Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Nuclear power is perfectly safe (Score 1) 124

Fukushima was run by capitalists, and it failed partly due to incompetence and greed

Where's the evidence? What failure of Fukushima can be attributed to incompetence and greed?

The failure to strengthen and raise the height of the seawall. It was well known that the seawall was insufficient to contain a tsunami of known historical magnitude. The coast of northern Honshu is hit by big tsunamis about every 300 years, and was "due". They didn't fix the wall in order to save money, and just hoped they would get lucky.

Comment Re:Nuclear power is perfectly safe (Score 1) 124

Keeping nuclear energy away from private ownership doesn't guarantee there will never be an accident, it just makes accidents due to insufficient compliance with safety regulations less likely.

Nonsense. Under government ownership, the people making the regulations and the people complying with them are the SAME PEOPLE, or at least answer to the same people. This guarantees a conflict of interest, and a lack of accountability. Government owned and run nukes have a far worse safety record than privately run nukes.

Comment Re:Nuclear power is perfectly safe (Score 1) 124

but the lies were equally ambigious.

Absolute hogwash. TEPCO has slanted the facts, and issued incomplete and inaccurate information. But to compare that to the behavior of the Soviet Union in the aftermath of Chernobyl is ridiculous. The Soviet Union issued NO information for days after the accident. Even immediately adjacent towns were left uninformed, and the denials continued as people showed up at hospitals with rashes and vomiting from radiation sickness. They allowed thousands of their own people to be exposed needlessly. They didn't admit to anything until after it was widely reported in the West, which learned about the accident from radiation blown across international borders, and confirmed it with satellite photos. Even then the Soviets tried to minimize and cover up the story for months afterwards.

Comment Re:Nuclear power is perfectly safe (Score 2) 124

You think it would have gone better if it was?

Yes. The main problem with Chernobyl was not the accident itself, but the design. It had no containment vessel. No government has ever allowed a private company to build a nuke plant so obviously defective. People in both government and industry are the same, and equally likely to be selfish, greedy and incompetent. The difference is that capitalists are accountable, to both regulators and shareholders. The government is accountable to no one.

Fukushima was run by capitalists, and it failed partly due to incompetence and greed, but also because of one of the largest earthquakes ever recorded.

Chernobyl was run by socialists. It failed entirely due to incompetence and greed, on a sunny and calm Ukrainian day.

The GPP's claim that socialism is some sort of silver bullet for nuclear safety is absurd.

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.

Slashdot Top Deals

Nothing recedes like success. -- Walter Winchell