Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Romneybot to lose debate (Score 0) 168

Both right and left wing economics are Keynsian at their roots. The Austrian model is the only one that works - economies are more organic than formulaic because they are comprised of organic components.

Maybe I misunderstood your use of left/right - it may be a symptom of context. In the US, the "right" typically fights for the right to bear arms while the left typically pushes for gun control. This is not universally true, but I suspect that more than 90% of the candidates that identify themselves as "left" are pro gun control.

The assertion regarding taxes on the wealthy is disingenuous. I have been directly affected by high tax rates and I am not in the 1%. The question is not who's hands you put money in, the question is how do you generate more money. Giving money to the poor has been proven to seize the recipients in an iron grip of dependency.

There is no FACT that taking money from business owners increases investment. When I pay the taxes I pay now I simply can't afford to pay someone else to do jobs that I can do on my own. THAT is a fact. The government is the single least efficient means for putting oney into anyones hands.

Our (US) founders knew these - they wrote that when more than 50% of the population becomes dependent on the remaining portion of the population due to government influence then their experiment would have failed.

Comment Re:Romneybot to lose debate (Score 0) 168

Why do you hate the constitution?

The right are far more interested in infringing on your liberties than the left.

Cite evidence please. While I think both parties are a joke, this statement is just plain silly

The police state is a right wing construct.

And the Democrats are less right wing than the Republicans.

Why do you hate America? Not only are the Republicans hell bent on stripping away the freedom of religion, expression, privacy, fair trial, etc. But they are pushing for a road to abject economic annihilation. The only balanced budget proposal is from the Congressional Progressive Caucus. It has been objectively proven that deregulation has destroyed the economy and directly lead to this last great recession, as it led to the great depression almost a hundred years ago. Republican economics are an abject disaster.

I think you may be confused. Is gun control typically a platform for the left or right? Are property rights more often abused by the left or right (think about the effects of profound regulation via EPA etc.).

De-regulation destroyed the economy? Really? You might want to brush up on your history and economics.

Comment why trust the government (Score 3, Insightful) 77

I am constantly amazed at arguments in favor of whatever government action folks want that base their premise on the trustworthiness of government. Why does anyone think they can trust a government? Now I am certainly not an anarchist, however I take the same view of centralized government that the founders of the US took - powerful central governments will inevitably grow and be corrupted because they are comprised of humans who are imminently corruptible.

It amuses me to see folks distrust a corporation and turn to the government as if the people in a government job are somehow more moral or ethical than those in private sector. They are all made of the same human stuff, all just as corruptible - the only meaningful difference is that the humans in government wield the power of massive force to accomplish their goals.

The government has NO business getting involved with cyber security any more than they do getting involved with how I secure my house or car. The government sucks at doing things efficiently and using best practices - the examples are legion.

People need to take personal responsibility for their systems and decisions.

Submission + - Quantum Computing Paper Presentation & Seminar Report (faadooengineers.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Quantum Computing Paper Presentation & Seminar

The history of computer technology has involved a sequence of changes ~ZT\ one type of physical realization to another from gears to relays to valves to ~3nsistors to integrated circuits and so on. Today's advanced lithographic *r-:hniques can squeeze fraction of micron wide logic gates and wires onto the s^face of silicon chips. Soon they will yield even smaller parts and inevitably each a point where logic gates are so small that they are made out of only a -^ndful of atoms; i.e. the size of the logic gates become comparable to the size r atoms.

