Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Why? (Score 1) 1004

If it is ever used, it could mean the end of the world is nigh.

Or not. The world didn't end with the K-T Boundary Event (big rock falling out of the sky, causing explosion a fair number of orders of magnitude larger than the Tsar Bomba).

It won't even end civilization, though it might do a job on Western Civilization....

Comment Re:A well-written headline (Score 2) 75

The whole point of a headline is to be attention-getting. If you can make it clever, all the better. Nuclear Plants Leak is pure gold. Don't pretend people don't make jokes about how wind farms are hot air yuk yuk yuk. On the other hand, if you're a bit sensitive about jokes about nuclear plants leaking, well... u mad, bro?

LIke "Thousands killed by solar power"? Which, by the way, is true. Getting killed falling off a roof while installing solar panels is a more common way of dying than from a nuclear accident (total casualties in the USA due to civilian nuclear power: zero. Note the word "civilian". There was a military tet reactor that fit into a bathrub that managed to kill three people when they failed to follow procedure doing maintenance))....

Comment Re:BULLSHIT US saved Russia (Score 2) 1004

Russia contribute man power and equipment like tanks that the west has no concept of. For example there were literally 10x more Russian armies when Germany surrended. The truth is Russia WON ww2 by blood and guts.

Did you know that the USA sent Russia more than 10K tanksin WW2? And airplanes? And food/fuel/etc?

Russian tank production in WW2 was roughly comparable to US tank production, by the way.

And there were definitely 10x more Russian armies than German armies at the end of WW2. But not 10x more than American Armies. Don't forget that, for all the Europe First talk, most of the American effort was spent fighting Japan. So, we did the whole Second Front thing (and the Africa thing and the Italy thing) with the leftovers from the War in the Pacific thing....

And yes, the Russians won WW2 by blood and guts. Mostly because they had a nasty habit of executing competent generals (who might be a threat to Glorious Leader).

Never doubt that the Soviet contribution to WW2 was important. Decisive? That's arguable. Though there's a strong argument that Soviet participation in WW2 saved Germany from being hit with multiple atomic bombs....

Comment Re: Why even have elections? (Score 1) 430

Cannot vote Libertarian for the following reason:
-- The Environment-- property rights being enforced before the '60s is one of the biggest reasons our skies and rivers were so polluted before the EPA came into existence.

For anyone who was old enough to pay attention during the late 60s/early 70s you have to remember the smog over major cities, a river that could burn and Lake Erie dying. The regulations promulgated by the EPA resulted in much cleaner air, rivers and lakes.

Comment Re:Taking CO2 out?? (Score 5, Interesting) 375

Dare I say it?

Replace coal plants with nukes.

Then replace natural gas plants with nukes.

Then keep on building nukes till we have enough electricity being generated to replace all those gasoline/diesel automobiles (trucks, trains, etc) with electric versions.

And while we're doing that, replace oil-burning ship power plants with nukes.

Note that the steps after "coal plants" can be rearranged to taste. There are good arguments that we'd be better off getting the cars/trucks/trains replaced with all electric versions before we replace gas-fired power plants.

As long as the people getting worried about AGW are chanting "no nukes, no nukes", I'm going to continue ignoring the AGW problem as "not very serious, really"....

Comment Re:Best attempted on Earth first! (Score 1) 221

Hint: Replace the words "mining robot" with "mining RPV".

Realistically, we're not talking autonomous mining robot, we're talking remote controlled mining equipment. Sort of like what we use on Earth, but with a longer delay between command and response.

What I'm curious about is whether they've established requirements for CNC milling machines that can make the parts for the mining robots, to include the parts to make another CNC milling machine.

Excluding IC's, of course. They're light enough that you can ship a 100-year supply from Earth for less than the cost of building a chip fab on Mars, most likely.

Comment Re:Cost of loss? (Score 5, Insightful) 105

How much did all of this mission cost?

In the neighborhood of $1.3 billion.

Does anyone realize how much food that money could have provided to those in need ON THIS PLANET?!

$1.3B would buy in the timezone of 300 million big macs. Which would be enough for every poor FAMILY in the world to get a Big Mac. Hardly a significant impact on world hunger.

Note that if ALL the money ever spent on space were spent on food instead, we'd be worse off. The weather satellites alone paid for the entire world's space exploration budgets in better harvests as a result of better weather prediction....

Slashdot Top Deals

"my terminal is a lethal teaspoon." -- Patricia O Tuama