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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:better late than never (Score 1) 49 49

The idea isn't to charge them with the cause of the disaster, but with more than a little incompetence that they displayed afterwards - not to mention the often blatant lies they told to the public during the aftermath. Examples include publicly chewing out the Daiichi site supervisor for using seawater to keep the surviving reactors cooled down when that was pretty much all he had to use (given the alternative? Yeah, I'd piss on the things if it helped). Other examples include sending needed cooling water to the Daini site... in drinking water bottles. There's a whole host of other bork-ups, and the blame for the vast majority of them lies squarely on the execs in Tokyo.

So what? What's so special about your accusations that the level of "blame" rises to that of public humiliation? I think instead we see here a prime example of why the culture of responsibility, that Japan is or perhaps was famous for, has such a hard time taking root on "this side of this Pacific". Namely, that a certain culture is far more interested in assigning blame even to the point of blowing minor missteps out of proportion such as you do above, than in taking responsibility or respecting those who do.

And I find it interesting how you respond to a post about witch hunts with arguments based on water bottles. That veers into self-parody.

Comment Re:Give specific technical arguments or go away (Score 1) 109 109

You might have a point if his argument was something more nuanced than "it's hard and I don't understand how it will ever work" with a few marketing = boogeyman slams thrown in for good measure.

It was. You mischaracterize the post in question.

Comment Re:Every new technology... (Score 1) 109 109

So because you can't understand it, it must not be of any consequence?

If you're spouting such straw man platitudes, then you don't know enough about quantum computers to condemn someone else. In the defense of the previous poster, I'll note that there are a number of phenomena that permeate all of the Solar System (gravity, neutrinos, and thermal radiation) that may place an upper bound on the reliability of quantum computing no matter how magical your technology is.

Comment Re:There's Very Few Things (Score 1) 80 80

You tell me. I'm not you, I don't know why you do the things you do. I'm not trying to tell you why you did something. I'm just telling you what you did.

Since I didn't do what you are "telling" me I did, and you are now claiming that you didn't imply this either, then there's no point to this thread. We can communicate or we can imagine things of other people. I'd rather communicate.

You tell me.

No, I won't.

Comment Re:Yes! (Score 1) 296 296

I fear it's something ingrained in humanity, so long as we have the capacity to imagine, it seems possible to become deluded in this particular way given the right conditions.

I think it starts with the idea that one knows best usually combined with a ridiculously oversimplified model of how things work.

Comment Re:There's Very Few Things (Score 1) 80 80

Yeah so? Doesn't mean you can't be ALSO predicting a die off. It's not a false dilemma.

Why would I be predicting that? To claim that die-offs are necessary for prosperity is in my view a non sequitur, another sort of fallacy.

China is wealthier and better off than before. Doesn't mean there wasn't a whole lot of dying off on its way here.

Correlation doesn't imply causation. And really, die offs are associated in Chinese history with chaotic periods which don't have prosperity.

Exactly, and I'm saying you have pointed out how there are many people right here on slashdot who show all the signs of walking right into those screw ups, making things a lot worse before they could get better.

That's a lot of vague talk. What are "many people"? What are "screw ups"? And what is "better" versus "lot worse"?

Comment Re:Or let us keep our hard-earned money (Score 1) 566 566

And in other nations, it's a faction of what you spend in the USA.

For the OECD, it's 35% (from countries like Mexico and Estonia) to 70% of the US's spending per GDP (France and Netherlands). It's considerably better than the absolute worst, but it's still a big and growing problem.

If it is a Miracle, any sort of evidence will answer, but if it is a Fact, proof is necessary. -- Samuel Clemens