Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



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

Comment Re: Pierson's Puppeteers (Score 1) 229

In contrast, keeping a house warmer than the outside is much cheaper. Humans with no technology are 100W heaters. All other machines that we put in a house generate heat as a waste product. With modern insulation, it's very easy to reduce the outflow of heat. Heating a house for a day can easily consume less energy than cooling it for a week.

It's very easy to keep a house cooler than the outside cheaply. You sink ducts into the ground where they get cooled to 50 degrees, and you use slow, low-power fans to move that air into your house. Sadly, we don't do this, nor do we install adequate insulation into most homes. They are overwhelmingly still insulated with fiberglass, which is practically ancient technology today.

Comment Re:Pierson's Puppeteers (Score 1) 229

Around 90% of them would actually mean it (you'd have thought that sociopaths would be a lower percentage of the population of parents than the general population, but apparently not).

Why would you think that? Having children is a sociopathic act when we're overpopulated. At our current level of behavior, Earth is over its carrying capacity. People having children aren't thinking of society, they're thinking of themselves.

Of those, a very small percentage would honestly be able to say that they also want a safer world for everyone else's children. If your children are going to inherit a survivable part of the world, then why should they care that if a billion or two other people that they've never met will suffer and / or die?

That, in turn, is only because they are stupid and ignorant. It should be obvious that we are all living on the same planet.

Herd mammals did not evolve to have an emotional response to that (and, for the most part, that's a good thing - you couldn't function if you had an empathic response to all of the suffering in a world of over 6 billion people). That's why appeals to emotion in things like this are a waste of time.

Herd animals are easy to panic. That's why appeals to emotion work. If you tried them with predators, you'd just get your face bitten off.

Comment Re:Pierson's Puppeteers (Score 1) 229

Why the hell should anyone care about abstract "people"?

Because they are "people"

If they don't, I argue that they aren't actually people, and we'd be better off without them. AKA you.

Another argument is that sooner or later the men with guns are going to realize that the environment has to be protected. And then they will find that you muck up the numbers, and will have to be removed from the equation in order to make them come out correctly. Buh-bye!

Comment Re:Only time will tell (Score 1) 229

These have been increases in temperatures.

What have?

This implies global warming.

What does?

Since we are still at the infant stage of understanding and accurately predicting what will happen over mid to long spans of time it's best to stop arguing,

Actually, we're well past infant. We can make pretty good predictions. The only way in which they aren't very good is that things are actually getting worse faster than predicted.

try to pollute less since that just makes sense,

To a lot of people, it doesn't. Consequently...

and enjoy our lives.

I'm trying, but people who don't believe in polluting less are making it difficult. That's why we need to force them to behave better. And that's why we need to argue about it.

Life is too damn short to fight about issues primarily created and controlled by oil, gas, and energy corporations.

This issue was created by physics. Try to keep up.

Comment Re:So global warming started... (Score 1) 229

It is because we burned all that that we sit here with 2016 technology not dying of different diseases and injuries and infections and feeding many multiples of people per acre than they did.

No. That's only because we burned some of that. Most of what we burned, we burned for profit and greed, not human advancement as a species. Not even accidentally. Most of the unnecessary energy output goes directly to padding pockets.

Comment Re:Shows cumulative as well. (Score 1) 229

So many like to point to industrial revolution for causing this.

That's because humans now emit more CO2 than volcanism.

Yet, what this study is really saying is that for centuries, if not millenniums, man had been overwhelming nature and slowly breaking down its ability to absorb the co2.

Yes, that is also true. We were deforesting the planet in pursuit of war. Most of the really heavy deforestation came when the big countries went naval warfare. We were cutting them down, making them into boats, then putting them out into the ocean and sinking them and losing that wood forever.

Of course, today we're still doing the equivalent; just try getting a permit to cut down a tree in Japan and use it for something, but they are buying California's redwoods as fast as they can be shipped over there. Then they are coating them in tar and sinking them under the ocean for storage. What are the odds that some cataclysm will remove them from the equation? Pretty goddamn good in Japan. We're cutting down the redwoods for nothing, as a species. Just to move some numbers around.

If there were such a thing as karma, humanity would deserve to die.

Journal Journal: Shouldn't need to say "I didn't care much for Gawker but..."

The fact you have to bend over backwards to disassociate yourself with Gawker before pointing out that Thiel's assault on it was a dangerous attack on free speech is a dangerous sign that we've already drifted a fairly long distance towards fascism.

And, FWIW, if Thiel had bankrolled Elton John's (far more legitimate) lawsuits against The Sun newspaper in the 1980s, and bankrupted Rupert Murdoch as a result, there'd have been a public outcry in Britain.

Comment Re:Peter Thiel didn't bankrupt Gawker (Score 1) 135

Bankruptcy was an absurd punishment over a celebrity sex tape.

This was never about a sex tape. It was about Thiel being pissed about an expose of homophobia within silicon valley in which he was outed. The original article Gawker published about him was actually, ironically enough, relatively good journalism, about a matter of legitimate public interest, only partially spoiled by Gawker's carelessness.

You may want billionaires to dictate who can and who can't write the news. Me? I'd rather not live in a thielocracy.

Comment Re:Science (Score 2) 62

Yes, more transceivers are better than less, thank you MIT.

But only if they're really tightly synchronized.

MIT got them to be tightly synchronized despite being in different boxes in different rooms, rather than all being in the same box, WITHOUT a lot of extra, extra-special, extra-fancy, extra-cost, hardware. This can be built with a bit more off the shelf stuff (maybe the SAME amount of the same off the shelf stuff but with a bit better firmware) and easily folded into the next generation's chips.

Comment Re:Not handy for the home (Score 1) 62

Since they are talking about many devices connecting to multiple routers it's not going to do much for the average home user then. I may have a couple of devices but only the one router.

Actually:
  - If you got a second router, put it some distance away from the first, and hooked them together with a network cable, you could use two devices about as fast as you could one with one router.
  - If you had three wired routers you could use three devices close to as fast as you could use one with one router.
And so on.

Note that I'm not talking about using the devices with each near a particular router. I'm talking about the routers spread out around the room or the house and the devices also somewhat spread out - but differently (even just at different spots in the same room) and with no particular relation between the device and the router locations.

Comment I read the version with the photos (Score 1) 1

I've got to say your camera barely qualifies as a potato.

I used to do the convention thing, but then I realized that all I ever did was gawk at better-dressed people and occasionally spout gibberish at people who are significantly more famous than myself (As an example, back in the 90's I met Brian Jaques and handed him Salamandastron to sign. When he asked me who to dedicate it to, I replied "uh... I dunno?") or embarrass myself by asking really, really stupid questions at panels.

I just realized it's been a decade since I drove half a day to Dallas on a lark and went to A-Kon. Every now and then I think of going to cons again but work hasn't left time for having a life, even a nerdy life such as that maligned by the masses.

Slashdot Top Deals

If in any problem you find yourself doing an immense amount of work, the answer can be obtained by simple inspection.

Working...