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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Meanwhile... (Score 2) 181

Actually we know that it has no consequences, because we observe people, today, living in envirnments far more radioactive than those around Fukushima in amounts of millions. Take Mexico City for example. It's background radiation is far greater because it's situated so high. Yet there are no visible spikes in things normally associated with radiation, such as cancer.

Let me repeat that: we KNOW that small increases in radiation exposure has no effect on health because we have millions upon millions living in such environments. Anyone arguing against this would be arguing against reality. Which is why no one except idiots talks about linear no threshold model.

Comment Re:Meanwhile... (Score 1) 181

His point stands. Tsunami was the single biggest disaster to hit Japan in a long time. We're looking at millions displaced, over 30.000 dead, hundreds of thousands wounded, massive economic and infrastructure damage.

Fukushima gets a lot of publicity because "nuclear is scary" for average people, but the amount of fear in comparison to actual threat is incredibly inflated. And on the other hand, amount of fear for natural disasters, that are several orders of magnitude more dangerous is "meh, not so scary, don't care".

Tsunami got a whole lot less publicity than Fukushima did. Compare the damage those two events did. Fukushima is going to have to do something pretty damn huge in comparison to what it's doing now to become more than a small slice in the huge chart when comparing it to tsunami that caused it.

We just had another disaster in the Philippines. It crippled most of the country. I'll bet you 100:1 that no one will remember it in just a few months. Yet we'll still be talking about Fukushima. At the same time, consequences of that disaster, just like (other) consequences of the tsunami in Japan are still huge.

That's the big problem. Media blows things completely out of proportions because scaring people with word "nuclear" and "radiation" sells. Scaring people with word "tsunami" or "storm", not so much. It's a matter of proportionality, and it's completely out of whack in modern society. We are taught to fear largely inconsequential things, while largely ignoring huge threats.

Comment Re:what? (Score 4, Insightful) 258

It makes sense because it's part of basic infrastructure, that enables other services and businesses to function more efficiently.

You don't need to pull profits from basic infrastructure, if you can instead collect taxes from companies attracted by superior infrastructure that enables them to do business much more efficiently, and often do business where it would be otherwise impossible to do. It's called "synergy" - infrastructure enables more business, and pays for itself with taxes collected from them.

Comment Re:How is this news for nerds? (Score 1) 80

This is not my day in expressing what I mean.

I was trying to say that it is in fact possible to match a decaying orbit to rotation speed of upper levels of atmosphere so that upon contact the object will not have a significant speed differential and will survive re-entry intact. Such an orbit is quite possible. Such an orbit would have to be near-geostationary at the point of entry, meaning it would have to be slower at higher height.

Comment Re:strict privacy laws my ass! (Score 1) 109

I like how in almost every post you seem to:
1. Admit to something.
2. Deny you admitted to something else in your previous post.
3. Argue that claiming "production does not equal profit" is anything from "illogical" to "nitpicking".
4. Make a personal attack against me, ranging from calling me a troll to asking what's wrong with me.
5. Promise to "stop feeding the troll".

To answer your question: I'm just tired of apologists who like to pretend that all taxes are bad because they believe in it. And they will use any doublethink necessary to argue so. So I like to shove their faces into the absurdity of their doublethink in hopes of eventually getting their own bullshit meters to tilt enough to see through their own doublethink. I call it a good deed of the day.

Comment Re:I guess I'll see (Score 1) 156

WvW was never a competitive environment. It was a place to zerg for gold, karma and EXP. I was a part of a guild that had very active WvW group for a while, and we did manage to turn quite a few battles around with surgical strikes at certain sites in game, in the end, the mode was mostly about zerging and it was the zerg, not us determining the victory. If our zerg sucked or was too small, it didn't matter if we were awesome or sucked.

Comment Re:I guess I'll see (Score 1) 156

There is deflation of real money currency and inflation of in game currency, because there are less and less players willing to pay for the real money currency, and more and more botters grinding in game currency.

And really, no. Unless by relaxing you mean botting the game. Because a lot of people ended up doing just that. Put their character up with an AoE macro on a known event boss spawn spot with many others and just leave the game farming your exp, gold and karma. There was a lot of that within days of release, which says a lot about the monotony of the gameplay.

Comment Re:I guess I'll see (Score 1) 156

Interesting. I was playing since the start, and I remember seeing first half assed AoE event botters when I hit level 10 just a couple of days after release. And there was a LOT of them withing just days after that. Because leveling in PvE, once you got your basic "priority order" was incredibly boring. Hell I played an elementalist just to make it at least challenging. With warrior, it was literally charge in, activate hundred blades, run to the next mob, charge in, activate hundred blades...
So people just botted everything. I still remember coming back to the undead 80 zone on my second character, only to see that a good half of the zone was event AoE botters.

I did appreciate the art, and it kept me playing long enough to get two characters to lvl80 just because I loved the views. I leveled by going in opposite directions (first character to the south, second to the north). The rest of the game was incredibly grindy and mediocre, except for combat system which was just bad because everything was about AoE and spamming hundred blades.

Comment Re:I guess I'll see (Score 1) 156

Unfortunately they didn't see it that way in GW2. Hence the entire problem with massive grind and pay to win selling in game currency that can buy essentially everything including the legendaries for real money.

They chose to monetize all of the progression, which brought in game currency inflation to hilarious heights as everyone and their grandmother has to bot for gold if they're not grinding materials required for legendary.

Comment Re:I guess I'll see (Score 1) 156

I have bad news for you. All commercial games' main point is to get as much money as possible.

It's just that GW2 goes it in exceptionally user-hostile way of pure pay to win by selling you in game money for real money, and allowing in game money to buy the best, most rare gear in the game (legendaries).

Slashdot Top Deals

It isn't easy being the parent of a six-year-old. However, it's a pretty small price to pay for having somebody around the house who understands computers.

Working...