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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Who wants to retire? (Score 1) 115

I'm in my 40s, so I've started thinking about it. You know what? I can't see myself retiring, and it's not about money.

I just wouldn't know what to do with myself other than become a couch potato. I've already travelled the world as much as I care to (and have a bit more travelling to do to keep the spouse happy).

I'm not rich enough to just do 'whatever', but have more than I need to get by. Unless I win the lottery so I can fiddle around on a large scale, I'll keep working just for something useful to do.

What retirement looks like for me is slowing down, not stopping.

Comment Re:Fail policy; fact checking is usually biased (Score 1) 106

This is simply another fail policy; fact checking of late has be shown to to be biased.

Of course it has. And Hilary Clinton is a Reptoid from the Hollow Earth and Donald Trump has been negotiating with gray aliens for the cure to cancer. Do not believe the people who tell you these are not facts. They're biased.

Comment Re:This is retarded conservatism to help 'coal' (Score 1) 279

Yes, they CAN do it, but there is no reason to do it.

And mineral coal is not that "close" - it contains a lot of impurities (eg heavy metals, sulfur) which makes it unsuitable for water filtration and battery electrodes in your list of examples.

We don't need coal anymore. When - not if - all the coal is gone, we have it covered.
=Smidge=

Comment Re:It's pretty simple (Score 1) 164

I agree that limited your personal environmental impact - and making compromises to limit the environmental impact of your society in general - is just common sense in terms of long term safety.

That's not the same thing, though. When you talk about safety standards, you're talking about things that are dangerous on scales of less than a human lifetime, and also that have a nice, local cause-and-effect relationship.

Climate change is too slow, too abstract, and the costs too dispersed to qualify. That's why sane nations have environmental standards along side their more traditional safety standards.

Comment Re:It's pretty simple (Score 5, Insightful) 164

This common measuring stick you speak of would enable consumers to make an objective comparison of products' energy use. Fair comparisons tend to put one product, the inferior product, at a disadvantage. This affects profits and jobs. And people will say OMG! the government is involved in the market so it must be bad.

Both Hershey Chocolate and Prestone Antifreeze are very sweet to the taste. But the safety of each should be subjectively measured in a way that doesn't put either product at a disadvantage when marketed as a snack treat.

Comment It's pretty simple (Score 4, Insightful) 164

The higher the organizational level at which a standard is set, the fewer groups have to come up with standards, and the easier compliance becomes. Done at least somewhat close to well, it is more efficient for the standard setters, the companies who follow the standard, and the consumers who judge by it.

Now, Energy Star isn't a safety standard, so it's not exactly critical, but it's still a great thing to have a common measuring stick for all to use.

Comment Re:This is retarded conservatism to help 'coal' (Score 2) 279

Activated CHARcoal, which is not made from mined coal but from organic matter than is run through a gassifier to remove all the volatile compounds and leave the carbon.

You do not need mineral coal for this. There are vanishingly few things that require mineral coal these days.
=Smidge=

Slashdot Top Deals

What this country needs is a good five cent nickel.

Working...