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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
What's the story with these ads on Slashdot? Check out our new blog post to find out. ×

Comment Re:Or for slightly less per month (Score 1) 11

Depends on how much you use the car. Drive a brand new car off the lot to the used car dealer across the street, and you'll find the car is now worth about half what you paid for it. It takes a lot of 3.5 krona minutes to make that instantaneous depreciation seem attractive.

Now if you're like most suburban-dwelling American, you spend hours a day in your car, so it just makes sense to buy it, or lease it long-term. But if you lived and worked in Manhattan you'd be nuts to own a car for transportation unless you were a gazillionaire. Just the cost of keeping the car would exceed the cost of renting one on the rare occasions you'd need it.

I suppose most people in Copenhagen are in the same boat. It's far more walkable than most American cities and enjoys excellent bicycle and pedestrian public transit infrastructure. But every so often you and several of your friends might want to take a trip that's a little inconvenient to take by transit. If that's every day several times a day then sure, buy a car. But if it's only occasionally then it doesn't make sense to have a car sitting and depreciating in a garage somewhere.

Comment Re:Alert! (Score 3, Insightful) 52

Exactly. Science is not a democracy. We don't get to vote on the rules of physics, they are what they are even if we agree with them or not.

However we have no way of getting to know those rules except through a social process in which scientists read and argue about each others' research.

Trust me, if the majority of scientists hadn't agreed on Newton's laws of motions you'd never have heard of him. Of course then we wouldn't be having this technology-mediated conversation; we'd probably be throwing rocks at each other instead.

People that believe we should reduce carbon output and also believe that nuclear power will kill us all are rejecting science twice over.

Disproof by counterexample: me. I think we should reduce carbon output and I think nuclear power could be useful, provided that plant developers post a bond to cover the decommissioning costs. I won't bother to address your point about wind power, but I do recommend you take the the drive from Los Angeles to Palm Springs sometime. You might find it enlightening.

A true scientist would admit we know very little about the environment. Anyone that says they've solved the equation is either delusional or trying to sell something. I'm not buying.

And no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.

Just because scientists don't know *everything* doesn't mean they know *nothing*, or that they don't know enough to have a more informed opinion than a layman.

Comment Re:Speed isn't Everything (Score 1) 138

The tax money is/was a loan to get the operation bootstrapped. It's a sunk cost. Tax money is not paying any operational costs at all, so the municipal broadband is on a level playing field with Comcast that got a monopoly for many years to bootstrap it and AT&t which got billions in federal funding (and years of monopoly status) to bootstrap it's broadband offerings.

So no, it REALLY, REALLY (i'm for real about this) is a price vs. performance decision. If the others want to compete, they might want to correct the things that routinely get them at the top of the most hated companies in America list.

I never claimed the states have a functional democracy. Then there's that whole constitutional thing that limits what sorts of laws can exist.

ATM = At The Moment.

Comment Re:Regeneration (Score 1) 194

The reason you're able to live outside the city right now is because fuel prices are insanely cheap, and the cost of transportation is subsidized. If road users were forced to pay for both the entire cost of road construction and upkeep, as well as the pollution problems caused by their fuel usage, transport costs would be much, much higher. Raise gas prices to $10-15/gallon and see how many people continue to live out in the sticks. On top of that, enact strict anti-pollution laws which make it very difficult or even impossible to keep older cars on the road (meaning you'll have to buy a newer car, which means a car payment plus the high fuel costs, though at least you'll get higher mpgs so it'll offset things a little bit), and everyone will be living in the city (or at least a very built-up suburb) except a few rich people who can afford to drive their Ferrari to work from their 100-acre estate.

Comment Re:Three Seashells (Score 1) 194

And let me tell you, I would much rather choose running around naked covered in green jello singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener" than having the only restaurant be a vegetarian Taco Bell.

But are you ready to eat rat burgers? You see any cows around here? Er, wait...

Comment Re:And we care because...why? (Score 2) 201

Bad example with the nail salon thing. How many men have you seen with fingernail polish? There might be a few gay men interested in breathing those fumes all day, but they're likely employed in nail salons (or more likely own them). That field likely is almost-all-female naturally.

The child-care example is quite valid, however. Lots of men like being with small children, but our culture discourages that as they're seen as potential molesters. Another example is primary education: how many kindergarten or grade 1-4 teachers are male? There's simply no evidence that 95% of men have zero interest in being around small children, absent social stigma.

Anyway, I know you're joking about the cartel thing, but there's definitely a stigma about having men around small kids without female supervision, and this really is an inefficiency that's bad for society. Personally I think it results in a lot of women being around kids (because they fill the void basically) who really shouldn't be. As a society, we seem to have this idea that women are all wonderful, caring people when around small children, and it simply isn't true. A lot of them are nasty, heartless bitches and shouldn't be around any kids or have their own. Assuming men are generally bad and women are generally great with kids is bound to result in a bunch of these women taking jobs with children.

Comment Attention contrarian investors: (Score 1) 134

There's a reason they're called "wind farms": like a farms they have good years and bad years.

El Niños come every five to seven years, and then go away. It's called the "El Niño/Southern Oscillation", or ENSO, and we're bound to get the *opposite* end of ENSO some time in the next couple years (the so-called La Niña). So if this news has people dumping their wind stocks, this'd be a great year to buy. Then dump them in three years when the news sounds insanely good.

Comment Re:Story title is nonsense (Score 1) 141

If I were to hire a PR firm, I sure wouldn't want to be supervising everything they do. If I was going to do that, I'd just do my own PR.

If you indeed did that, you may not want to look *too* surprised when your company name is excoriated in the press due to something dumb on the PR firm's part.

Here's a clue: When you hire a PR firm, you do it to get ideas out of them, and to have them do the grunt-work of buying ads, setting up and running booths at shows, order/buy cheap swag on your behalf for your TAMs and reps to give away, and crap like that. Once you hire them, you had damned well better approve everything they do that interacts with anyone outside of your company. You approve the swag, you approve the sales pitches, you approve the ads, you approve the schmoozing of bloggers and journalists so that shit like this does not happen.

It's your company, your brand, your reputation.

Otherwise, Microsoft can point the finger all they want, but they're the beneficiary of the shill-job, so they get to eat the blame when it's discovered.

The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much.

Working...