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:Will EV work outside cities and suburbs? (Score 1) 72

Depends what you use your car for and how many cars you have.
e.g. we are lucky enough in our house to be able to run a Diesel and an Electric. Sure the Electric has a worst case (cold weather) range of 100 miles, but that's enough for either my wife or I to commute and if one of us has a longer journey to do we can take the Diesel (or motorbike). It's re-charged overnight on the driveway and I cannot describe how convenient it is to never have to use a fuel station for those house's main vehicle..
Sure Electric won't work for everyone and solve every problem, but they are cheap to run, very nice to drive and mostly guilt free. I've never used a public charger but the Leaf does have a tool whereby you can book the charger you plan to use (never used it though) and there are apps to check if the charger you plan to use is functional. Doesn't help with none electric car users parking in your space though. I'm a big believer that the limit to electric cars is not range, but charging point availability. If every car parking space at home and at work and in the shopping centres and pub had a charger (could be one of the 7kW ones) then I honestly don't believe we'd be worried about their range or battery technology.
So no I don't have range anxiety but that's because I either use the Diesel for long journeys or the ones I was thinking of using Electric for I planned in advance to have my breaks at a place with a charging point.
Worst case scenario, Nissan will loan me a Petrol version for the first 3 years of ownership if I couldn't use the other car.

But I say all this in the knowledge that there are lots of people I know without a driveway so can't charge at home, or who live more than 50 miles from work, or can't afford 2 (new) cars, or can't park 2 cars or ...

Comment Re:government regulations (Score 1) 333

> This all comes down to personal responsibility, not more nanny state regulations. I say we let the markets sort this out. Next thing you know they'll be conducting raids on wasabi factories. Where does it end?

I dunno where regulation should end. Maybe where consumers are protected, where we have clean water and clean air, and aren't setting up the environment to make us and millions of other species to go extinct within the next couple of centuries? If regulation is what it takes to achieve that (it is), then I am all for it.

Regulating banking and getting banks OUT of selling investments and back to, you know, banking, and where people actually earned interest on their deposits (I used to get 8%-12% on my savings account in the '80s) would not be an entirely bad thing, either.

There is a lot to be said about the Democrats' desires rather than the Conservatives. Just what the heck are conservatives conserving, anyway, other than straight white male privilege?

Comment Re:Makes you wonder (Score 2) 333

It's kind of like when you allow VW to test emissions on their own vehicles and provide the data to the government, never once mentioning the fact that the ECU has code to detect test conditions and adjust the fuel and ignition timing curves to cut emissions during those specific conditions, and not get caught because they validated their own results.. until a competitor happens to notice and calls shenanigans and then it's discovered that nearly every VW-affiliated brand has been doing this for years.... but government regulation is unnecessary because climate change is a sham, and besides, increased CO2 levels is good for crops, and aside from skiing, winter sucks, so it's all good. Let's get rid of regulation and let all manufacturers perform their own testing with absolutely no oversight or spot-checking of their honesty... because corporations naturally do what is right! /s

Comment Re:government regulations (Score 1) 333

Right.. just like Rand Paul reputedly started his own certification board (National Ophthalmology Board) to get certified as an ophthalmologist. All a company needs to do is incorporate their own fraudulent lab and slap a certification on it, and conveniently "lose" the test data in a hard drive crash. But don't worry, the certification is valid. Trust us!

Comment Re:side effects of truthiness (Score 3, Interesting) 385

In many conservatives' minds, it is, because they are obviously co-conspirators in the liberal conspiracy. All too many conservatives disregard anything that disagrees with the tinfoil hat set's holy trinity (Limbaugh, Beck, and Jones) because obviously so-called "legitimate news sources" are trying to hide the truth... the truth that gay and nonwhite people are in cahoots with the lizard people who run the Illuminati and therefore the shadow government.

Yes, some people really believe that.

It's maddening, and no amount of evidence will prove to them that "crooked Hillary" isn't, and that Trump isn't a saint. Oh, and the videos of Trump admitting to sexual assault, bragging about ripping off small businesses deeming it "good business," and so forth are faked, just like the moon landing.

Comment Re: Fake News? (Score 0) 624

If Snopes were left-leaning, it would have been impossible for me to defend Bush all those years.

Sorry, but Snopes is left-leaning. What you've run across are examples so flagrant, they had to admit them to false. For example, "Trump to Repurpose USS Enterprise Into Floating Hotel and Casino" or "Donald Trump Was Born in Pakistan" are obviously fake and Snopes will label it as such.
The best way to check any "fact-check" site is to find the same quote said by two people on different sides of the aisle. What I have found is that many times, the same claim will receive a higher rating from the left, as the site will find an excuse as to why it may be true. The right receives no such courtesy.

Comment Re: Fake News? (Score 0) 624

I'm led to understand reality has a pretty strong left wing bias, also.

Do you mean the "reality" that says only white Republicans can be racist?
Maybe you mean the "reality" that every Republican candidate since Reagan is a racist/misogynist/elitist/Bible-thumper?
Oh, I know... You mean the "reality" of Obamacare cutting health care costs and everyone being able to keep their doctor, right?

Sorry, but when "the left wing" has played the bigot (racist, misogynist, homophobe, transphobe) card so hard and so long that it's color has worn off, I have hard time believing that they know what "reality" truly is. Don't believe me? Go back and look at the smears against Romney and look at what they are saying about him now. Back then, he was an animal abusing, woman suppressing, religious nut-job. Today, he's the sane pick for Secretary of State. Seriously, how long did you think the American public would believe the BS when you tell them same BS every four years, only to back off your claims a few weeks after the elections end? Well, the elections you win, anyway.

Did you ever stop to think that maybe they simply disagree with your policies for reasons other than hatred?

Comment Re:The ultimate in postmortem narcissism (Score 1) 386

> The father had legitimate concerns about how she would live after 200 years if she was revived (cited in another post of mine below)

You know, there is this newfangled thing called school, and at 14 years of age, the subjects she will have covered already will still apply. She will be able to take history, algebra, geometry and trig, and intro science classes in high school.

Do I think they will be able to revive a human after being frozen for 200 years? Not really... but it's worth trying.

Slashdot Top Deals

1.79 x 10^12 furlongs per fortnight -- it's not just a good idea, it's the law!

Working...