Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:windturbines are not the solution (Score 1) 180

"Did you even READ the links I gave you?
No I did not."

"what is written in it, does not interest me"

I think that sums things up quite nicely, indeed. Basically, you don't want to educate yourself - throwing in an appeal to authority at that (always a weak sign), nor are you interested in any arguments that don't stroke with your biased vision.

Comment Re:Timothy still pushing bitcoin? (Score 1) 267

Bitcoins (the accounting token) is backed by the Bitcoin Network of nodes, software, mining hardware, and all the other stuff that makes it useful. Without the network, bitcoins are just entries in an un-editable database.

This is similar to UPS shipping labels, which by themselves are just sticky paper with some stuff printed on them, of no inherent value. But they are backed by a network of shipping terminals, trucks, and other stuff that makes the labels useful for moving packages, so people are willing to trade money for the labels.

Instead of packages, the Bitcoin Network moves monetary value from place to place, and it does this very well. In one test, it moved some bitcoins halfway around the world, six times, in an hour, for a few cents in fees. The usefulness is why people will trade other money for some units of the accounting token.

Comment Re:Follow the money (Score 1) 267

Transactions only contain the sending and destination addresses, and the amount of bitcoin being transferred. They don't contain any personal information. As long as you don't leak your identity by activity *around* a transaction, they can be anonymous. For example, Coinbase is a company that sells bitcoins to individuals, and you can link your checking or credit card to fund the purchase. So Coinbase knows which coins you bought. But if you buy them in a private transaction from an individual for cash, less info can be revealed.

Comment Re:Establishment clause (Score 1) 275

> A group of native Hawaiians object on the grounds that the land has historic and spiritual significance.

It doesn't. The top of Mauna Kea was used by the natives as a *rock quarry* for stone tools. There is literally tons of archeological evidence of that:

http://www.mauna-a-wakea.info/...

https://photos1.blogger.com/bl...

Comment Re:eminent domain for nice [public] things (Score 1) 275

Eminent domain isn't relevant in this case. The land already belongs to the State of Hawaii, under their Department of Land and Natural Resources. Basically the entire upper half of the Big Island by altitude is a nature reserve. The very top of Mauna Kea is a science reserve managed by the University of Hawaii (another state institution). It includes archaeological sites where natives used it as a *rock quarry* for stone tools, and the area where the telescopes are set up.

Nobody has ever lived up there, because there is not enough rainfall to support farming, and it gets quite cold at 14,000 ft. So there was nobody to kick out. Once westerners brought metal tools, they replaced the stone tools, so even the native quarry shut down.

Comment Re:Unhelpful Whining (Score 3, Informative) 275

> We have no business as a society stopping building on the basis of blasphemy anyway.

Except the top of Mauna Kea was never a holy site. It was a rock quarry, there is evidence all over the top of the mountain. Before Westerners brought metal tools, the natives used stone ones, and the lava that erupted up there during an ice age cooled quickly, making it chip-resistant. So they set up mining camps and dug up the mountain top. They didn't live up there, not enough rainfall to grow things. That's also the reason it is a good telescope site. So the natives commuted from lower altitudes, dug up stone tools, and went back down. Not exactly a religious pilgrimage.

Comment Re:And for what? (Score 5, Informative) 275

> "The planned construction site is on land considered sacred by some Native Hawaiians."

What the *modern* natives fail to mention is that the *pre-western* natives used the top of the mountain as a rock quarry. It wasn't sacred at all. Turns out that lava erupted during an ice age, when there were glaciers on top, hardened rapidly, preventing crystal growth. Crystals fracture more easily, so the lack made for excellent stone tools, which the natives used before westerners brought metal tools.

The top of the mountain wasn't habitable for the same reason it makes an excellent telescope site - very little rain. The altitude also means it's cold, and it is high enough to induce altitude sickness if you are acclimated to sea level. So the natives didn't live up there, but rather set up mining camps to extract the rock, then took them back down. There is literally tons of archaeological evidence all over the Mauna Kea Science Reserve, the area on top of the mountain that the University of Hawaii controls. The astronomers are careful about not putting a telescope in archeology areas. There's rock debris, partial tools, shelters, etc. up there.

If it was originally an industrial site, I see no reason not to use it now for a scientific site. It's not like they are knocking down the Parthenon to build a telescope.

Comment Re:Surprised? (Score 1) 566

Well, to be fair, "minimum requirements" means "bare minimum to make the OS work, with nothing else running". But too often it's interpreted as "optimal requirements", another beast entirely.

I've told this story a time or two already, but what the hell... back in the olden days my test rig was a 486DX4-100 with 8mb RAM. One day I accidentally hooked up the wrong HD and here's Win2K booting up. Took a few minutes to reach the desktop, but was reasonably usable thereafter (even with no swapfile)... a little sluggish but tolerable. I was astounded.

Slashdot Top Deals

10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.

Working...