretty good. Most of it in the Mars is pretty straight, without arguing about global warming, adding adjustments to make the data fit the model or whatever.

I'm sure you can find your way around, but here's one page to start with. Many people are rightfully concerned about measuring the polar ice caps on earth. When reductions were measured in the north* that was considered major evidence of global warming. Here NASA talks about the same thing happening at a much faster rate on Mars. NASA measured the reduction at 3 meters per Mars year.

Note again I'm not saying this effect accounts for ALL or even MOST of the warming on earth. It seems to account for between 15%-60% of it, probably close to 30%. The majority is very likely carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide, with deforestation being a problem we should keep in mind.

* Some say we should ignore the 30% INCREASE in polar ice on the south pole. Polar ice only matters when it fits your campaign pitch, perhaps.

Comment Energy mix indeed (Score 1) 147

> There's an energy mix for a variety of reasons.

Exactly. One big reason is that some of the stable, reliable sources aren't as clean as we'd like (coal, natural gas, nuclear), while the clean sources are either not as reliable (wind, solar) or available only in very limited locations and amounts (hydro, geothermal).

The mix allows us to use the cleanest stuff when and where it's available, then throttle the slightly less-clean stuff like natural gas to meet demand, with something very steady like nuclear providing a base level that meets minimum demand.

If you're interested in the mix, here's a paper that may interest you. Of course all figures in the paper are cited to reliable sources. It seems like _maybe_ you don't care for math at all, and if that's the case this paper isn't for you. If you don't mind just a little math, this paper goes over many different sources in the mix, discussing the costs and benefits of each, and how they can be combined.

The figures for solar-electric have improved a bit in the last 2-5 years, so the solar-electric number in the paper are very slightly outdated. The conclusion hasn't changed though - solar electric is a good supplemental source, not a reliable inexpensive source capable of providing the bulk of of energy needs.

The paper, if you're interested and don't mind some fairly easy math:

Comment Re:So what should we do? (Score 1) 508

The point isn't that one gets into an exotic car and sees something different. I've been in a few card with strange controls for the handbrake, but they are obviously different with pull shafts or foot pedals and releases. This is a case where they made the operation completely different, while looking like a standard control. So someone gets in, looks around, thinks "yep this all looks familiar I can go now" and only finds out later that it is different. Even if they do know, the muscle memory associated with decades of having it work a certain way mean that unless you are paying close attention, it's easy to forget and do the old movement.

E.g., in my Dad's Volvo, I often start the wipers when going for the indicator. It's annoying, but after a few minutes of driving, my brain has adjusted and I'm OK with it. But I make that mistake a few times every time I drive that car, which is only a few times a year. Luckily, that mistake isn't something that can result in a dangerous situation. The worst is that turning on the indicator signal is delayed by a second or two, and I get laughed at by my Dad.

Key operational controls should either work the same, or look and feel completely different to ensure that users' muscle memory doesn't result in inadvertent operation.

Comment My understanding of cubed. Your journal entry is s (Score 1) 147

Your journal entry and some of your other posts indicate that you're an intelligent person.

I'm intrigued why it's hard for you to understand that Y = X^3 means that as X changes, Y changes a LOT. That when Y equals X cubed, a large value X means a VERY large Y, and conversely a small value for X means a comparatively tiny value for Y.

Really, your other posts seem like this arithmetic shouldn't be hard for you. A strong wind has a LOT of power. A light wind has almost no power in comparison. It makes wind farm design a bit tricky. It also means that wind can be a really good way to reduce natural gas generation when the wind is good, and doesn't provide significant power when it's not windy. I'm really surprised you're having trouble with this, you're definitely not stupid.

Slashdot Top Deals

Earth is a beta site.