Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Corruption? In Russia? (Score 2) 94 94

You don't like the numbers that have been published but have no facts to support what you would rather believe so you attack the reputation of the source of the numbers as your fallback. Have you considered pursuing a career as a lawyer or politician? You would fit right in.

My point is that you have no facts either, just the rantings of one of the most corrupt politicians in the House (which is ironic, given that we are talking about corruption...) You did not provide any sources for Mr. Issa's claim - and neither did the Post article you cited. In fact, the same article provided another (unsourced) number that was less than half what Mr. Issa claims.

Moreover, the article you linked was not written by the Post itself, but by some "senior principal analyst" at a company that specialises in government contracting! Do you think that maybe claiming that their competitors are missing billions of dollars in "waste, fraud and abuse" might just be a marketing ploy?

Comment: Re:Corruption? In Russia? (Score 1) 94 94

I would love to see your evidence of this as the GAO would be out of a job if they left that much waste.

Have you heard of this thing called a search engine? You should try it.

Here is just one article that came up as the first result on Google: Federal government continues to lose billions to waste, fraud and abuse

If you have any more questions you can ask Darrell Issa who chairs the House Oversight Committee whose committee was investigating said fraud and reported the numbers given.

I have serious doubts that Darrell "Benghazi!!!!" Issa would know corruption if it bit him in the nether regions. And before you go all partisan on me, you should note that the list of dishonorable mentions on the same page is balanced between the parties.

Comment: Re:Huh? (Score 1) 278 278

doesn't conservation of matter pretty much guarantee everything is just recycled?

* internet advises people to drink 2-3 L of fluids per day.
* 365 days per year, 70 year lifespan -> 70k liters -> 70 m^3 over lifetime.
* 7b ppl alive today. Everybody alive today will drink 500 m^3 of fluids.
* the handwavey estimate is that half of the people who have ever lived are alive today. if this is true, then the entire human species has drunk 1000 m^3 of water.
* the volume of the ocean is 1.3 10^9 km^3 -> 1.3 10^18 m^3.

so even if no water has been recycled, there are a billion trillion liters of water in the oceans that have never been drunk by humans.

I think your math is rather off...

7e9 x 70m^3 ~= 500e9 m^3 x 2 = 1e12 m^3

But yes, that is still a tiny fraction of 1.3e18 m^3.

Comment: Re:Dodos are us! (Score 1) 55 55

I've heard that Dodos were delicious. I'm for getting them unextincted and setting up a fast food chain. Gotta think of a good name though, something catchy.

Actually, no they weren't! Apparently thy were killed by dogs more than people for meant. And we all know that dogs will eat just about anything...

Comment: Re:Both own half. (Score 1) 374 374

Why not ship the frozen fertilized ova to another star system w/o any humans on board? Once they arrive at their destination, robots should be able to handle growing them in a gestational tank and decanting them at the right time.

I have a vague memory of reading about a natural experiment where something effectively like this happened (wolf children?) The children were basically insane because they missed parental bonding.

Comment: Re:It's my choice to kill my kid! (Score 1) 616 616

The issue is also whether you allow society to dictate what medical procedures are performed on your body.

Lets not forget the fine history of unethical human medical experimentation in the United States. And people think we should just give the government carte blanche to dictate medical procedures?

Unbelievable. Something about history, and being doomed to repeat it...

Nice false dichotomy there.

Nobody is dictating what medical procedures you can perform on your (childrens') bodies. Rather, the law prevents them from performing medical procedures (i.e. uncontrolled exposure to dangerous diseases) on unsuspecting victims (i.e. those who can't get vaccinated) in public schools. If you want to perform such experiments, you will now have to do it in the privacy of your own home on victims (i.e. children of other anti-vaxxers) who have consented in some form (i.e. by being ignorant.)

Somehow I find your willingness to subject innocents to known dangers via your private medical experimentation far more disturbing than a slippery slope argument about the government possibly doing so in the future.

Never say you know a man until you have divided an inheritance with him.