Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:This is more sensationalism than any real threa (Score 1) 189

From my hydrology textbook last year: cooling edges out agriculture for water utilization nationally ... But hey, the textbook could be entirely wrong.

Either your textbook is completely wrong, or you just misunderstood what it said. Cooling uses very little water. It is no where near either agriculture or household use. The main problem with power plants is not that they "use up" water, but that they warm it up, causing thermal pollution. But the water is still available for other uses downstream.

Perhaps your textbook was talking about hydro-electric power plants (dams). But those don't use the water for cooling.

Comment Re:Sounds iffy (Score 1) 237

It is nearly impossible to do a study where you watch for every conceivable chemical that ever has or ever could exist.

No it isn't. You just take out the water, take out the normal minerals found in ground water, and then see what is left. What they found was that nothing was left. Which is exactly what they should have expected. Methane is far more mobile than any fracking chemicals, and was unable to permeate the overlaying layers of shale for millions of years. So how could the fracking chemicals do it? Answer: they didn't.

Comment Re:Like horses (Score -1, Flamebait) 116

You can lead a student to learning, but you can't make them think.... or do the homework.

Apparently, ye olde traditional brick and mortar schools at least have an edge on making them do their homework, if not actually think...

Keep in mind that this is San Jose State, which is barely one notch up from a community college. Ambitious, self-motivated students are not common there. I live in San Jose, and I have worked with a number of SJSU interns and graduates. I don't expect any of them to be future Nobel Prize winners. If this same program was done at Berkeley or Stanford, I think you would see different results.

Comment Re:or could it be ... (Score -1) 341

If I don't have full control over my drone, then I shouldn't be flying it.

I didn't say you didn't have full control over your drone. I said a gust of wind blew it.

Then I didn't have full control.

They didn't say you can't fly your drone there, this is a law that says someone else may shoot it down and take it to the city hall and get paid for it.

If it is legal for other people to shoot it down, then that pretty much implies that I am not allowed to fly it there. I think you are arguing in circles. You are assuming that this is a stupid, self-contradictory law written by complete morons that makes things both legal and illegal at the same time. If that is true, then yes, it is a stupid law. But I see no reason to assume you are correct. This is a "drone hunting license". No other hunting license allows the anyone to hunt on park land or hunt on private property without the owner's permission. Why do you assume this is different?

Sigh. So pretend you live in Deer Trail and this law is being discussed, and you realize that your personally owned property can be shot out of the air just because you own it. Do you approve of that law now?

If the law actually conforms to your imaginary distortion, I would not approve of it.

Comment Re:That's socialism (Score 1, Offtopic) 269

Socialism is government ownership of the means of production.

No, you're thinking of communism.

No I am not. Socialism is an economic system. Totalitarianism is a political system. Combine the two, and you get totalitarian socialism, which is communism. Just like fascism is totalitarian capitalism, as clearly stated by the founder of Fascism, Benito Mussolini: "Fascism ... is the merger of state and corporate power."

Comment Re:or could it be ... (Score 2, Insightful) 341

I don't fly it over other people's private property without their permission. If I did, I would have little right to complain if they shot it down.

So a gust of wind comes up and your drone is blown over your next door neighbors property, and he pulls out a shotgun and blows it away. And then takes the parts down to city hall and gets a bounty for it. How cool is that?

If I don't have full control over my drone, then I shouldn't be flying it. I get along fine with my neighbors, but in principle, I think they have a right to defend their privacy.

Or he sees it flying at the park and shoots it down.

Park land belongs to the government, and if they say "no drones", then I have no right to fly it there. I don't live in Deer Trail. I live in San Jose, California, and here flying drones in a park is fine. While flying my drone, I was only once approached by a police officer. He watched for a while, and then chatted with me about buying one as a birthday present for his son. Then he got on his bike and left.

You like that law? You think your drone is illegal just by itself?

My drone is not, and should not be, illegal. But flying it over other people's property without their permission, should be illegal.

Comment Re:That's socialism (Score 2, Informative) 269

Socialism is defined by the character of trying to maximize the social good of government, regardless of the common conflation between socialism and communism.

Baloney. Socialism is government ownership of the means of production. Period. Sometimes that works well. Sometimes it turns out bad. But to say it is "socialism" only when it turns out well, is nonsense.

Comment Re:No Horse/Tree Connectivity? (Score 1) 109

How about this law from my state? "You cannot chain your alligator to a fire hydrant."

I just googled for this, and found people from Alabama, Arkansas and Michigan claiming that this is the law in their state, but none of them citing any actual law. Which leads me to believe it is just an urban myth and isn't actually a law anywhere. Do you have a citation that says otherwise?

Comment Re:No Horse/Tree Connectivity? (Score 2) 109

Probable actual reason: A horse tied to a tree will gnaw on the bark. If they gnaw away a ring around the trunk, the tree will die.

God damn, how long are you leaving it tied there? It'll be close to starving before it starts to do that.

It depends on the size and type of tree. Many trees have thick bark and bitter sap. Other trees, such as fruit trees, have thin bark and sweet sap. A horse can kill an apple tree in less than an hour.

Comment Re:No Horse/Tree Connectivity? (Score 5, Interesting) 109

What kind of place is Baltimore if their "openness" doesn't allow horse/tree connectivity? I realize it's probably IP/patent related, but geez folks, can't we work this out?

Probable actual reason: A horse tied to a tree will gnaw on the bark. If they gnaw away a ring around the trunk, the tree will die. If it is your tree, on your own property, fine. But if it is my tree, and I have not given you permission, or it is a tree on public property, it is perfectly reasonable for it to be illegal for you to tie your horse to it.

The other laws seem reasonable too. What if you neighbor starts collecting goods and holding a garage sale everyday? When does it become a commercial enterprise in a residential area? I am not sure I would draw the line a twice a year, but if zoning means anything, they have to draw a line somewhere.

Fruit on a wharf attracts fruit eating insects, which can spread to/from ships, encouraging the transfer of invasive species. It is a reasonable law.

Comment Re:Practicality? (Score 1) 230

There doesn't necessarily need to be hypocrisy to oppose abortion but support the death penalty either.

Indeed. I am pro-choice and anti-death-penalty, and I have been called a hypocrite, but I don't see any hypocrisy. I am pro-choice because I don't think the government has any right to be making life and death decisions. I am anti-death-penalty because I don't think the government has any right to be making life and death decisions. That seems very consistent to me.

Comment Re:Practicality? (Score 0) 230

a) The gallup link says nothing about the genders of the people questioned in that poll. they're not citations if you do not provide them.

It is in the cited article. Most modern browsers contain something called a "scrollbar". It is usually located to the right of the content, and is used to continue reading web pages that contain more information that will fit on the screen. You can use your mouse to operate it. If you don't know how to use a mouse, you can use your keyboard's cursor keys. Good luck.

Comment Re:the answer is yes, we will (Score 1) 154

We aren't merely surveilled, however, we're self-surveilling.

That's different. I have several security cameras installed at my house. If you even drive into my cul-de-sac, I have a photo of you and your car. But I don't have any ability to tie either to your identity. I have no access to the license plate database, or any facial recognition database. Of course, if you ACTUALLY COMMIT A CRIME, I can turn the photo over to the police and they can run the DB check. But for normal non-criminals, my cameras do no violate their privacy in any meaningful way.

Slashdot Top Deals

Economics is extremely useful as a form of employment for economists. -- John Kenneth Galbraith