Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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

Comment Re:Wouldn't need subsidies (Score 1) 259

The "nuclear is expensive" claim is only true because the anti-nuclear lobby has made it that way.

This is unequivocally false. Nuclear power has been the most expensive way to generate energy since its inception. The only possibilty and the only way nuclear power in practice has been economically feasable is more or less due to the quote in the summary:

"does better in a socialist economy than in a capitalist one, because nuclear energy prefers to have the public do the cleanup, do the insurance, cover all of the losses and it only wants the profits."

Breeder reactors are a great idea, but do nothing to mitigate the insane and massive cost already incurred, and will continue to cost, indefinitely. Clean up nuclear power's current problems first, pay off the massive subsidy-debt to governments (to the people that payed for it), solve the waste problem (the current one, as it is, without invoking the largely non-existent messiah breeder reactors), and then you can once again receive massive government subsidies for energy companies to build their breeder reactors, take all the profits, with none of the respinsibility.

Or, you know, spend that money on alternative energies and actaully get what you pay for without incurring insane massive debt and the possibility of any sort of nasty waste that lingers as a dnager for a millenia.

Comment Re:Arguing over the subjective (Score 1) 523

With that kind of attitude, you'll never pass any software engineering practical exam, and thus never become legally licensed to practice software engineering in the civil, academic, corporate or industrial world. On the other hand, programmers never needed such things, will need no stinking license to practice ever, won't need tuition debt, and certainly don't need a stinking framed degree with a fake and insulting euphamism for "programmer" printed in fake caligraphy. Real software engineers are actually spoiled rich and bored programmers trying to prove something. Programmers simply program, otherwise they are not programmers, but hacks (not to be confused with 'hackers').

Comment Re:We don't know how to be nice. (Score 1) 379

In the last 15 years, we have seen the death of habeas corpus, the death of the Fourth Amendment, and the death of the Sixth Amendment (and of course the bastardization of the 2nd Amendment). Recently, there have been assaults to the 1st Amendment... and your post appears to be on the wrong side of that battle.

Comment Re:Wow, they really are stuck in the past (Score 1) 486

I don't think for long, now they have named Mr. Gates as a target, the world's richest man's (more or less) decadently well-funded security team is very likely now targeting them. I wonder how many ex-special forces work for him, and how many more will now be hired.

Comment Re:What about non-"tobacco product" vapes? (Score 1) 342

The FDA is making a mistake only in this regard. FDA seems to only care about nicotine regulation. Nicotine is pretty dangerous stuff, but the fact of the matter is it is simply not the most dangerous element of vaping. How many nicotine poisonings or deaths have there been since the industry's birth? Probably none. Yet FDA absolutely should be stepping in to hold manufacturers in line, but FDA need to see where the very real danger lies: lithium batteries. Lithium cells need understanding and care to be used safely. The one line warning that lithium cells may have, without any benefit of instruction or best practices, is clearly insufficient. It is kind of nuts what modders think they are clever doing with sub-ohm coils and 100W vapes... rest assured more children will be maimed, and apparently FDA is currently blinded to this fact because nicotine is a drug and all drugs are bad. For all the good intentions of the nanny state, it rolls right over the actual real dangers from which they should be protecting consumers.

Comment Re:Grease can be used as fuel. Why would you dump (Score 1) 189

It isn't too much of a surprise that the economics of producing biodiesel from used restaurant oil are shaky; and it also wouldn't be much of a surprise if on-site/near-site illicit dumping by individual operators looking to avoid paying for collection would be pretty common; but I am a little surprised that, if you are going to go to the trouble of collecting the stuff, it isn't economic to burn in less demanding applications.

Could be that their fuel tax has something to do with it:

With state gas taxes now up to 44.5 cents a gallon, adding in the current federal gas tax of 18.4 cents, the total per gallon gas tax in Washington is now 62.9 cents.

A free barrel of grease used for fuel now costs $18.69 in Washington State.

