Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:a step too far (Score 1) 346

you sir, are blind, war is never good

What an utterly naive interpretation of world history you have. I can assure you, if you'd been a Jew being rounded up for extermination in WW2 you'd have a different opinion. Likewise, if you were Chinese or Korean being subjugated by Imperial Japan, you'd have a different perspective. There is such a thing as a "just war" even though you somehow ignore the concept. It's usually when your opponent starts the war and is hell bent on eradicating you and your way of life.

Alas, you sit there in perfect safety and comfort, passing judgement on those who sacrificed fa more than you can ever imagine so you could impugn their sacrifices.

Comment Re:Oh look. (Score 1) 346

For now, people can worry about what type of weapons to use and whether or not certain types should be banned.

But in the future, all the debates will be about will be "how do we pick just the right grid squares in which to Kill All Humans?"

Banned for who? And who's going to enforce this ban?

You have to remember any treaty (a) must have signatories that agree to follow it and (b) there must be a method of enforcement. If you lack either of these two conditions, the treaty has no effect.

Comment Re: Oh look. (Score 1) 346

If there was a "total war" America would not exist anymore.

Not sure how you think you could pull that off, but whatever.

We sink your carriers, then we siege your cities.

Again...exactly how do you plan to accomplish this? It's not like Iran hasn't been firing missiles at our carriers this whole time. Yeah, it's a halfhearted effort by the Iranians, but what exactly do you think would happen to Iran if you managed to even damage one of our carriers, much less sink one? I can describe it thusly: the American gloves would come off. Iran would be plastered into oblivion via conventional bombardment, and there's very little Iran could do to stop it. Sure, we'd take losses, but the Iranian regime would cease to exist in totality. America has had this option available to it since day one. We haven't exercised it. Not because we couldn't do it but because we chose not to. Do not mistake restraint for a lack of capability.

Comment nuclear = quality of life (Score 1) 108

Down here in the heat and humidity of USDA Zone 10-11, my monthly summer/fall electric bills are now topping $900 (and still rising!) which is as big as my family's food bill. I keep most of the house at 79 during the day and bedrooms 75-76 at night. I know many folks who just peg it at 72 or lower all the time. I would absolutely live within range of a NPP or SMR. It's 2026 and there's no reason we shouldn't be down in the $0.05/kWh range in the US.

Comment Re:*facepalm* (Score 1) 177

This was always going to end this way. Sorry Ofcom but 4chan is 100% in the right here. Your authority extends only to requesting it be blocked in your country. Nothing more.

This isn't a multinational company and it is not in any way subject to any laws other than US law.

The US should think and act the same way: activities, companies and individuals outside the borders of the US are not subject to US laws. America is not the world's police force, as much as it likes to think it is. Mind your own business, and the rest of the world should do the same.

Allow me to posit the following: we could very well be minding our own business but still strongly influence the rest of the world. For example, if a company wishes to do business in America -- the world's largest and most lucrative commercial market -- they must comply with US laws. This is no different than any other country. You may not like it, but that's how commercial business works, and it'd be no different if someone like North Korea had the market everyone wanted. You'd just be complaining about a different country.

Don't like it? Don't do business in the US and you're free to do whatever you want. You'll be excluding yourself from probably 70% of the available market, but you're free to make that choice.

Don't forget, your argument can be turned around quite easily: you could mind your own business and stop trying to tell the US how to do business according to your wants/needs. Funny how that works.

Comment Re:UK folks went to 4chan, 4chan did not go to UK (Score 2) 177

they are no longer in the UK and UK laws no longer apply.

You're blissfully unaware of how laws work.

There are certain crimes that can be prosecuted and punished in the UK even if they were committed in Thailand or Antarctica. It is sufficient that they can get to you somehow, for example via an Interpol arrest request or an extradition order or by freezing your assets, etc.

Don't trust me, look it up, I'm sure chatgpt can fill you in.

You're blissfully unaware of how national sovereignty works.

Good luck getting the US to accommodate an Interpol extradition request for 4chan and its personnel. There's no reason the US would agree to it since 4chan has violated no US law. So long as 4chan operates in the US exclusively and violates no US laws, they are effectively beyond the reach of the UK government. They could presumably nab some 4chan executive if they ever visited the UK, but all one has to do to avoid that is just not visit the UK.

This is how international legal disputes have been handled since the dawn of international legal disputes. Don't trust me, look it up, I'm sure chatgpt can fill you in.

Comment Admitting the obvious (Score 5, Insightful) 184

It's about time they admitted to something that was obvious to almost everyone: nuclear power is the only effective path to carbon-free base load power generation. Wind and solar make good intermittent sources, but base load has to be utterly reliable regardless of whether the wind is blowing or the sun is shining. That's nuclear.

Getting rid of the nukes was a knee-jerk reaction, not a smart technological decision. The pivot to depending on oil and gas from a potential hostile neighbor just added to the madness.

Submission + - NY AG Letitia James is suing Valve (cbsnews.com)

DesScorp writes: James is going after Valve on gambling charges, stating that loot boxes are predatory, especially for underage gamers:

"This loot box model that Valve has developed—charging an individual for a chance to win something of value based on luck alone—is quintessential gambling, prohibited under New York's Constitution and Penal Law," the complaint says. In one of the games, the process even resembles a slot machine, according James. Since the prizes in the loot boxes are determined randomly in accordance with odds set by Valve, James alleges, that effectively makes Valve an online casino. "Valve, a video game developer, has made billions of dollars by letting children and adults illegally gamble for the chance to win valuable virtual prizes," James posted on social media. "These features are addictive and harmful. That's why I'm suing to stop Valve's unlawful conduct and protect New Yorkers."


Slashdot Top Deals

The universe does not have laws -- it has habits, and habits can be broken.

Working...