Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:Social scientists (Score 1) 384

by khallow (#49375093) Attached to: Experts: Aim of 2 Degrees Climate Goal Insufficient

world temp has risen 0.7C over past 10 years we have lost permafrost that has led to the draining of 10,000 lakes worldwide
each year an extra 10,000 sq km of ocean is created from melting arctic ice sheet
in Sept 2005 an area of the arctic ice sheet the size of Alaska vanished.
In 2004 the first ever hurricane in Brazil in the southern hemisphere,
Hurrcane Vince landed in Huelve, Spain, the first tropical cyclone ever recorded in Europe.

So what? Most of this stuff would have happened anyway. This is the big problem with the current debate, too much of it is based on confirmation bias. The real evidence will come not now, but in the coming centuries.

Comment: Re:Only Republicans are too stupid... (Score 1) 74

by khallow (#49372541) Attached to: FCC Chairman: Net Rules Will Withstand Court Challenge

It seem you are implying that corruption cannot happen in the free market without government involvement. The government is a tool, just like guns. The biggest evil bogeymen are the ones that use that tool to do evil, which are typically corporations.

Government agencies are corporations with sovereign immunity.

Comment: Re:Social scientists (Score 1) 384

by khallow (#49372429) Attached to: Experts: Aim of 2 Degrees Climate Goal Insufficient

Until we can produce a case of a planet where the temperature rose 1.5 degrees and civilization got into trouble, then there is absolutely no reason to just go for it and see.

Well, Earth is going to do that. So we'll have our test case. But what reason is there to expect that we'll see trouble from such a small rise in temperature?

What ever happened to scientific curiosity? Doesn't anybody want to know what will happen if we heat up the planet?

Last I looked, scientific curiosity hasn't gone anywhere. It's still there, should you decide to reach for it. And add me to the list of people who would like to know, beforehand, what happens when we "heat up the planet".

Comment: Re:Only Republicans are too stupid... (Score 1) 74

by khallow (#49369615) Attached to: FCC Chairman: Net Rules Will Withstand Court Challenge

so a free market requires government regulation

No, a free market requires regulation, but it can self-regulate as well.

but again, this is an argument against corruption, not against government. again, the problem with regulatory capture is large market players corrupting the rules. so you want to heal your sick government, not weaken it further, thereby giving large market players yet even more ways to abuse you. and they will

This argument doesn't make sense. Corruption happens because governments and their agents have power that they can readily monetize. So it is better to give them more power that they can monetize further? Or perhaps convert to even nobler coin such as establishing a tyranny?

but certain people, they just utterly lack the awareness that the government is not the only evil bogeyman in the world. many times in fact, like regulatory capture, the government isn't really the ultimate bogeyman, but just the front for the real villains: plutocracy

They are by far the biggest, evil bogeymen out there.

Comment: Re:Social scientists (Score 4, Insightful) 384

by khallow (#49367443) Attached to: Experts: Aim of 2 Degrees Climate Goal Insufficient

Conservatives need to come to the table with solutions

You need problems first in order to have solutions. For example, this article is about how 1.5 C rise in temperature is supposed to be bad with all sorts of "negative impacts", but there's no actual evidence for the claim. Providing solutions to non-problems doesn't help anyone.

Nor do we have a sane plan for keeping temperature rise below 1.5 C. Note that you won't get the US, China, Russia, or OPEC on board.

Comment: Re:The true sticking point - China (Score 1) 147

by khallow (#49363977) Attached to: Russia Wants To Work With NASA On a New Space Station

But you remember Ukraine ONLY, not North Caucasus, not Volga region. Why?

Because most of the deaths were Ukrainian as reported by Wikipedia's sources. And Ukrainians would have died elsewhere than just in the Ukraine. A lot of people had been moved around during this period.

Second, I find it interesting that considerable argument has been put forth that there was a weather/climate contribution to the Holodomor, but no one can say what this contribution was. Along this vein, I see no evidence that Romania was suffering from this famine despite being right next to the Ukraine. Instead, their cereal production was higher in 1933 (which would have been the peak of the famine) than in 1932, despite a nasty economic depression.

Comment: Re:The true sticking point - China (Score 1) 147

by khallow (#49363741) Attached to: Russia Wants To Work With NASA On a New Space Station

1) "Terror" famine in 30-s was EVERYWHERE in USSR. There are some territorial variations of famine but they are depended on structure of agriculture, not on nationality. Being a grandson of kulak I know these facts from my parents.

Those "territorial variations" ended up with Ukraine getting much harder than anywhere else.

2) The famine was result of mass exchange of grain to Western industrial technologies, and destruction of peasantry created masses of hungry industrial workers. Both were needed to survive WWII.

This is an interesting rationalization. We have here the bald assertions that Russia had to starve Ukrainians in order to have industrial technologies and that there had to be "destruction of peasantry" resulting in "masses of hungry industrial workers" in order to survive WWII.

The US went through trying times too during that part of history, but they didn't have to starve millions of an uppity ethnic group in order to survive those times.

Comment: Re:The true sticking point - China (Score 1) 147

by khallow (#49363599) Attached to: Russia Wants To Work With NASA On a New Space Station

Actually, there's nothing really secret about TDRSS.

They're encrypted, TDRSS communications is routed through US military infrastructure, and the US military is the primary user of the system. There might not be much secret about the TDRSS system and protocols, but a lot of stuff associated with it is secret (in the sense of (IMHO legitimately) classified as secret).

Comment: Re:The true sticking point - China (Score 0) 147

by khallow (#49363103) Attached to: Russia Wants To Work With NASA On a New Space Station

That is the sticking point - USA, a racist country, doesn't want anybody from China to get into space

No, the US, a racist country, doesn't want its stuff stolen by China, another racist country. Given that the US already works with Russia, Japan, and the ESA countries, which are all racist countries, I'm sure something can be arranged. Probably what would happen is that the relatively secret stuff that the US has on the ISS like the communication system (TRDSS) will either be opened up or a few wheels will be reinvented in order to eliminate a good portion of the stuff that China would want to steal.

Moving on, I think the real problem with this concept is how badly the ISS turned out. It's an awful lot of money spent for little outcome. I suspect that the parties involved would both want a bigger and flashier space station than the ISS, would want the US to pay most of the cost, and there would be the same massive inefficiencies, vast cost overruns, and corruption as were present in ISS

Comment: Re:Stark disconnect (Score 1) 42

by khallow (#49360763) Attached to: Taxpayer Subsidies To ULA To End

Somebody stepped back and realized that it might be good that X does some things differently.

Let's not get hasty here. There's a reason I'm a fan of SpaceX, but not of the ULA. Sure, you might be right. But it also might be a way for the ULA getting to compromise SpaceX's competitiveness, at least in Air Force contracts.

How can you work when the system's so crowded?

Working...