Comment Re:God I hate to say this, but (Score 1) 562

basically identical

Why don't you just use the word "similar," if it is not precisely identical? Perhaps your point is thin. As much as the plot is like IV, it is like I and VI, because he plots of I and VI are indeed very similar to IV. In regards to similar plots, the original 6 have similar plots as well. Even smaller scenes can be compared to the larger acts, in similarity. Sometimes, the shots from one of the films is entirely duplicated in another. Lucas created his masterpiece like a musical piece. Do you complain that the 3rd movement of a musical piece is "basically identical" to its 1st movement?

Perhaps you believe you are insightful, but your observation is as shallow as it gets. Basically, your insight is worthless. Let me rephrase that. Your insight is worthless.

Comment Re:Ontological Confusions (Score 1) 411

However I object to the term 'ontological confusions', some people's philosophies aren't founded on logic

I object to your obvious confusion about the terms you're using. Why would anyone believe ontology has anything whatsoever to do with logic??! FYI, the things religious people believe has everything to do with metaphysics. Otherwise, nice massive Strawman fallacy of a post there!! And then more ridiculous people mod parent insightful? I know you think you're deep, alright, but you should stay in the shallow end.

Comment Re:Here we go again (Score 1) 568

Look, 'software developers' are, to a large part, engineering software. They're making a machine, an engine designed for a specific purpose.

Someone at Subway engineered all those sandwhiches. Someone at the bar engineered all those drinks. A software engineer's engine, code execution, running on processors and memory is a loose metaphor for a literal engine. I argue that programmers are certainly engineers, metaphorically speaking. A parent, however, is an engineer in the literal sense, if you accept that a human body is a literal engine in that it converts power to motion, does W ork as in W = F * d . Some code, I have no doubt, can do W=fd. Those programmers are literal engineers, but others are metaphorical.

Some type Bash commands, but never call it programming, and believe most who script would only describe it as such to one who never heard the term "scripting," because it is literally programming, but simpler and perhaps rudimentary compared to the big programming projects... there are other language examples. Many scripters are programming at the level of software engineering projects. But we all agree without ever raising a vote that scripters are not quite programmers, even though they absolutely are. Graphic Designers were once artists, and then there was WWW and suddenly page/site designers are developers.

At the end of the day, it is protected speech.

Comment Re:Here we go again (Score 1) 1165

The United States doesn't lock up its crazy people and doesn't provide a reasonable option for their mental health treatment.

Ah, it didn't take long to blame mental illness over lack of rational gun control laws. Turns out, however, that while 1% of the mentally ill are homicidally violent (just like in the general population), 100% of shootings are actually fully caused by gun owners. Why can't the NRA police its own instead of pointing fingers? Because gun owners are nuts? Not likely. Most are closer to being children than being nuts. Put down the deadly toys, children. Time to grow up.

Comment the bigger picture (Score 1) 569

What every bloodthirsty news consumer fails to see is that car emissions hardly matter, globally speaking, compared to other air pollution sources. One supertanker produces more emissions than 50 million cars. Shipping and energy production produces the vast majority of air pollution. VW was perhaps dishonest, but shrewd when you realize that US emissions regulations and checking on cars is bullshit, putting too much emphasis on a pollution source that is insignificant next to shipping, enegy, and the BIG POLLUTORS. This is a distraction. This is only going to serve to make people rich by devaluing VW stock temporarily, while at the same time allow the real polluters to go unniticed and unreported. And if the air seems stale, idiots will blame car manufacturers and traffic. Whatever this story is, it simply doesn't matter to our air and lungs, but we will exaggerate its importance anyway.

Comment Re: Looking more and more likely all the time... (Score 1) 518

Science is not about great schisms where meanings and understandings are suddenly reversed from one generation to the next.

False. Science paradigms, for better or worse, remain in place for as long as it takes (Plato to Copernicus/Kepler, anyone?) for a paradigm shift to come along and pull the rug out from under the previous paradigm. This is how its always been. BTW, "modern physics" is always wrong... because its only a model, and NOT REALITY, and merely the best model we have to explain observations as close as we can. What science observes is reality, but the description and explaination is a model, a fictionional likeness of reality, but not reality itself. You're probably thinking of mathematics.

Slashdot Top Deals

Put not your trust in money, but put your money in trust.