Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



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

Comment Re: Irrelevant (Score 1) 456

I'm pretty sure we do. Wind farms aren't pretty to look at. Reclaimed coal mines don't look any different than the prairie did before they dug the coal out. I don't know about all the power plants in WY, but the one near us has pretty good scrubbers to help with pollution controls. The wind farm, however, is right next to town and we get to enjoy all the tower's red aviation warning lights on the horizon all the time.

Comment Re:Wyoming = big coal country (Score 2) 456

11% of electricity produced in WY does come from wind. Around 2/3 of generated electricity is already exported according to google searches. The biggest objection to wind farms is disruption of scenic views. The biggest problem with export is again building infrastructure to export the electricity and again scenic views.

People probably wouldn't object as much to the wind farms if the power was needed by the state's residents. When there is a large oversupply, it's a fair argument to not reduce our quality of life by building ugly wind farms. There has been particular resistance in the SW corner. FWIW we now have a wind farm north of town and it really isn't that nice to look at. Another consideration is that wildfires can put a wind farm out of commission for quite a while whereas power plants with a smaller footprint can be better protected. With increasing drought, that's a real concern.

Comment Re: I thought state and religion were separate in (Score 1) 1527

Perhaps that is why God had Peter record in First Peter

4:17 For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? 4:18 And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

not that there isn't a lot of other good stuff in the rest of the chapter.

Comment Re:I thought state and religion were separate in U (Score 1) 1527

You may be right about the improbability of an atheist being elected, and I, for one, am glad. It isn't like we've had a great many presidents who actually followed Christ's teaching. Some have certainly done a better job than others. If more Christians lived up to what He expected of us, perhaps you wouldn't be so bitter.

God doesn't care about political correctness. He cares about being correct according to His precepts and His commandments. God loves everyone. He just hates what everyone does for part or most of their lives. If you don't wish to avail yourself of His method of reconciliation to Him and try to live up to those standards with His grace covering those times you fail to measure up, that has and always will be your choice. He's laid out the consequences of the free choice you are making. Hearts are rarely converted with torches and pitchforks.

Comment Re:Casio ToughSolar Pathfinder (Score 2) 232

I have an older model, but I agree. Never having to set the watch and never having to worry about a new battery has been the nicest thing ever. Selecting time zones easily is a plus as well. As for the rest of the bells and whistles - well they're cute, but the other features are really the best for me. If you're out climbing you don't have to worry about getting a phone out to see the time and worrying that it will drop someplace inaccessible or just fall on something hard and break. I'll grant that phones "may" be more useful in a problem situation if you can get cell coverage where you are at (many places around here you can't), but I try not to be that wedded to a phone that one is always available to see the time on. Watches still serve a useful purpose if you are outdoors much.

Comment Re:The question is this (Score 1) 637

I do support the EC. I don't support winner takes all. I really don't support the entire primary process of either major party.

Do the primary election just like the general election. All states vote on the same day and no caucus garbage. Let the state's individual party votes in their respective party convention be broken down based on that state's popular vote for each candidate. At the end of the day, we'd probably know who the candidates for each party would be, but allow some time for mail-in ballot processing as now. After a couple of weeks, hold the convention for each party, add up the totals, and make the results official. No super delegates are allowed.

If you want to make it interesting, allow individual voters to write in an opposing party candidate for a particular office - and have that vote actually count for the opposing party at the cost of no say in that race for your own party candidates. If necessary, scale the cross party vote by some percentage to keep party A from messing with party B which is much smaller. That way people don't have to switch parties for the primary just because of one race and the party benefits by seeing just how many voters think the candidates they selected were truly awful. Four weeks or so later after the individual party conventions - maybe a bit longer - vote in the general election.

The primary process is really the biggest problem we have. The self funded candidates can make it to the end, regardless of their positions. The well connected can as well. Everyone else is eliminated long before some states even get a choice in the matter. The problem is not how the EC decides the election after the damage is already done. Fix the primary system, and all of this uproar about the EC would largely go away.

Comment Re:The question is this (Score 1) 637

Wyoming isn't ignored because it only has 3 electoral votes. It is ignored because it is reliably Republican. It voted (sadly) for Trump by the highest margin of any state. If I remember Time's graph, it's about on par with how heavily Democratic the District of Columbia is. Republican candidates don't need to come here because it is already wrapped up. Democrat candidates don't need to come here because it is hopeless. Advertisements aren't going to change any minds. In many locations in the state, there is only a Republican candidate for office for some state offices. That is how Republican Wyoming is.

Comment Re:Sour grapes (Score 1) 1430

I'd say the main argument for leaving the EC alone is that the lone Representative to the House in Wyoming (and other single Representative states or even the two Representative states) can't get much of anything done for their states compared the the huge number of Representatives from each of the bigger states. Having a bit of advantage - if it can even be called that with only 3 votes in the EC - gives a little balance to the difficult position smaller states like Wyoming have in all other aspects of the the House of Representatives in Congress.

If California wants something badly, they start off with 53 votes in favor. That's not a majority in itself, but it's a good start.

