Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Polls on the front page of Slashdot? Is the world coming to an end?! Nope; read more about it. ×

Comment: Re:Tubes (Score 1) 226

Your mass prevents it from happening. As you get closer and closer to c, your mass increases, requiring more energy to accelerate you further.

To actually move at c, you'd require infinite energy. You don't have infinite energy, hence you can't hit c.

Now, the trick with the tube would be this:
Take, say, a six foot by six foot square of material. Lets say light can move 3 feet/second, and you can move 1 foot/second, and you want to get a dinky car, represnting you, from the middle of the left edge to the middle of the right edge.

Light will do that in two seconds. The dinky car will do it in six seconds.

Now, pick up the cloth, and hang it over a clothes line. Hook a dinky-car sized flexible tube from point A to point B on the two edges. They'll be an inch or two apart. Light still travels along the surface, and takes two seconds to get there. Your dinky car, however, gets there virtually instantly.

Your car didn't move any faster, you just warped space to decrease the distance you had to travel.

Comment: Re:Military service can be mandatory, can cause ha (Score 1) 545

by SuiteSisterMary (#49750221) Attached to: California Senate Approves School Vaccine Bill

I'd love to hold society to the standard that no child should have to risk death due to parental stupidity. That's just not California. If you really want to uphold this ideal, you'll have to crusade for myriad causes, including gun control, obesity-fighting measures, tighter distribution of driver's licenses, promotion of breastfeeding, etc, etc. On the list of annual deaths in California caused by parental stupidity, lack of vaccination is near the bottom of the list.

All of this is true. However, lack of vaccination will rapidly climb the lists if America's current anti-science, anti-education and anti-logic trends are allowed to continue.

Comment: Re:Since there's no downside, why not go all out? (Score 1) 1093

by SuiteSisterMary (#49743171) Attached to: Los Angeles Raises Minimum Wage To $15 an Hour

I don't think there's a downside to a minimum wage, or at least, not a compelling one.

As to specific implementation details. I really don't know. Not my field. My lay opinion would be that, well, it needs to be tied to the local cost of living and what not, but it would be a bitch to administrate. But no, having the minimum wage in Buttfuck Arkansas and Los Angeles be the same is probably sub-optimal.

I intended more to point out that while a small increase is basically a cost-of-living raise, a large increase will, indeed, likely do more harm than good.

Comment: Re:Military service can be mandatory, can cause ha (Score 1) 545

by SuiteSisterMary (#49734565) Attached to: California Senate Approves School Vaccine Bill

I'd support a bill like this if it also included provisions for criminal charges against parents who 'opt out' and their child winds up having long-term effects, or dying, of preventable diseases.

Say, do you also believe that, say, seatbelts are a matter of personal choice?

Comment: Re:Republicans could... (Score 1) 609

by bmajik (#49727225) Attached to: The Demographic Future of America's Political Parties

So, my ideological transition went from Reagan Republican to Goldwater libertarian to Rothbardian Anarchist.

Personally, I am socially boring, somewhat socially conservative, and evangelically religious. I don't (politically) care what other people do to themselves; as long as they and their government don't do it to me or my family.

I've really given up on government as an entity that can create moral good in the world; it seems that historical attempts to have government play that role have turned out poorly, both for the people involved and the morality being coerced.

I've tried to explain where my head is at so you can try and tailor the message in a way I might understand.

Can you help me understand what the "war on women" rhetoric is about?

Assume that I'm an intelligent person, with degrees in Math and CS, and extensively educated in history, medicine, politics, and economics.

Yet, despite this, I cannot for the life of me understand how people with different ideas came to those ideas via any plausible mental process. It seems to me that there are fallacies all around - why aren't they seeing them?

I want to assume that they are acting with good intentions, but I am unable to debug or understand them and their decision making process.

So, this is a legitimate request for help, and not a thinly veiled attempt to demean or attack someone.

Will you explain what the "war on women" is in a way that will cause me to want to listen? Explain what things are included in this war, and what things aren't.

I mean, my inclination is to throw a flag on the play before it even begins; a political "war on women" appears to suppose that all women should think and want the same things politically, which is self-evidently insulting to women and denies their essential individuality.

For instance, the only people I know personally who are tireless anti-abortion activists (and I know several) are all women. Are they part of the war on women?

I'll stop, and hope you craft a well-intentioned response.


Comment: Re:How the executive wipes away democratic power? (Score 1) 121

by bmajik (#49720249) Attached to: Learning About Constitutional Law With Star Wars

The one thing I want to point out is that you should recognize the name "Cass Sunstein"; he's not some random academic, he was part of the Obama administration, and has a bunch of ideas that you will find either kooky or great, depending on how you align politically:

He's also good about co-opting terms he disagrees with as a way to try and attack intellectual opposition. He calls a bunch of things libertarian that are flagrantly NOT libertarian, for instance.

Comment: Re:Pay Settlments from Police Pension Funds (Score 1) 201

I think the idea is that it would eventually render bad cops uninsurable, and thus, unemployable.

Really, though, these are all suggestions to get around the central issue; cops look out for their own, even in the face of blatantly criminal behavior. It's a cultural issue, more than anything.

Comment: Re:Military service can be mandatory, can cause ha (Score 2) 545

by SuiteSisterMary (#49697155) Attached to: California Senate Approves School Vaccine Bill

Put this another way:
If measles goes through a small town public school with a thousand kids, three of those kids will die. Several will have life-long aftereffects.

If you vaccinate every human being in a large city, *1* will have *some sort* of adverse effect.

If 'reducing possible harm to children' is actually your end goal, there's no way in hell you'd argue against vaccines.

The problem, really, is that there are entire generations who've never seen a playmate die of measles, or have the polio leg braces, or the like.

Comment: Re:Understanding why some people fear vaccines (Score 1) 545

by SuiteSisterMary (#49697119) Attached to: California Senate Approves School Vaccine Bill
Sorry, but that's all on the level of pointing out that dihydrogen monoxide is a universal solvent, causes horrible burns in it's gaseous state, induces tissue necrosis in it's solid state, will suffocate you in it's liquid state, and that excessive doses will cause seizures, among other problems.

Comment: Re:They wore him down. (Score 2) 246

Yes, this. It seems like the logic here is 'to get a gov't job, you must pass a polygraph test. This man taught people how to skew the results of that test.'

Note that the requirement to get the gov't job isn't 'be truthful and accurate when answering questions about things like criminal history,' but 'pass the polygraph.' Validity of the polygraph doesn't enter into it.

The biggest difference between time and space is that you can't reuse time. -- Merrick Furst