Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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

Comment Re:Cool, but how does that help anything? (Score 4, Informative) 488

There's not much water on the moon, and no CO2 - but plenty of both on Mars. Add power and you can make methane fuel for the return trip (and for refueling trips further out). Plus you need water for drinking & hydroponics, oxygen for breathing, CO2 for your greenhouse, hydrogen for fuel cells - much harder to be self-sustaining for any long term on the moon.

Comment Re:Surprisingly XKCD is wrong ! (Score 2) 192

Oh look, it's this guy again - cite him a study and watch him yell "NO IT ISN'T!" and start frothing at the mouth :-)

Pro tip, dude - look a few posts up. Someone already tried posting your version, only to find it's not "better data" at all. I'm guessing you took all of Watts' claims as gospel and never realised it's based on only a single ice core (and thus says nothing at all about global temperatures). Or are you just still pushing your whole "nuh uh, you're all wrong because Greenland" schtick?

Comment Re: The U.S. ain't perfect, but... (Score 1) 527

That's one side's view, yes - there are differing accounts. You might want to read up more on the prelude to that battle. Workers had already been killed in previous clashes. The situation should never have been escalated like that - sending in hundreds of men with guns all but guaranteed further deaths.

Comment Re: The U.S. ain't perfect, but... (Score 1) 527

Agree that regulation doesn't solve corruption, of course, and that powerful people will exploit any political system - but are you saying regulation doesn't solve anything? Because it's simple enough to show that sensible regulation can be very effective at reining in many forms of corporate bad behaviour.

Comment Re: The U.S. ain't perfect, but... (Score 4, Informative) 527

Just to pick the first three:

John Jacob Astor: bribed officials & politicians to ensure his monopoly, exploited natives with liquor.
Andrew Carnegie: insider trading, exploited workers, murderous strike-breaking.
William A. Clarke: inspired the Corrupt Practices Act 1912, but not in a good way.

We all agree that economic activity needs to follow basic laws, but I'm mostly referring to regulations that limit corporate exploitation of things that aren't illegal, yet can be clearly damaging to society. Pollution and dumping of waste is an obvious one (incidentally, benefits of EPA regulations outweigh costs by 10 to 1). Worker health & safety is another. Price-fixing, false advertising, leveraged monopolies, offloading of external costs onto the general public etc - all things that benefit the corporation at the cost of others, often in hard-to-quantify but very real ways.

Regulations are a burden on the economy - but kept reasonable, they prevent excesses that can be much worse.

Comment Re: The U.S. ain't perfect, but... (Score 3, Insightful) 527

I think people have forgotten what unregulated capitalism looks like. It wasn't all that long ago.

Capitalism, like every other organisation, needs checks and balances. There's no other way to ensure accountability, and without accountability then unrestrained capitalists can do just as much damage to society as unrestrained communists or dictators. Moderate regulation is a necessary tradeoff to stop psychopath CEOs like Shkreli from efficiently strip-mining their markets to the bone.

Comment Re:only 73% of the market cares.. (Score 1) 75

I'm sure you'll still be able to use Bluetooth headphones with your new iPhone, but I've also heard that Apple's upcoming "AirPods" use a new proprietary standard (big surprise there).

Of course, Apple doesn't have to create a new & incompatible standard just to get better wireless audio than A2DP. They could happily support aptX over Bluetooth (or even AAC or MP3). But I expect the prospect of a whole new field of Made for iPhone peripheral licencing just proved too tempting, so I expect we'll hear plenty about how this glorious new standard is well worth the extra cost you'll be paying.

Comment Re:The anti-science sure is odd. (Score 1) 709

the EXACT OPPOSITE has been *****OBSERVED*****

So you keep claiming, but repeating it louder isn't going to help. If you can produce this supposed evidence, try doing that, because spamming links to some political site won't sway anyone. And while you're at it, see if you can explain away the mountains of evidence showing the accelerating rise in temperatures for the last 150 years.

the falsified data from NOAA, yes, FALSIFIED

Let me guess, you've got no evidence for this accusation of malfeasance either, right? Your sole basis for all this seems to be that you don't like the results, and something something conspiracy. Well too bad, science doesn't work that way. You can spout Lysenkoism all you like, but from here it looks much more like you're the one denying the evidence you dislike, and producing none of your own.

NOAA are completely open about their data correction methods, which are peer reviewed, confirmed independently, and are corroborated by data & analysis from NASA, CRU, and other international agencies. And if you still don't like it, take their raw data (yes, it's always been available) and do your own analysis (if you can get your methodology through peer review, ha ha). That's what the Berkeley Earth people did (you can check their data too) - and surprise surprise, their results agreed with NOAA, NASA, and the others. So your unsubstantiated claims of "tainted" data are laughable in the face of the real evidence.

No amount of evidence will ever persuade you from your religious beliefs.

What a coincidence; "no amount of evidence" is exactly what you've produced. And yet it's you that has repeatedly dismissed all the evidence against you, citing only some purely hypothetical political manipulation. "Zombie minion" indeed.

Comment Re:The anti-science sure is odd. (Score 1) 709

did you not know the Minoan Warm Period, Roman Warm Period and Medieval Warm period were warmer than today?

No, because globally, they were much colder (see fig 2).

Vikings farmed in Greenland

And now it's easier than ever before.

wine grapes could be grown as far north as York in England.

There's many commercial vineyards there today, and even further north.

Now the graves of the Vikings are under 'permafrost'

Wrong, there hasn't been permafrost at those sites for a long time.

You talk about 'nutters' yet seem to be defending a position for which you don't even understand even the basic counter evidence

I've yet to see you present any, only oft-repeated claims that you obviously have never bothered to check for yourself.

I would hope you would look at the statement of the leaders of the CAGW movement

You seriously expect us to accept a bunch of out-of-context quotes as evidence of some global conspiracy? The only "agenda" it proves is that of the people who set up the website.

"Anti-science" means people who deliberately ignore the huge amounts of collected scientific evidence, and continue to spout provably incorrect claims with no evidence of their own. "Nutters" usually follow this by attempted FUD about the reliability of all the evidence against them, inevitably resulting in global conspiracy claims. You certainly qualify for both terms.

Slashdot Top Deals

!07/11 PDP a ni deppart m'I !pleH