Submission + - Airbag saves man's life, then kills him (cnet.com)

SternisheFan writes: "In 2010, Ronald Smith of Scotland, was involved in a six-car accident, during which his airbag deployed successfully. He wasn't hurt, even though he had been hit from behind and had struck the car in front. The crash was of sufficient force that his car window broke and pierced the airbag of his Vauxhall Insignia. (Vauxhall Motors is owned by General Motors.) After the crash, Smith, an engineer, reported seeing white powder emerge from the airbag. His face was also red from some sort of irritation, presumably related to the white powder. As Scotland Daily Record reports, he began to feel ill. He suffered from a cough and shortness of breath. A few
  weeks after the crash, he was admitted to hospital, where he died. He had not been a smoker. He had not experienced any other obvious health problems.
    An inquest was finally held. During it, a forensic pathologist talked about how Smith's lungs were infected and that he died of bronchial pneumonia. The coroner, Terence Carney, declared in his verdict: "This man died as a result of this incident and more pointedly because of the explosion of his airbag, and this death should be recorded as misadventure."
    Washington University's chemistry department says that inside airbags is a mixture of NaN3, KNO3, and SiO2. The end result of the chemical reaction is supposed to be silicate glass, which is safe. What might have happened is still open to conjecture."

Software

Submission + - French government to use PostgreSQL & LibreOffice in free software adoption (computerworlduk.com)

concertina226 writes: French government agencies could become more active participants in free software projects, under an action plan sent by Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault in a letter to ministers, while software giants Microsoft and Oracle might lose out as the government pushes free software such as LibreOffice or PostgreSQL in some areas.
Google

Submission + - Brazilian Judge orders 24-hour shutdown of Google, Youtube and Executive arrest (volokh.com)

_Sharp'r_ writes: "Judge Flavio Peren of Mato Grosso do Sul state in Brazil has ordered the arrest of the President of Google Brazil, as well as the 24-hour shutdown of Google and Youtube for not removing videos attacking a mayoral candidate. Google is appealing, but has recently also faced ordered fines of $500K/day in Parana and the ordered arrest of another executive in Paraiba in similar cases."

Comment Re:Theory or fact? (Score 1) 672

I don't think it is fair to accuse me of being disingenuous - while it is true that I don't agree with evolution I would like to see an honest and open dialog in which people can present facts as facts, theories as theories and be free to disagree with theories until they are established as fact.

It may be true that this bill is intended to discourage critical thinking about science, but what many folks (not necessarily you) seem to be pushing for is to censor the discussion rather than engage in open debate about theories that we simply don't know to be fact.

Comment Re:Theory or fact? (Score 1) 672

No, I am not holding anybody to an impossible standard. We can make whatever claims we need to about geological processes, stellar evolution etc. I am only asking that we distinguish between things we can know as fact and things that we must suppose as theory.

It is important to understand the distinction between fact and theory so that further improvements can be made in any discipline. If a researcher finds facts that collide with a theory, he must be comfortable declaring a theory to be in error.

What we should teach in schools is that a fact is distinguished from a theory in certain ways, that facts and theories both provide meaningful aids in understanding our world but that they are not equivalent. Further, when we teach a theory in school, we should teach it as a theory not as a fact. Student should know what we know for certain and what we have had to derive from the facts available to us.

Comment Re:Theory or fact? (Score 1) 672

While there may be subtle (or not so subtle) shifts in meaning based on context, I think it is fair to say that no one would assert that we can use the words theory and fact interchangeably in science or any other discipline.

No reasonable scientist would accept a theory as having the same weight as a fact. In the event that an observed fact conflicts with a theory, good science calls for us to reformulate the theory based on the facts. We do not discard facts when they conflict with a theory.

Comment Re:Theory or fact? (Score 1) 672

"All modern life forms" is one of things that has not been proven, in fact has not been repeated a single time - this is a theory. So far we have been unable to evolve a complex life form from a simple one even a single time. Whether you agree with the theory, the bottom line is that it is no more than a theory (at best) and has certainly not been proven through observation of repeatable scientific experiments.

In other disciplines we would never accept an assertion as fact that could not be proven demonstrably - software engineering is a simple case. If you tell me that a program can perform some task, you prove it by writing a piece of software to perform that task. Does biology get a pass on this requirement?

Slashdot Top Deals

Quantum Mechanics is a lovely introduction to Hilbert Spaces! -- Overheard at last year's Archimedeans' Garden Party

Working...