Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Survey brought to you by (Score 2) 114

Even space travel they have focused on trying to do it cleanly. A big part of why their next generation of engines, the Raptor, uses methane as a fuel is that in the long-run one can synthesize methane directly and a straightforward way This has both an advantage in terms of Mars (can make more fuel on Mars) and also in terms of eventually making clean fuel on Earth.

Comment Re:Yes, but it doesn't matter (Score 2) 1424

This isn't really how the history went The Democratic-Republican party wasn't really connected to the Republican party at all. The Constitution was written before any political parties existed at all, and they didn't originally intend for their to be political parties. And in the pre Civil-War era, the Republicans were primarily in the North, which was the area which had less proportional strength from the electoral college.

Comment Re:Electoral college does reflect the popular vote (Score 5, Insightful) 1424

There are two historical elements for why the electoral college was invented. One, discussed by Hamilton in Federalist 68 was to provide a final stopgap against demagogues like Trump The second was to give the slave states more power and it should be clear why that shouldn't be ok. As for the argument involving counties: that's just silly. There's no reason that amount of total area won should mean anything at all. Moreover, there's no reason you can reasonably object to cities dominating simply because they happen to be dense areas. Disagreeing with a group doesn't mean you get to use essentially arbitrary criteria to decide you'd like to ignore their wishes.

There are good arguments against having the electoral college change in this case (especially given that we don't know if Hillary would have won the popular vote if both her campaign and Trump campaign had optimized voter turnout rather than focused on swing states) but trying to make an argument that relies on county number is just awful.

Comment Yes, but it doesn't matter (Score 4, Insightful) 1424

There are a lot of good arguments for the electoral college voting for Hillary. Lessig lays most of them out. There are also good arguments against (among other issues we don't know if Hillary would have won the popular vote if both she and Trump had been competing to optimize turnout). It is also utterly irrelevant: the electoral college members are primarily bog-standard Republicans, and we've seen in the last few months that most establishment Republicans hate Hillary more than they love their basic ideology and beliefs (whatever Trump stands for, it damn well isn't conservativism by any standard definition of the term). So pushing for this at this juncture is a waste of resources.

Comment Re:Third party standards (Score 2, Insightful) 434

To answer your question the political agenda of the SPLC is simple,it is to promote themselves so they can get more money.

After all if they don't have a new "bogeyman of the day" to shill for the press, why the press won't write about them anymore, and gasp! They might not be able to get those big fat donation checks anymore! You see the flaw in your logic is assuming its automatically a black/white issue and that one has to be beholden to a single political party, when looking at your typical SPLC list its pretty obvious they hate all religions and religious groups equally but their biggest goal is to label damned near every assembly of more than 4 people as a "hate group" so they have someone new to shill to the press because in the end? Their biggest desire isn't the favor of a political party, its good old fashioned money money money.

Comment Re:Two possible motivations (Score 5, Interesting) 725

Actually, having thought about this slightly more, another possible motivation occurred to me: there is a fair bit of evidence of Russian meddling in this election and that some of the anti-Hillary propaganda came from Russian sources to try to push the election to the candidate they favored. By the same token, Musk is potentially a real danger to Russian interests, since Russia is heavily oil dependent and also has an advantage when the US is dependent on Russia for manned space launches. If they have the now existing resources and hooks into the US public, then using it to harm Musk is a natural thing.

Comment Two possible motivations (Score 5, Insightful) 725

I'm not sure what the motivation is for these attacks. Musk hasn't been particularly political and mainly stayed out of this election. As far as I can tell, the primary motivations are one of two things. Either one, the people behind this are simply hateful and without a major target like Hillary must choose another, or two, they hate Musk because much of his work (electric cars, solar cells, even wanting to use methane for rockets because methane is a potentially renewable resource) has been to deal with issues related to global warming. If the second is the motivator, then it says something really fascinating: that there are elements of the right which not only are convinced that global warming is some sort of evil hoax, but that they actively hate people who disagree with them and are trying to take steps to destroy someone who is trying to help. If that's the case, it is truly a frightening example of the depth that people can sink to, and the levels they'll go to not just ignore facts they don't like but to actively try to harm people who try to deal with those factual issues.

Comment Re:No principles. (Score 4, Insightful) 600

What is wrong with Bannon? So far the only argument I've seen is the left wing media classic "he is an "ist" and a bad bad man!" in this case an anti-semite over of all things an article 1.- He didn't write, 2.- That was written by a pro Israel Jew, 3.- Which called a Jewish man on the left a "renegade Jew" (the writer of the article says if he had it do over again he would have used traitor) for supporting policies that helped Iran and Hamas, both sworn enemies of Israel.

So I'm sorry but if that is the best they can come up with? Its just more SJW shit, instead of debating the policies just call someone an "ist" and think you can silence them with name calling. We saw this all through the election with the MSM quick to call anybody who didn't support HRC an "ist" and called Trump an "ist" multiple times while completely ignoring how HRC said black teens were "super predators" who should be "brought to heel" like dogs and pushed through 3 strike laws that were specifically targeted at blacks, for example how you'd get a strike for crack but not for powder coke. Anybody wanna bet if it was someone on the right who had said and done those things we'd have heard a dozen times a day how much of an "ist" they were?

Comment Re:I still want short distance & long distance (Score 1) 395

About your sig? Sorry but sadly SJWs are very very real and while its true the world would be MUCH better off if we could just line them up and have them all shot (which would probably please them as most are beta whites and thus you would have less "white privilege" in the world) we can at least take comfort in the fact that being betas most of them will not get the opportunity to breed and thus will die out.

Comment Re:I still want short distance & long distance (Score 5, Informative) 395

Uhhh the US taxpayers paid to the tune of 200 billion for a nationwide upgrade to our intertubes during Clinton and all we got for that money was a low res Goatse from the big corps.

This is why we should give them 90 days to either provide what we paid for, give us back every cent with interest, or we nationalize the whole thing and open it up to competition like we did when we first broke up Ma Bell. If they want exclusives in an area? Let them run 100mbps FIOS to the door and we'll be happy to give them a 15 years exclusivity deal but as it is now? They owe us a shitload of money and we should demand we get what we paid for!

Comment Re:Loved the pros and cons in the comments (Score 1) 191

It especially makes no sense with Windows 10. After all with previous versions it cost $100 minimum for a copy but now you can get Windows 10 insider for free so this OS actually costs more than the cheapest version of Windows....I really don't see who the target audience is for this. If a user likes Windows 10 they aren't gonna suddenly want to pay $15 for a Linux look alike and if they like Windows 10 but don't have the money for a copy they can just take the free Insider version, and Linux users certainly aren't gonna pay $15 just to have their Linux look like an OS they don't like so who are they selling this to?

At least with Xandros you could see what market they were targeting as not only did it have a Windows look alike desktop as one of the three choices on install (the others were KDE 3 and OSX) but they paid MSFT for access to the Exchange and Windows Server code so they offered one click support for Exchange and Windows Domain log in,so at least you could see what they were charging for, but this? It looks like the same ho hum programs every other distro on the planet offers, just with a Windows skin on the desktop.

Slashdot Top Deals

Save energy: Drive a smaller shell.