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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Isn't this along the same lines as... (Score 2) 404

Isn't this along the same line as causing a traffic jam at a busy intersect just to say hay you should have a police officer watching every traffic corner?
Maybe I'm missing the point but mostly they just seem to cause petty disturbances. Are they trying to make it so companies have to weigh every new venture they role out with the thought of risk vs reward?
I always wanted to be a person who achieves something not someone that goes over to the next guys sand castle and kicks it down and says damn should have made that sucker hurricane proof. Better luck next time.

I'm just surprised these guys don't naturally just turn on each other over time.

Comment Cost of security but what did we gain? (Score 2) 456

So out of the 145million people that filed taxes it cost us 21k each over 15 years.
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/10taxstatscard.pdf

But think of all the innovation;
Remote controlled drones with missiles.
Armored K9's
Quiet Helicopters
Body Scans (would be nice if they could detect cancer or a tumor at least while i walk though)
um cannot really think of anything else we came up with for 3 trillion.

I think we got hosed on this deal.

Comment Wouldn't it be more effective to buy the US Gov? (Score 4, Insightful) 472

I think that the music industry is already grossly overvalued and would not be a wise investment.
The US Government on the other hand that would be a valuable investment if they could just find a way to buy them off in bulk.
Lets do the math.
1 Prez, 1 VP, Chief of Staff, Secretary of state ect, Cabinet lets round that to 65 for ease
100 Senators
435 House of Rep
As of January 2009, a total of 3,200 Fed Judges
So we have about 4,000 monkeys to buy. Per year
Average salary is probably around 180k. So we will offer them 10x the amount per year or 1.8 Million per worker.
For only 7.2 Billion per year I think I could effectively own the entire federal government.
I think google can swing that.

Comment Re:Double standard? (Score 2) 486

It was probably more about the idea of being able to arrest the guy on a trumped up charge than to actually get a conviction.
That is the great thing about the law enforcement agencies. You can screw people without actually having to convict them of any wrong doing.
There is not much you can do to fight, stop, or prevent it aside from thoroughly screening who gets to be a police officer.
The system was actually intended to work this way.

Comment seriously stop trying to complicate shit (Score 1) 212

If they think having real id's will protect infrastructure they are wrong.
If they think having real id's would save more lives or fight crime/terrorism more than just dumping the money into police / safety / intelligence measures wrong again.

What we need to do is think further ahead after the real id comes out. We will need a really real id.
Then we can lay the ground work for a Real DNA id.
Then maybe we can have Really real secure dna id by 2020.
It'll only set us back 10 trillion and another 2 trillion each year after that.
The idea is to make the USA so poor no one would care to launch terror attacks on it.
Kind of like Africa but with real id's.

Comment Re:How abundant and hazardous? (Score 1) 56

I did think and even looked up the material.
I even checked it twice now... still sounds hazardous to me. But like I said I could be wrong and these could be overkill warnings.

Hazards
EU Index 034-002-00-8
EU classification Toxic (T)
Dangerous for the environment (N)
R-phrases R23/25, R33, R50/53
R23/25: Toxic by inhalation and if swallowed
R33: Danger of cumulative effects
R50/53: Very toxic to aquatic organisms, may cause long-term adverse effects in the aquatic environment

S-phrases (S1/2), S20/21, S28, S45, S60, S61
(S1): Keep locked up
S20/21: When using do not eat, drink or smoke
S28: After contact with skin, wash immediately with plenty of ... (to be specified by the manufacturer)
S45: In case of accident or if you feel unwell seek medical advice immediately (show the label where possible)
S60: This material and its container must be disposed of as hazardous waste
S61: Avoid release to the environment. Refer to special instructions/safety data sheet

Comment How abundant and hazardous? (Score 1) 56

I've never heard of zinc selenide so I looked it up.
Sounds hazardous. On the plus side maybe it will kill the rats that chew through the fiber optics.
I couldn't easily find out how abundant and cheap the material is.
Personally I don't think you can get too much cheaper than silica but then again I've got no clue what I'm talking about.

Slashdot Top Deals

For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!

Working...