Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


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

Comment Re:Entropy. Your only friend. (Score 1) 247

Deaths per 1000 is not a good proxy for life expectancy. If you look at Japan, which has the highest life expectancy, deaths per 1000 is even higher.

If the population in a region increases over several decades because of a high birth rate, deaths per 1000 will be lower even when the life expectancy is 60 years or less. If you have many young people and not many old ones, deaths per 1000 are very low.

Comment Re:Lovely...with no pressing issues... (Score 1) 133

It's a problem that Harper won with ~40 percent of the vote. It's a problem that Trudeau did the same. It's a problem that the NDP won in Alberta due to vote splitting between the Wild Rose party, and the PC party.

This is why we need something other than FPTP.

Comment Re: You know what? (Score 1) 560

Completely different from what you say, the predictions for the second decade of the 2000s (where we are right now) are closely matched by the predictions in the first climate report to the IPCC of 1990. The following reports moved the error bars a little down, maybe because of political pressure to not paint the future too black, but in fact, the first report was right.

Comment Re: You know what? (Score 2) 560

Because most of our crops don't grow in tropic weather. Because the trade winds will cause an inversion between the Tropics and halfway to the equator, independent of the global temperature, meaning that there will be deserts north and south of the equator anyway. Because rising sea levels mean lost agreable land, which not necessarily gets replaced by the same amount of newly agreable land in the North (In the South, there is just ocean and no new land to be gained by moving climate zones closer to the Southpole). Because the amount of food we grow is a limiting factor to mankind. In fact, the total amount of land used to grow crops is slightly shrinking in most regions of the world, be it due to urban sprawl or re-forestation.

Comment Re:FTFY (Score 4, Informative) 773

Oh. I found the reason:

The great Hunza secret to old age turned out to be its absence of birth records. The illiterate elders didn't know how old they were, and they tended to overestimate their ages by a decade or two, as I discovered by comparing their recollections with known historical events.

Read yourself: The Optimists Are Right.

Comment Re:FTFY (Score 2) 773

Also, the cure for cancer is at least in part based on the Hunza mountain people who live an average of 120 plus years and do not get cancer.

The longest ever documented lifespan of a human being was that of Jeanne Calment, who died in 1997 being 122 years old. She was no Hunza, but a french woman from Arles. Most other persons being named as the oldest person currently living die between 114 and 117 years old.

I thus seriously doubt any information about people getting older than 120 years on average. You need a very strong proof for that claim.

Comment Re:Michael Flynn Jr believes it (Score 4, Insightful) 773

I never understood that. Whatever else Donald Trump may be, he definitely is establishment. You can't have any large real estate business without being in constant contact with local politicians. His whole economic message during the election was that he has the connections necessary to make Things[tm] work. So he is the establishment guy and insider, that will put an end to all those establishment guys and insiders, right?

Comment Re:Stop using cars at all. (Score 1) 240

We grew up out there, saw that it was a cultural and economic dead end, and fled as soon as we could. We understand the rural lifestyle quite well as we were raised in it.

But do you understand why others find it attractive? Somehow, I seriously doubt it. And if you do not, you do not truly understand it.

Comment Re:Not mine, you won't... (Score 1) 240

The problem is that what Americans call "dense" isn't dense enough, outside the Northeast, for European-style mass transit to work well, and yet lots of folks think American cities aren't truly great unless they have mass transit - regardless of whether it will work and be cost-effective. That leaves American taxpayers with huge bills for mass transit systems they'll never use.

Comment Re:Not mine, you won't... (Score 1) 240

Self-inflicted? Yes. Problem? There is where you'll get lots of disagreement. The American Dream of a single-family house on its own lot is still very, very compelling for the majority of Americans. Many - I'd say a clear majority of - Americans want no part of a European-style rabbit warren, no matter how much our betters in the Northeast tell us it would be good for us.

We build out because we can, and because that's what we want. Yes, we know that's not conducive to mass transit, and we don't care. Europeans telling us we're doing it wrong get very, very tiresome.

Slashdot Top Deals

Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing. -- Wernher von Braun