Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re: Finally (Score 1) 375

I think nuclear will always have its place, but apart from safety issues, the fact is that nuclear power is extremely expensive. Some of that is due to regulatory regimes, but then again, if it's hard to get a reactor built with regulatory regimes in place, just imagine how hard it would be without. Without that insurance, voters would reject it utterly.

In the end, nuclear fusion is not a renewable, and still requires fissionable materials. Yes, you can use breeders and the like, but then you have to worry about nuclear weapons proliferation. In the meantime, renewables are catching up fast, and several energy storage techniques are in development. About the only thing that could upset the march to renewables is cheap and efficient fusion, but let's face it, fusion is always a few decades away, and probably will be for some time.

Comment Re:Finally (Score 1) 375

Exactly. The same kind of conspiracy where the tobacco industry spent decades paying for studies that attempted to minimize the effects of tobacco smoke, or to misdirect it toward some other cause. Or the conspiracy where the sugar industry spent decades trying to minimize the effects of refined sugars or misdirect it toward some other cause.

There's a lot of money tied up in the fossil fuel industry, more than tobacco and sugar, and thus all the more reason to try to undermine both research and actual renewable technologies in favor of maintaining the need for fossil fuels as a major energy source. Of course, the fossil fuel industry knows they've got only a few decades at most, and possibly less than that, but every year they can keep people using fossil fuels, even at the much-reduced profits since the oil crash, is an extra year that they can keep the money rolling in. It's just a conspiracy to make a whole lot of money, and then pass the bill for paying for the mess the industry leaves behind to the rest of society; just like Big Tobacco and Big Sugar have done.

Comment Re: The media is (Score 1) 461

Except for the problem of Congress actually investigating that. Now you may be right in the end, but since neither you or I are in a position to make the judgment, what you're really doing is making an unevidenced declaration. Nixon's supporters, like Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush did much the same thing as Watergate began to simmer, and in the end, despite claims by the Administration and its cheerleaders, even Republicans came to recognize that Nixon had indeed committed impeachable offenses.

So maybe it's all fabrication, though if it is, you're talking about a vast web of conspiracy involving a whole lot of actors, some of which are pretty much political opponents. But if it makes you feel better, then all the power to you. But keep in mind, the only thing right now keeping Trump in the White House is the GOP's general fear that removing him would do them political damage, and the fact that, innocent or guilty, the man seems incapable of opening his mouth without somehow sounding like he's indicting himself, eventually that will chip away at the base, just as Nixon's failings begin to erode the base. So while I'm sure you will remain a true believer, and refuse to accept anything that Congress or the three letter agencies say, and will doubtless hold the torch for Donald Trump until you expire your last breath, it's not you who is going to be making that decision, it's Republican lawmakers, based on whether or not Trump's failings, real and imagined, threaten to do political damage to the party.

Comment Re:Wasn't the "new information" the Trump/Russian. (Score 1) 87

I'm sure the three letter agencies have long been in the habit of keeping the President apprised of important operations, seeing as normally the President is a sensible, sane, intelligent human being capable of rational thought and reflection. I'm thinking going forward not much in the way of classified information is ever going to reach the Oval Office.

Comment Re:Wasn't the "new information" the Trump/Russian. (Score 3, Informative) 87

But Russia isn't really that interested in fighting ISIS. That's a side-effect of helping Assad. So no, Russia and Israel are not "on the same side", particularly if an Israel agent embedded in the Assad regime gets revealed.

You know, this has only been going on since 2011, so I'm not sure how people could still be confused about the details of the conflict.

Slashdot Top Deals

"May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house." -- George Carlin