Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



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! ×

Comment Re:It's pretty simple (Score 1) 193

I do look at the labels (especially since they are bright yellow and required to be plastered on the front of every appliance). Yes, they do influence my purchase decisions.
(BTW, your "in door" ice dispenser takes up a lot more space in the freezer and uses more energy than the traditional ice maker. I think it's an American thing to have ice in every beverage. I prefer water at tap temperature and I don't drink flavored beverages.)

Comment Re:So you want a tax on wind and solar. (Score 1) 300

I thought the point of renewables is that they have very little cost to society. There is no CO2, NOx, heavy metal pollution, mine tailings, etc. There is a small amount of pollution related to the manufacture of solar panels, windmills, etc. but beyond that, there is no ongoing pollution as there is with fossil fuels.
You seem to think that they should pay a tax for retraining workers... perhaps, but that is also a very small amount compared to the amount of energy generated and is covered by existing government programs.
So, what is the rationale for taxing renewables?

Comment Re:Do we really need more people? (Score 1) 173

And anyways isn't it a Progressive stance to bleat on about how there's too many undesirable people in the world and how to fix it?

No, and definitely not when it's thinly veiled "Brown people are to blame!" We are interested in fixing issues with the world, we're just uninterested in trying to claim it's all a massive moral failing on someone's part and make ourselves feel superior for it.

And you should realize that unlike the right, it's not a religion with us. If a key liberal position were there's too much babies and we need to stop trying to save lives, I'd be firmly opposed to that but would still be a liberal.

Comment Re: Yay for Men's rights... and other possibilitie (Score 1) 173

or providing alternatives to abortion.

You mean like lobbying to have birth control coverage mandated for all women and providing free birth control to women to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Yeah, that is nice of them to do.

/sarcasm. You make this far too easy.

Comment Re:Yay for Men's rights... and other possibilities (Score 1) 173

Not yet. There's still a significant window where babies can't be supported out of the womb. This would be useful for early premature born babies, born months early, not from conception on. Doctors have been pushing back how early a baby can be born and still survive for a while now.

Scientists have recently also had breakthroughs on the other side of things, keeping embryos alive from IVF longer without implanting them, but that was pushing it forward a matter of days, not say into the second trimester.

I don't see a definite timeline on when technology will advance to the point of supporting embryos from conception to viability either. The research on pushing how long embryos are viable after conception without putting them in a mom is all academic for understanding how embryos form, it's not gearing towards what you're talking about in humans. There is a "14 day rule" established in the 70's saying you can't let human embryos develop beyond that in a petrie dish. That was established when 14 days after IVF seemed like an impossible barrier to overcome. Without a clear medical necessity, there's not going to be much of a push to remove that rule, and there is no clear medical necessity: surrogates, IVF, and adoption are all things. The pro-life crowd is going to oppose ending the rule. Granted, the pro-life crowd is really focused on slut-shaming and punishing women who don't want children, embryos in a dish are not really their thing, so it's not going to be as vicious as their attacks on planned parenthood.

I digress, my point is there's no strong push to figure out how to keep an embryo alive out of a womb from conception to a point where the bag would support life, so expect it will be a very long time before it's a possibility.

Comment Re:Do we really need more people? (Score 1) 173

You can ask "don't we have too many people already" about medicine at any stage. A prematurely born kid has a better chance of contributing something positive to the world than some old boomer asshole who should be dead already. So lets bring this topic up next discussion about flu vaccines or alzheimers research.

The populations in Africa and the Middle East have far exceeded the available resources in those regions, and they're now heavily dependent on handouts from Western nations. There's no sign of the reproduction rates slowing down in those regions, either.

You must be a trump voter, because you're bringing up a lot of alternative facts. Developing nations are becoming less dependent on the west. And the birth rate is in fact slowing down in all areas.

The focus should be on getting the reproduction rates in third-world regions back down to more reasonable levels, to prevent the never-ending stream of famines, wars, and disease outbreaks we've been witnessing in such regions lately.

Another Trump voter sign: imagining things used to be better in your youth when in fact they were quantifiably worse, and making decisions which are going to exacerbate the perceived problems. Diseases are at an all-time low thanks to hygiene, sanitation, and vaccines. Much of that has been thanks to aid from western nations to developing nations. Oil dependence is going to cause wars, climate change is going to cause famine, and neither of those things are going to be solved by lowering birth rates. Which, as we have already covered, are in decline already.

Comment Facebook wants to tell me what they think is true (Score 2) 107

I just want Facebook to show me stuff, not tell me what they think is true.

I already fight the FB Android app:

- Most Recent is always, ALWAYS populated with hundreds of items, despite my reading every damned one of them 2 hours ago.

- I can Like item after item, and 15 minutes later scroll back through the list and MOST are actually NOT marked 'Like' by me. Huh?

- I can read Most Recent and refresh, and the order changes. Every damned time.

- I can delete all the app data, reinstall, and get the same crap. Hundreds of items unread, when I did in fact read them.

- Recommended For Me includes crap I've been rejecting for a few years now.

The Facebook Android app royally stinks. Facebook has been manipulating my feed for years. I should trust them to fact-check? No, on several counts. Never.

Slashdot Top Deals

Your computer account is overdrawn. Please see Big Brother.

Working...