Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



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

Comment Wasted millions..... (Score 1) 123

They could probably have put a monkey into the office instead of Mayer, and be in the same position. Maybe even better because Yahoo would not have made all those failed acquisitions.

It's not even that she laid out some grand strategy or attempted some potentially groundbreaking acquisitions. There has been no vision, no risk-taking, nothing. Her only strategy appears to be to deploy employee-unfriendly policies, while benefiting from special arrangements for her personal life.

Comment Re:Something deeper.. (Score 4, Insightful) 459

Anyone who deals with such placement knows that you get a flood of obviously fake, misleading, and just plain silly applications from certain Asian countries

Advertise a job in Silicon Valley and you will get lots of applications from ethnically Asian people who are local and either have green cards or are citizens. There is no reason to assume that this issue is in any way related to foreign applicants (who can be legitimately discriminated against).

Comment Re:Questionable analogy and questionable analysis. (Score 1) 227

This is fallacious, as capacity is consumed and is a limited capacity.

So, if I understand you correctly, if I download 1GB, then for the rest of that month, the routers can only handle their normal traffic minus 1GB? And so on for every user?

No, your explanation is flawed because it assumes that, at a given time, one individual can consume all the bandwidth, locking out other users. In reality, of course, what happens is that everyone's Internet service slows down so that the sum total matches the capacity. But the network capacity for the rest of the month is unaffected. Even if no one downloads anything, the network capacity for the rest of the month is unchanged

Network capacity has an instantaneous limit, and capacity is not "consumed" in any meaningful use of the word.

What ISPs are really selling is speed. But this ISP only offers low speeds. It's offering a sub-par product and would like to hide that in ridiculous monthly caps.

Comment Re:Mature technology (Score 1) 247

And now, you are confusing the issues also. The point about residential solar is that, when all those A/C units kick in, so does the output of the solar systems. Moreover, that electricity doesn't have to be delivered over the grid. Residential solar has a greater impact than just the generation cost.

Utilities have a perverse incentive: since they generally operate both generation and end-user sales, with prices set through a regulatory body, these utility companies actually benefit when the base cost of generation increases. Solar threatens their profit and that's why utilities oppose it.

As for Hawaii, the story is clearly not finished there. Hawaii has some of the the highest electricity costs in the nation, so the opportunity for solar is greatest there.

Finally, the argument initially was about solar in general, not specifically rooftop solar. As I pointed out above, even if utility-grade solar offer the possibility to provide cheaper electricity than the alternatives, utility companies benefit from the status quo, and that is why solar has had such a small impact on US generation.

If it is financially viable for an oil state to use utility grade solar, it's financially viable for most southern states in the USA.

Comment Re:Mature technology (Score 1) 247

Yes, because other energy sources don't receive subsidies? This is the biggest lie that the fossil fuel lobby puts out. The subsidies are both direct and indirect, in not making fossil fuel extraction and use pay the real costs -- costs including the destruction of the environment, clean water, etc..

But still, assume a 30% subsidy to the Dubai contract and then find alternatives that are as cost effective.

Utilities have killed solar in the USA.

Yes, it is intermittent, but solar production is greater when electricity usage is greater. There are also new technologies for energy storage coming on line that will eliminate the issues from intermittent solar production. Thermal solar, for example, can store heat and produce electricity when needed. In many US states, sunlight is very consistent during 3 seasons.

Comment Re:Mature technology (Score 1) 247

Solar if flailing with by far the largest subsidies ever seen for any power technology on a per MWH basis. After a decade still only about 1% of US generation

You will find that this is because utilities in many states have been able to push anti-net-metering changes, making residential solar uneconomic. On the other hand, CA residential solar capacity recently hit 5% of peak capacity, triggering a change from one net metering plan to another.

As for the idea that Solar cannot be economic, let me destroy that idea by asking what technology can provide power at 2.99c per kWh? Answer: Solar

Solar is only failing because regulators and politicians have been bought off by utility companies who are heavily invested in fossil fuels.

Comment Let's have some fun (Score 1) 45

Let's have some fun with this statement:

Proofpoint reported that between June and July, Donald Trump's name appeared in 169 times more spam emails than Hillary Clinton's.

Possible causes:

Spammers think Trump supporters more likely to fall for scam?

Trump actually spamming?

Clinton spamming and using Trump name in spam to alienate possible voters?

Comment Re:Bottom line... (Score 1) 183

Let me get this straight--if you have (limited liability) companies, you need regulation because they will take actions that externalize their real costs.

Exactly right. Take the example of a mining company that pollutes a nearby river or the groundwater in the region. In the Libertarian world, there is absolutely nothing to stop this happening. Libertarian ideals mean that, even if the company were prosecuted, the mining company would simply fold up and another company (owned by the same people) would start up in its place. A simple arrangement whereby the mining company owned nothing (it rents all equipment and the mine from other companies) would ensure that there are no assets for the company to forfeit.

Let's look at another example, which is related. Many Libertarians would think that people should not be required to have car insurance. But what happens when a poor person without insurance crashes into and wrecks your car? They don't have the money to pay you.

Similarly, banks can easily get into a situation whereby they owe far more than the value of the bank. Economies and personal wealth were hampered in the times before governments would provide guarantees to ordinary bank deposits and because governments provide these guarantees, regulation is required to reduce the possible impact of this.

Obviously, the possibility of companies going bankrupt with large debts cannot be eliminated with regulation, but it will happen far more often without it.

The simple fact is that we have seen what happens in a Libertarian world. You just have to look at history to see that the Libertarian ideal is bad for the economy.

Libertarianism is the political approach of the simple minded. It sounds good, but if you actually look at the consequences, it only benefits the very few ultra-ultra wealthy.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Gotcha, you snot-necked weenies!" -- Post Bros. Comics

Working...