Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



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! ×
Earth

'Moore's Law' For Carbon Would Defeat Global Warming (technologyreview.com) 111

An anonymous reader quotes a report from MIT Technology Review: A streamlined set of goals for reducing carbon emissions could simplify the way nations approach the quest to reduce human impact on the planet. A group of European researchers have a refreshingly straightforward solution that they call a carbon law -- or, as the Guardian has coined it, a "Moore's law for carbon." The overarching goal is simple: globally, we must halve carbon dioxide emissions every decade. That's essentially it. The rule would ideally be applied "to all sectors and countries at all scales," and would encourage "bold action in the short term." Dramatic changes would naturally have to occur as a result -- from quick wins like carbon taxes and energy efficiency regulations, to longer-term policies like phasing out combustion-engine cars and carbon-neutral building regulations. If policy makers followed the carbon law, adoption of renewables would continue its current pace of doubling energy production every 5.5 years, and carbon dioxide sequestration technologies would need to ramp up in order for the the planet to reach net-zero emissions by the middle of the century, say the researchers. Along the way, coal use would end as soon as 2030 and oil use by 2040. There are, clearly, issues with the idea, not least being the prospect of convincing every nation to commit to such a vision. The very simplicity that makes the idea compelling can also be used as a point of criticism: Can such a basic rule ever hope to define practical ideas as to how to change the world's energy production and consumption? The study has been published in the journal Science.

Comment Re:No jobs, sit in traffic all day (Score 1) 191

I'd rather stick my balls in a vise than live in most inner cities. I'd rather set myself on fire while sticking my balls in a vise than live in Seattle (or Portland, or San Francisco), how you people can stand the level of mental illness that pervades the cities, I'll never understand.

Whatever, grandpa. It's not the 1970s, you know.

Comment Many different things (Score 1) 117

We do studies which do measure self-reports of alcohol consumption over long duration periods (e.g. years).

In general, what most of these studies tend to say is:

A. Don't binge drink.

B. No, seriously, stop.

C. If female, there tend not to be positive effects of drinking more than one drink per day. No, don't add up all the alcohol from the week and drink it at one party.

D. If male, 2-3 drinks a day may have a positive effect. Some of that is because men tend to be bad at socializing. Some of the positive impact and lower stress is from the socializing. Drinking all this alcohol in one sitting by yourself in the dark is probably very bad for you. Get a drink or two with family or friends, especially at a meal. Drinking on an empty stomach tends to be bad for you.

E. Don't drive or operate machinery while drinking or shortly after that.

F. We told you to stop binge drinking. Seriously. Stop doing it. Especially in the basement and then passing out.

G. Stop writing code when you're drinking. No, it doesn't help.

Comment Re:also in the news ... (Score 1) 467

Good thing it takes longer to work someone to death if you're paying them a little bit. Slavery is for suckers.

The thing is....NONE of these "gig" jobs are there for you to make a living on...that's not their purpose.

They are there to allow you to make some money on the SIDE, when you have free cycles.

Not every single job out there is one meant to make a career and living from, when did this thinking come about?

Perhaps from the fact that everybody needs a job to make a living on? And that people who have a job that they make a living on, have no free cycles?

Comment Re:Rotten Tomatoes is getting self-important (Score 1) 349

I do the same when looking for a restaurant - find a negative review and they'll tell you everything good about the place that they don't understand.

This. I use this same strategy when evaluating any product. Read a few good reviews, sure, but I need to read a few of the top negative reviews to figure out if the product actually has weaknesses that matter to me, or if it's just been purchased by a few users with unrealistic expectations.

The good thing about negative reviews is they usually aren't placed there by the business or by a sock puppet/SEO, so the dishonest reviews are at least more transparent. If some jerk with a grudge posts a 1 star review, they'll often include a whole sob story about how this company was unfair to them because they didn't immediately replace the broken thing the user dropped on a concrete floor.

Slashdot Top Deals

Veni, Vidi, VISA: I came, I saw, I did a little shopping.

Working...