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 All the passengers fault.. (Score 3, Insightful) 167

I am sure it's all the passengers fault. Not people desperately trying to get to their flight after a long delay waiting for their turn at a bit of ineffective security theatre..

Of course this would be solved by not requiring them to remove their laptops.. Something which would have next to no effect on the uselessness of their scanning anyway..

But no.. It's all the travelers fault. Silly travelers.. They deserve to have their items removed.

Of course it should be quite trivial door then to track down the owners right? TSA is so proud of how well informed they are about the travelers.. Surely they can localise the owners of one of a handful of people? No?

Comment Re:Source? (Score 1) 251

Probably because that list is part of the newly passed act they are discussing?

it explicitly says so, right in the 'bloggers ass' as you like to say:
'A list of who will have the power to access your internet connection records is set out in Schedule 4 of the Act'

Now, I am sure that actual reading is beyond you, but give it a go! its amazing what you can learn.

Comment Re: Awesome: more "biomass" to prop up green numbe (Score 2) 393

'The transit of an air mass containing radioactive gas released from the Three Mile Island reactor was recorded in Albany, New York, by measuring xenon-133. These measurements provide an evaluation of Three Mile Island effluents to distances greater than 100 kilometers. Two independent techniques identified xenon-133 in ambient air at concentrations as high as 3900 picocuries per cubic meter. The local gamma-ray whole-body dose from the passing radioactivity amounted to 0.004 millirem, or 0.004 percent of the annual dose from natural sources.'

There you go. Sorry for the actual fact check, but yes, the release Xenon could have had the massive net effect of increasing your normal background radiation exposure by an extra 21 minutes over a year..

Truly horrific!

Oh, and you need to look up the meaning of the word 'exploded' because your definition seems rather... odd.

Not to mention your use of 'wormwood'? which I can only assume means you are a religious nutcase, and using that to refer to the BS biblical 'end of the world' scenarios such nutjobs seem to like to claim every little thing that happens is? If so you need to be more clear..

Comment Re:Need to focus on priorities here! (Score 4, Insightful) 393

And it is totally false.
Or do you think cows contain some kind of secret matter transmuter?

They are counting all the water that PASSES THROUGH, very VERY little of which is actually consumed.
If a cow actually contained that much water, the water alone would weight nearly 7 tons....

In other words, it is the usual media BS that people believe these days without the slightest attempt at critical thinking.
So, grow up and use that thing between your ears next time. The water was not removed from the system, it just passed through..

Comment Sorry, Wrong. (Score 0) 186

Because they havent, sorry to say.

In fact they have actively argued AGAINST including it, for a number of reasons, none of them sane - while avoiding the main reason, that it stops their models from producing such alarming (and therefore funding producing) numbers.

Actually, it is not quite true. A few have included some such numbers, however even those assume that biomas is a constantly REDUCING quantity.
Because, as we know, increased temperature, increased rainfall, and increased CO2 levels (the three things they universally predict) are all hated by plants, and reduce their growth rates..

Comment Sorry, Right. (Score 1) 186

No, there are a few scientists pointing at coral dieback, and global warming and shouting 'See! Correlation!'
Of course it is very simple to test, and you will notice that these particular scientists do not actually do such tests.
The ones who do (and the ones with ANY idea of coral history and historical ocean acidity) realise this is a load of bull.

Almost certainly coral dieback is caused by actual chemical pollution. You know, the stuff everyone ignores now that they have the bigger (and much more profitable) boogeyman of CO2..

As it happens, pollution caused coral dieback is also the cause of the 'pacific atoms vanishing below the rising oceans'. This, again is well known by the actual scientists who have studied it, and is clearly shown as the islands with overpopulation are the ones sinking, and the nearly islands without humans are growing.. damn facts getting in the way!

The problem is politics and money.. Pacific islands want money, and ocean researchers want money, and the evil global warming means money!

Comment Yes, permanent (mostly).. (Score 2) 186

You do realise that when a plant dies and rots (burns? really? that is a tiny TINY proportion) then the majority of the carbon in it ends up in soil, not as a gas, right?

I know you probably dont try this much in your inner city apartment, but try spending a bit of time in the real works.
This is exactly where SOIL comes from. I can guarantee you that if you put a box of lawn clippings on the ground somewhere, they do not evaporate into CO2.

There is of course some gas release (and a number of gasses), however the majority ends up captured. Go dig up some soil under a nice deciduous tree and you will find the soil is MUCH richer there..

Comment The big question.. (Score 2) 186

Which has been evident for quite some time is...

WHY is this not being allowed for in predictive models? Why should this is new to the people working on this?

We are regularly told how old the knowledge that atmospheric CO2 increases heat trapping is (and that is true).
And yet, models do not allow for increased plant growth rates, and increased total living biomass thanks to increased rain, increased average temperature, and increased CO2... The effects of those on plant grows is even older...

The easy assumption is because those mitigate the models significantly, therefore making the results less worth of funding.

That is, of course, the problem with the modern scientific 'method', it is all about media attention, publication success, etc. Not about actual science.
Come on guys, if you are going to model a system, leaving out the majority of active biomass matters..

Comment No, Not it is not, and neither is yours. (Score 2) 259

WTF are you talking about?

You do know that the Mac uses exactly the same CPU and chipsets that you can get in equivalent PCs right?
You do know that it is Intel that sets exactly how many PCI-Express ports are available to that, because it is PART OF THE CPU, right?
You do know that there is absolutely NO special hardware in Macs, or special setup, EXCEPT a boot and video bios specifically created
by Apple to block normal drivers from accessing them (and, because of that, meaning that driver updates are much MUCH slower), right?

So no, you are just making shit up I am afraid. It is very easy to purchase both a Windows Laptop and Desktop that makes exactly as
good use of its internal setup as a mac, because its all basically standard.

You will of course try and point to some POS HP $400 laptop and say 'see! it is badly setup!'. that is market separation, and which it
sucks, it is why they are willing to sell that for you for $400.

So, basically grow up, learn a few actual facts, and stop trying to claim 'secret sauce!' to rationalise your personal spending habits.

Comment Apple Reality Distortion Field (tm) (Score 4, Insightful) 259

Just the usual ARFD effect.

'My computer, despite being slower in all measurable specifications, is FASTER! HA! AND I AM A PROFESSIONAL!'
Followed by turning of the back, fingers in ears, and reciting of 'nya nya nya nya I cannot hear you nya nya'

And in the real works, people keep on getting work done, knowing that in actual fact, the exact machine specs, OS, etc
have such a small effect on a persons productivity, that it is unimportant.

Not to mention that fact that if he really is doing such high grade video work, and is using ANY laptop, he just doesnt get it,
as a much more powerful desktop will be much MUCH more productive (for a start, it will have monitors where he can actually
see the video he is working on... RAID storage so a drive crash wont lose all his work, much more RAM to allow a decent video
buffer, and more cores, because video processing IS embarrassingly parallel and scales nearly perfectly).

So, basically a chump. example what the media loves for clickbait.

Comment Re: Really.. (Score 4, Insightful) 209

Yes. An article presenting a completely false headline with content based on highly selective methodology so as to reach the conclusion they want.

What a surprise. The desperation of the apple supporters to rationalise their religion known no bounds.

But great click bait no doubt. That is all that actually matters.. Right?

Slashdot Top Deals

"Be there. Aloha." -- Steve McGarret, _Hawaii Five-Oh_