Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:And yet (Score 2) 172

Because, of course, both the IAEA and George Johnson are completely unbiased when it comes to nuclear power...

I honestly don't know about Johnson, but I've often seen guys of his age involved in science such as him to be quite pro-nuclear: quite enough for most to not be particularly thorough when it comes to researching positive outlooks. That brings me to the IAEA which is the source cited and has been criticised a lot for its very positive stance about nuclear power.

Last of all, when talking about Fukushima workers, let's not dig too deep, it could lead to taking a look at the sub-sub-contracting (often through the yakuza) of people and the way their eventual issues may get handled afterward :

Those are a few among all the various scandals surrounding the Fukushima disaster (still ongoing, by the way). But please, do keep downplaying what the risks are in using nuclear power. In any case, most of the vocal crowd on ./ will cheer on.

Comment Amazon Employees at work (Score 3, Interesting) 259

The first few comments from IDs numbers between 50387607 and 50387627, all shooting down the review (most with : "let's avoid shopping chores" and one with "it's great for imaginative geeks").

Yeah, I don't really believe there's anything genuine there...

Comment Re:Absolute vs. relative (Score 1) 316

Slight problem with your argument : you assume the employees are 100% productive when seated at their desk during the workday.

Yeah, right, like this is even remotely true

The reality is that most people working in offices spend a large part of their day pissing the time away (I see to remember reading somewhere that the average real work time in offices in modern countries was about 15H a week). If not, why so many people updating their facebook page during working hours.

So that 15 mns argument really sounds like a poorly thought out excuse.

Comment Re:5 billion is nothing compared to ... (Score 1) 356

Oil is paid in dollars (and the US are ready to go to war over that)

That's the reason why the US dollar is the international currency to this day. Being such, it means that, essentially, the US government prints money(well, the Fed, but there's not much of a difference), and it's up to the rest of the world to pick up the tab.

Comment Re:They should go (Score 2) 198

I wasn't talking about the latest development as related to specific diesel emissions. I was simply commenting on the previous post :

Diesel engines are much more polluting than petrol since the combustion is incomplete.

I already know about the difference between the official trope about diesel pollution and the improvement reached nowadays, but that wasn't the point.

Comment Re:Hasn't been involved with Greenpeace since 1985 (Score 1) 573

Equating 'Democrats' (as in "the" party and its members) with the left shows you are, at best, not really aware of the history of that party.

To begin with, until the 50's, there was no such thing as an united Democratic party, the biggest divide being between North and South : ever since the late XIX century, the US statu-quo was to leave the nation as a whole to, mostly, the Republicans, and the South to the pro-segregation Southern Democrats.

Considering their reactions and the way they acted under Roosevelt's presidency, it is quite clear that you should be seen as firmly conservatives.

Comment Re:They should go (Score 2, Interesting) 198

You don't know what you're talking about, do you?

The diesel problem isn't a combustion one: diesel is more efficient than petrrol. In case you wonder what "more efficient", that is that the combustion rate is higher than that of petrol.

The problem lies with particle emissions / N compounds emissions. That's where diesel pollutes much more than petrol.

Comment Re:Something completely different... (Score 1) 667

Actually, in the case of email, what happened with French is a case-study of how a living language works:

- A new thing appears (electronic mail), and through common shortening ends up being named email for English speakers.

- Among many new users of internet are the French who start taking advantage of this new tool. Most of them not being pedant linguist, they don't particularly care about how they name it, they just need to use a word that's both meaningful and non-confusing. Hence, at the start, 'email' works fine.

- Very quickly, again for the sake of simplicity, 'email' gets shortened into 'mail'. People understand what email is (and the word itself), but since the word 'mail' is English and in no way close to its French equivalent (courrier), there is no risk of confusion.

- Enter the linguists invoking the need to stay within the parameters of French, and so to create a specific word that arises from French roots : 'courriel' (the exact counterpart to email : Electromic mail ; Courrier Electronique). That's something that worked in the past, and I actually think the word "ordinateur" (the thing that puts into and rearranges order) is actually a better description of what the machine is than the English 'computer'. However, contrary to what happened 20 years before, global communication interferes with the attempt, and the word 'courriel' has never really caught on (except in some official writings) in France. I don't know about Quebec.

- A last ditch attempt has been made, following the idea that there are no diphtongues in French, the Academie has tried to make people write mail 'mel'. Of course, the reality is that, although it may be true of the official standard French (supposed to be that of the Versaille area), there many regional variations of accent where diphtongues do appear, and I hear as many 'mel' as I do 'mail' in everyday conversations (I won't bother with phonology symbols)

- End of story, 'lo and behold, there is a new word in French, which describes something very specific (electronic mail), and that word is Mail. It may be a while yet before the final official spelling is accepted as such.

Comment Re: HOWTO (Score 1) 1081

The difference is that in the latter case, you most probably get a much longer available time to realize your mistake and release the wrongfully accused (and maybe the gvt can even somewhat atone for the mistake). Unless you can raise the dead, it doesn't matter for the person whether you understand your mistake once you've murdered them (let's use the proper word, here).

Comment Re:Hang on WTF? (Score 4, Insightful) 191

The situation is somewhat incompletely described.

What actually happened was that the guy invented said blue led (on a standard engineer salary), which pretty quickly allowed his company to rake in tens of millions. When he politely complained that the invention which made them huge profits had earned him exactly nothing, his boss basicaly said:

"Oh, that's right. Here is a $300 bonus. Have fun at the bar!"

The problem he is complaining about when he talks about education is probably linked to the pyramidal hierarchy that's ingrained in Japanese people from kindergarten : whatever you do, the group leader is at the forefront. In research, that basically means a department director is the first credited for any discovery, except if he is generous enough to allow whoever did the actual work be awarded the authorship. Considering this also works in case of problems (the one in charge is the one taking the blame), you could say it is a game of give and take.

However in this case the profit only accrued to the boss/owners (I don't know whether the company was privately owned or not), with pretty much nothing for the guy at the source of it all. That's a breach of the unwritten rules of Japanese social interactions, but standard workings of Japanese society would have had him take it and shut up, too bad form him that his higher-ups were dicks. He decided he wouldn't.

Comment Re:we should not leave the Germains unsupevised (Score 1) 152

I have to disagree here.

Most European nations do have their own military and France - and Great Britain, to a somewhat lesser extent - do pull their own weight.

Don't confuse imperialism with a benevolent will to protect people : whatever the US military does is first and foremost to further the interest of the US itself (be it through control of specific regions, or simply an increase of budget going toward it). The only difference with previous Imperialist powers is that they have to be somewhat more discreet about it, so the average American can still believe the "we're the good guys" mantra.

8 Catfish = 1 Octo-puss