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:Roberts admits to being wrong (Score 1) 591 591

No big systems go into production that don't have a slew of bugs...of not working according to the intent of the programmers (and analysts, managers and stakeholders).

Apparently it was intended at one time, then discarded. I've done that with logic in programs, too (you make a mass substitution and miss a thing or two, etc).

So a lingering bug from a discarded architecture: what do you think the boss would have to say when you explain to him that "the bug must remain because that was the intent of one of the original, long-gone programmers"?

Comment: Re:The problem is that landfills are too cheap (Score 1) 371 371

I agree, those are the basic categories, and should be communicated to all (yes, I know it should be common sense, but...).

Frankly, when we went to single stream, I rejoiced in it. I had assumed that many of the problems stated in these posts had been taken care, and I'm dismayed that they aren't, or are causing other problems.

Like other posts I've seen here, I feel my utility should do a better job of explaining the issues.

Technology can fix some of these problems, but are more expensive. One thought I have is that, while expensive now, if some of these technologies are good and useful, the prices will come down. And when they do, we'll sell them to the rest of the world.

Comment: Re:The problem is that landfills are too cheap (Score 1) 371 371

You may want to read my reply to an actual (i believe) Gypsy, and mostly what HE wrote!

Well, what your "Gypsy" wrote, was an AC being a smartass. Let's try to keep the stereotypes to a lower level on this site.

we must at least use the right term: theft

Ok, you made your point. I too have (fill in ethnic stereotype here) coming around at night poking through the trash. As long as they don't make a mess I'm not going to go out there and chase them off. "There but for the grace of God go I", etc. I do understand that it can hurt the economics of the local recycling business. I don't really know how to resolve the issue without being draconian.

Comment: Re:$68 Billion for high speed trains (Score 1) 599 599

Instead of spending $68 Billion on a single high speed rail line between 2 cities that are already linked by several adequate transportation options, maybe we should use a fraction of that money for water projects? Moving water to where people live is a simple engineering problem. Why not solve it instead of being a victim of the weather?

Yea to cancelling SuperTrain(tm), Nay to moving water around is simple.

One could say that moving people around is a simple engineering problem.

Having said that, I do understand your sentiment.

Comment: Re:CA water is feeding you ... (Score 3, Insightful) 599 599

The Central Valley and other broad expanses in Ca. used to be bottoms of seafloors. This means it is *outstanding* land for farming, and a valuable national resource. One of the reasons that Ca. is the 8th largest economy in the world.

Cheap water is indeed subsidizing low food prices for the world. That will be changing, of course. I don't expect that we will be "coming over and taking it from" you, we will be paying market prices. At some point people with excess water will be happy to sell it to Ca.

Hopefully it won't happen so quickly as to cripple the 8th largest economy in the world. That might not be good for anybody.

Comment: Re:No boas here (Score 1) 173 173

The bias is actually very visible in the article with the Freudian slip of "send Russians money" instead of "paying Russians for services rendered" which is the actual case.

It's pretty rare for fanboy crowd to slip that badly though. Usually it's at least masked as a more reasonable argument.

Yeah, they forgot the "at gunpoint" whenever talking about govt. (taxpayer) bucks.

The rule on staying alive as a forecaster is to give 'em a number or give 'em a date, but never give 'em both at once. -- Jane Bryant Quinn