Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Your right !! (Score 1) 678

Your right !!... If only guns weren't so readily available he would have resorted to using far less efficient make shift weapons that people had a chance to defend them selves against, and he might have only gotten through 3 people max before being disabled rather than 50, how insightful of you!

Uh no. Because guess what? Even when there are severe restrictions on firearms, people still use them to commit crimes, getting them through black markets, smuggled, etc. Look at the North Hollywood Shootout. Every single one of the weapons that the three used was illegal. Either from the now-defunct Assault Weapons Ban to even federal law that made them illegal for the past 20 years.

I know guns are uber popular to some Americans but the whole "my right to defend myself" excuse is such BS,

No, my right to live without having to fear for my safety, and the ability to defend myself from threats, is an inalienable part of my natural rights.

if that is truly the reason then why don't you ban guns and buy body armour instead.

Because body armor isn't a catchall. There's lots of places it doesn't cover that still leave you vulnerable. And body armor is not magical. Just because it stops penetration from the bullet doesn't mean you won't die from it. The impact can still break ribs, cause internal bleeding, and more.

Everyone without brain damage can understand how even "certified" gun ownership will lead to an increase in availability of guns on the back market,

[Citation needed]
Since it's never happened. Except in locations where guns are banned. Like Venezuela, which has one of the highest homicide rates in the world (nearly 1 in 100 will be a victim of homicide according to UNODC stats).

and "certified" people are humans and can decide to be immoral too... what part of learning how to use a gun safely stops you from deciding to go crazy and kill some people because life treated you like shit.

And what part of banning them will stop someone from doing the same shit? Like people in China going on mass stabbing attacks. Or the dude in LA who plowed his car into a crowd of people. Crazy people are going to do crazy things. Nothing we can realistically do to prevent it short of mass brain control, and do you really want to propose that uber-dystopian environment?

Comment Re: Even if you think nuclear power doesnt kill pe (Score 1) 178

The exact same can be said of any real power generation. Probably less than 100 years worth of fossil fuels left -- that includes coal, gas, and oil. Unless we find other sources or get a lot better at recycling, rare-earth metals used in construction of electronics will start getting depleted as well. There's already a shortage on tellurium or molybdenum, both of which are key components in manufacturing electronics including solar cells.

Really, it's all a race until we get fusion going. At which point all of the clean energy nonsense stops becoming relevant except as a stopgap in remote areas where fields of solar panels or wind turbines are practical.

Comment Re: Even if you think nuclear power doesnt kill pe (Score 1) 178

The only reason Chernobyl was as bad as it was was simply due to three main factors: bad engineering, bad leadership, and immense political pressure. Had any one of those not been there, the worst would've been the plant shutting down. Due to the immense push from the Kremlin that nuclear power must not fail, due to the threat from the west, made them move their schedules much faster than would've been allowed safely. Had they had time to properly test their backup coolant pumps, or had leadership been more diligent in pushing back or getting the tests done, or had the engineering not led them to the point where there was no coolant flow while the diesel generators were spun up, the whole thing would've been avoided, or at least mitigated to the point of being a sneeze.

Comment Re:Good for her (Score 5, Interesting) 136

Another one, before they started losing customers en mass: IBM. Before they consolidated their employees to the GDC model (which had them working from homes or perhaps if they had a local IBM office), customers would have dedicated IBMers with them for a particular role. Now that many of those dedicated people were told to either move to a remote location or lose your job, well... And all of this was before the massive overseas transition, too. This was when IBM still had a sizeable portion of their workforce in the US. Not even 8 years ago.

Comment Re:Bullshit. (Score 1) 455

The fact that the uncorrected wage gap is what it is has not been disproven.

Yes it has. The original study looked at life-long income. When a man works for 40 years, the average woman will work for 20-30 years instead. Why? Maternity leave! Having a child. And maybe not even re-entering the workforce. That's where the supposed gap comes from. When you look at equal time, equal experience, equal qualifications, the "gap" becomes closer to 2-4%. Which can be easier dismissed as statistical noise, or explained by non-gender reasoning (such as weaker negotiation skills).

Comment Re:Apply it to VRU's (Score 1) 37

There are actually VRUs that already do this. They forward you to a operator if they detect you're getting frustrated. I think some of them also listen for expletives being uttered and use that for a cue. They started doing this where if the VRU stopped understanding what you're saying it would forward to an operator rather than keep trying over and over.

Slashdot Top Deals

Money may buy friendship but money cannot buy love.

Working...