Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Money makes the monkey dance (Score 1) 131

There are many reasons to "shit on americans". This isn't one of them. You opened your country to basically everyone to come in and fail to integrate, resulting in what is basically ethnic and cultural enclaves that co-exist side by side. Or at least try to.

But this is an anathema to building a high trust society. High trust societies are all culturally and ethnically highly homogenous. The moment that goes away, so does the trust. Humans are tribal that way and it comes with our basic nature.

So I'm not saying you're not charitable. You certainly are. I'm saying that you're a typical product of a medium trust high income society. You're performative because your society is highly competitive. And you're charitable because your society is middle trust at best. It's why your charity is less hard coded than that in low trust societies like Islamic nations. And way more than that of high trust societies, where taxes are much higher because we collectively agree that we will all pay a fair share so that no one goes homeless or hungry. And therefore there's no meaningful need for performative charity any more. Not to mention that most high trust societies are also high modesty societies. Standing out by listing charities you donate to as you did would be considered extremely damaging to your status and a marker of narcissism.

Comment Re:Who thought this was feasible? (Score 1) 163

Because we can only do one thing at a time.

We can't spend the same money on two different things.

It is silly to spend billions on biofuels for jets when spending the same money on wind turbines will remove twenty times as much CO2.

And "just raise taxes so we can do it all" isn't the answer. That will result in Trump being our next president, and then we will do none of it.

Comment Re:Just call it for what it is... (Score 1) 45

So yeah, we might well be inspiring others to put in geo blocks, and we might have a very much cut-down version of $social_media site in future. You know what? We want it that way. You can keep your "once you're in, you've got the entire spectrum of content from pretty rainbows all the way down the most depraved things humans can do to each other" services. Enjoy exercising your freedom to try to guide your kids through all that lot.

Funny, getting a lecture from a European about the most depraved things humans can do to each other.

Sardonic mode off

Which begs the question - why do you not have a harmless social media offering? It isn't that hard to do. Just set up some pretty simple software, then hire as many censors as needed to protect the children. You can implement a strike rule as strict as you like. Then you geoblock the USA. Comp,letely - a European internet based on European mores. Problem fixed. You just created jobs for Europeans, and have complete control over everything that not only children read, but you will even insulate adults from the evil of the USA. Because it is no secret that social media can be toxic for adults as well.

It is no secret either that the EU holds the USA in deep contempt, so as a good European, why do you not think to just keep our ways from infecting your children. They will then grow up with the social values and morals and protection that you demand?

The fix is pretty simple - but going back to my original statement, EU apparently places extraction of money over the wellbeing of children. Do you prefer the money over an actual fix? Just getting money makes you part of the problem.

Comment Re:Who thought this was feasible? (Score 5, Insightful) 163

A lesson I learned in first aid class is that if a patient has arterial hemorrhaging and an ingrown toenail, you focus on the bleeding and leave the toenail until later.

62% of the world's electricity comes from fossil fuels, mostly coal. Dozens of coal plants are currently under construction and will burn coal for 60 years.

That is the arterial bleeding.

Aviation is the ingrown toenail. It's a minor problem that is difficult to fix. It isn't where we should be focusing our efforts.

Comment Re:Salt = chemical? (Score 1) 93

When I return from vacation, I get my car detailed and get the undercarriage really cleaned up.

Because the ocean already generates aerosols, this isn't an issue since they are doing it out in the ocean already. Now if they were pumping seawater into the city centre and spraying it into the air you'd have an outright disaster on your hands.

The issue isn't where you pump and spray the saltwater. It is where the now acidified water comes back to earth, when the water cycle does its work. We can make estimates based on the prevailing winds, but the wind changes direction at times.

Worldwide scale for geoengineering does not mean anywhere people live. Quite the opposite. 71% of the world is not only uninhabited but actively salty already.

Once again, while salting the earth isn't a good thing - the big problem is not from salt. No doubt there will be sodium and potassium chloride that didn't get aerosolized landing locally, but that isn't the big problem.

We have plenty of evidence that stuff that happens out in the oceans has a global impact on climate (see stories run about the changes in environment due to changes in particulates from the shipping industry for example).

Of course, that evidence is what has the scientifically illiterate looking at aerosol injection as the silver bullet to immediately fix global warming, and ecologically perfect - I mean the oceans are full of salt, so what could go wrong. The problem is easily fixed. Or maybe not.

That humans aren't living in certain areas doesn't mean that they are lifeless. And as I noted before, the problem isn't where the salt and water is aerosolized, it is where it gets dumped as acidic rain. Dump it over the ocean, and it will start by killing shellfish and work it's way up the food chain. If it lands on land, well, DDG acid rain and just look at the pictures.

So what is your uninhabited area power source. Pumping seawater to heights where the sodium chloride is aerosolized is going to take significant power. And while we are at it - tell us where the water is perfectly safe to be pumped, and perfectly safe to land when the water cycle brings it back to earth. Should be simple - an uninhabited area where the prevailing winds take the savior salt to an equally perfect area. Seems a person could easily find the place where the harmless salt injection will do its work without any problems.

Funny how some years ago, Acid rain was seen as a terrible thing, destroying buildings and forests, killing fish, and harming animals and people's pulmonary systems. And now, it is rehabilitated, and will save the earth.

Maybe we could try nucing volcanoes while we are at it.

Slashdot Top Deals

"If you want to know what happens to you when you die, go look at some dead stuff." -- Dave Enyeart

Working...