If you want to fix the EC, make all states allocate their EC votes based on the actual outcome of the vote in the state. Eliminate the winner takes all crap.

Comment Re:Solutions (Score 1) 531

Going directly to the source is always useful when it is possible to do so. The thing with all solutions is that they take time. Sometimes going directly to the source can be the most time consuming - but you may get an unfiltered account assuming the source hasn't been itself manufactured or altered to change context. Technology is getting good enough to create really good illusions of fact. You tube is not necessarily better or worse at this. A couple of lines taken out of context there can be just as jaded as a news account if you don't see the entire speech or parts are selectively omitted.

Even trying to keep up with multiple sources as I mentioned on a continual basis can't really be done. But if something strikes you as off, you can always seek a second source from an alternative spectrum source. Pro Republican vs pro Democrat for example.

The older you get, the more cynical you get. You've simply seen too much and read too much and heard too much. If it is something that really matters, see what God says about it. He's a pretty solid arbitrator of what is truth and what is falsehood. Course, there's a lot of stuff I don't imagine He cares about that we get really worked up over...

Comment Solutions (Score 1) 531

So subscribe to both a very liberal and a very conservative newspaper that are well known that actually still do news - I know - that's getting tougher and tougher as more and more go to just running feeds. Pick up a local paper subscription as well if you don't live in a major city. Hard to pick good examples but maybe the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times/Washington Post. Read all three thoroughly. If the facts of a story are similar in each, then there is a greater chance (not in any way approaching 100%) that what you are reading is truth. If they are diametrically opposed, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

Pick a few more diametrically opposed pairs for variety (Christian Science Monitor vs. Freethinker). Extend as needed.

It's not perfect, but it's certainly better than just relying on a single source for news.

Comment Re: Why even have elections? (Score 1) 437

Really, all I am suggesting is that there are so many issues and problems with the two primary party candidates that taking a one issue stand as a means to divide the third party vote so that no third party can compete is the road to ruin.

The post was replying to smog in cities, largely caused by autos. That ship has sailed and the car companies aren't going to be able to push the product purchasers back to the 60s/70s.

As far as the rest of your comments - many are valid. I tend to think that since the various departments are under the executive branch, that Congress would be likely to shuffle some functions around as needed and would probably pass that legislation without much fuss. I wasn't necessarily even thinking of the EPA, although it certainly doesn't have a sound constitutional basis for existing. It's also an agency with cabinet level status, but really isn't on the same level as other departments. A lot of these were split out in the first place from other departments for political purposes to show we were serious about problem X or were created out of thin air because the existing departments couldn't communicate with each other in the first place. Recombining them isn't the drastic problem you point out.

I also think that regardless of the presence or absence of the EPA, the $1 bln dollar value you're throwing around would be just as effectively used greasing the palms of Congress to get legislation written to do whatever they wanted or carve out whatever exception they wanted anyway, so I'm not sure what your point is.

Finally, keep in mind that war is frequently much more harmful to the environment than the worst polluter. It's also much more harmful to those directly involved. You may have many reasons for disliking the Libertarians, but their keep your noses out of other peoples business stance has its merits.

Comment Re: Why even have elections? (Score 1) 437

The environment (from a pollution standpoint) has improved massively over the last few decades. There have also been some notable disasters on the pollution standpoint that happened even with a strong EPA around. A large part of the reason for the improvements had to do with pollution controls on automobiles. I doubt seriously that companies are going to risk going back to the 60's or 70's policies and products - even if the EPA wasn't there to stop them. All the major manufactures are moving to electric or hybrid - I just wish they were feasible in our neck of the woods.

In addition, ballot issues on corporate proxies seeking accountability for issues like these are getting higher and higher percentages of For votes - regardless of the industry - so I think that the pendulum is definitely swinging towards conservatism and protecting the environment regardless of the party in political power at the time.

But even for all the good that the EPA has done, you still have companies like VW scamming the system. So saying that government is the solution really doesn't work either.

Reducing the federal government's size and scope doesn't necessarily mean that the functions it does will all disappear. Some will be taken over by other departments if they need to exist at the federal level, and some will be taken over by the states (where the founders of the country intended them to be).

I don't agree with every policy the Libertarians have either. Remember that many would take a law getting through Congress to enact anyway. For all the uselessness that I feel exists in the Department of Education, one of the things that I would champion is the Common Core - I just think it should push students harder than they are now being pushed but it is still a great idea. With the mobility of the population, it is absolutely required that there be no impact on kids education when they move from state A to state B. Each grade level must be expected to have mastered particular items and not have the hodgepodge that we have had for decades. Even within a single elementary school here, they have gone to different math curricula every couple of years. Different ones teach things at different times, leading to gaps in the kids educations. That is madness.

But I've digressed. There is no one single issue that I can think of that is so big that I would disqualify the current Libertarian slate of candidates. If elected, they may well not win a second term because the main parties will have to seriously re-evaluate their lives. That would be a good thing, in and of itself. As former governors, I think that they would probably govern OK. Not great - not horrible. But I'm OK with that.

Slashdot Top Deals

Never keep up with the Joneses. Drag them down to your level. -- Quentin Crisp

Working...