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


Forgot your password?
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 Re:of course it will burn.... IF (Score 1) 418

It's possible that he means the timeframe for the consumption of the fossil fuels. But he's also speaking of "burn it over a millennia". An article trying to explain the impact in 2300 of fuel burn in the ~700 years after that date would not be published in a climate category, but more in some fundamental physics category, with subject like "is the direction of time fixed", "is the consequence always after the cause",...

Comment Re:of course it will burn.... IF (Score 5, Informative) 418

The article makes absolutely NO MENTION of time frame

Absolutely no mention, except for the six mentions of time frame in the article: "by year 2300", "in 2300" (twice), "during the 2100-2300 period" (twice), "to the year 2300", plus 3 mentions of the 2100 time frame. And I stopped to count before even reaching the end of the first page (out of 6)

Comment Re:Why more fuel than usual? (Score 2) 104

Basically, it's a wheel that you can speed up or down with a motor. The axis of the wheel is fixed to the spacecraft body. When you accelerate the wheel rotation, its angular momentum increase. But as the total angular momentum of the spacecraft does not change, the rest must rotate in the other direction, by reaction. Typically you include several of them in one spacecraft because each of them only control one axis.

Comment Same production, less effort? (Score 1) 954

If the humanity as a whole can produce the same amount of goods/services with less human effort, this seems to be a positive thing. The only thing to fix is the way to make all humans to have access to this goods/services, but that's not something to fix on the production part, it's somewhere else in the system.

Comment Re:So? (Score 1) 393

When we have a cold snap the global warming types say "it's just weather" and so when we have a warm month here and there I believe I can rightfully say that "it's just weather".

When was the last time that the monthly (or yearly) global anomaly broke a low record? Was that at this point that you heard people say "it's just weather"?

Comment Re: So? (Score 1) 393

They could have taken the years at the beginning of the recorded temperature (as the comment at the origin of this trend assumed), but the quality and uncertainty is bigger there. If they had done that, the current anomaly would bigger, but that does not really matter. The trend of the anomaly (= the trend of the average temperature) is the important part. And the fact that the anomaly has got several new high.

Comment Re:Yeah, sure (Score 1) 412

No, it is not required. The right to free residence (FTFY, free movement is everything below 3 months) as defined in the "EU freedom of movement and residence" text already include a clause explaining that you cannot move just to take the social benefits. Go to article 15:

2. Member States may require the persons concerned to provide evidence that they have:

(a) stable and regular resources which are sufficient to maintain themselves and the members of their families, without recourse to the social assistance of the Member State concerned. For each of the categories referred to in Article 14(2), Member States shall evaluate these resources by reference to their nature and regularity and may take into account the level of minimum wages and pensions;

(b) sickness insurance covering all risks in the second Member State normally covered for its own nationals in the Member State concerned.

Slashdot Top Deals

"If you can, help others. If you can't, at least don't hurt others." -- the Dalai Lama