Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:If they're going to do this... (Score 1) 161

Unfortunately the summary describes a 16 hour week + "additional flexible hours". Beyond that, the only clue is "30 hours per week", which is evenly divisible by five days (or six), but not four.

Hence my comment....

Personally, I've been looking forward to the four day work-week for a long time. Last time we shortened the workweek (from six days per to five) was before my father was born....

Comment Re:social experiments (Score 1) 291

I'd be interested in knowing WHY the robot babies failed.

Perhaps because human females are hardwired genetically to like babies?

Actually, this whole notion is from a very old science fiction story. Main characters had to deal with robot baby before they could get a license to have a real one. Very funny story.

But, as it turns out, completely unnecessary, since higher standard of living seems to reduce reproduction rate nicely in the Real World (tm).

Comment 70% accuracy? (Score 2, Insightful) 82

Hmm, 166 users, 71 of whom were known depressed. 70% accuracy means they picked 50 of the depressed people as depressed, and 28 (or 29) of the non-depressed people as depressed.

Given that the national depression rate is 6.7% (take that with a grain of salt), we'd expect to see, based on this test, 32.7% of the population found to be depressed. Of that 32.7%, one in seven would actually be depressed....

Color me less than impressed with this study.

Comment Re:Or the other reason.... (Score 2) 438

And yet the Netherlands has no problems with flooding despite most of the country being below sea level..

Of course, the Netherlands don't have a 3M km^2 watershed dumping water into them, either. And the Netherlands is smaller than Louisiana alone (by a factor of about 2.5), much less the Mississippi watershed (by a factor of about 80)....

Comment Re:Or... (Score 1) 82

The USA is the country which was in the right place at the right time to dominate everything for the last couple hundred years.

Couple??? No, the USA has dominated for the last century, maybe. In the 19th century, we were mostly a non-entity outside North America (and arguably South America). We didn't really take over as the dominant world power till WW2. Before that, the UK was still the big dog....

Comment Re:perhaps a buyback program? (Score 1) 191

Didn't you notice OP's "no questions asked"?

If the police are going to run serial numbers, that's going to convince people not to sell their guns to the cops. Which means it'll work like most "gun buy-backs" - they get a lot of crap (like a WW1-era rifle) instead of the guns they want to get (the ones the gang-bangers are using).

Comment Re:So long as we're trying such elaborate measures (Score 1) 191

The local laws in Chicago are some of the most restrictive in the USA. Basically, it reduces to "no guns for you unless you're politically connected".

And yet, the bad guys still seem to get guns with no real issues. Perhaps because if you're a criminal, you see nothing particularly wrong with breaking the gun laws, but who knows?

Comment Re:The targets aren't fixed points. (Score 5, Insightful) 191

It would be far better to legalize drugs, defunding the gangs.

Of course, as a privileged white male from the suburbs, I could be wrong.

Once upon a time, we tried a "noble experiment" that we called Prohibition. For Chicago, as for most of the nation, the result was vastly increased crime, and gun battles in the streets (remember "the Night Chicago Died", anyone?).

Eventually, we got rid of that particular notion, and thing settled down.

And then we decided we needed to Do Something (about the recreational chemicals of choice of certain, shall we say, darker-skinned citizens) and now we have The War On Drugs.

So far, the War on Drugs (AKA Prohibition II) has had pretty much exactly the same effects as Prohibition.

So, let's try a really bold experiment! End the War On Drugs (Prohibition II), and see if it has the same effects that ending Prohibition had. After all, we can always restart the War On Drugs if ending it doesn't fix the problems.

And, what the Hell, it just might work to let people drink/smoke/inject whatever they want, rather than trying to be Mommy to every citizen....

Comment Re:perhaps a buyback program? (Score 5, Insightful) 191

have a no-questions-asked firearm buyback program

So, I rob a gun shop in the next State, in the sure knowledge that the Chicago PD will act as my fence? Yah, that's a good idea.

Note, by the by, that many places in the USA (basically all of them, since Chicago has one of the worst crime problems in the USA, and some of the most restrictive gun laws) get by just fine without worrying so much about guns in private hands.

Comment Re:We're All Dying (Score 1) 510

The real problem is that profit is very much a part of human nature we can't seem to conquer.

Do keep in mind that your paycheck is "profit". Or, at least, the part of your paycheck that buys you the stuff above the subsistence level.

IOW, "profit" isn't a dirty word. It's perfectly acceptable to want profit, just as it's perfectly acceptable to want to be able to buy a nicer car.....

Comment Re: Stealth (Score 2) 117

The us military could have won in Vietnam if allowed to fire bomb civilian targets.

The US military didn't even need that. All they needed was permission to go into North Vietnam and beat the crap out of them.

Alas, the Korean War was still fresh in everyone's mind - when we rolled up North Korea, the Chinese came into the war. So, the various Presidents said "no invading North Vietnam".

And it's still pretty much true that if you give the enemy a safe space, the enemy CANNOT be beaten. If he's losing, he just pulls back into his safe space until he's ready to go another round....

Comment Re:You don't fit, support basic income legislature (Score 1) 366

You don't fit, anywhere in the puzzle. I suggest you support legislature in support of a basic income, because in the future probably 75% of the workforce will be automated out of a job.

Y'know, that's just what Ludd and co. said! Once upon a time, 90% of the population were farmers, then they invented harvesters and combines and such, and most of those farmers were put out of business. Terrible the way 88% of the population has been unemployed for the last century, isn't it?

What's that you say? We haven't had 80+% unemployment for a century???? How can this be?! After all, if we automate something, there's no way that whole new fields of endeavor would develop, is there?

Slashdot Top Deals

"Truth never comes into the world but like a bastard, to the ignominy of him that brought her birth." -- Milton