I agree with almost everything you said. We part company a bit on nuclear plants, though. My argument against them probably isn't what you think. It's that "all in", they're just a very, very expensive way to generate electricity. For starters, there has never been one built that was on time, on budget, delivered electricity at the promised cost and met its maintenance targets. And when you don't externalize the cost of dealing with uranium tailings, transportation and storage of waste, you don't get a lot more energy out than you've put in generating it.
This is a little bit of a sensitive subject for me, since where I live, we're now paying sky-high electricity rates, mostly to pay for maintenance of nuclear plants that spectacularly failed to deliver on promises made when my province committed to going mainly nuclear. And of course the local Conservative Party is blaming the high cost on a solar/wind initiative so modest most European countries would laugh themselves silly at it.
I can give you numbers if you really care, but trust me when I say nuclear in Ontario has been a huge pain in the rectum.
There seems to be a concerted effort to turn Slashdot into another little amplifier in the right wing echo chamber. Bashing Musk, and anybody else whose efforts could be construed as "environmental" or "progressive" has become the norm, and you can watch the comments of anybody who mentions this get modded into oblivion with depressing regularity.
The bottom line on Musk is that he's consistently done what people said was impossible, and he's done it against opposition from powerful vested interests. For example, car dealerships have a huge amount of influence at the state and municipal level in the United States. As a result, thanks to antiquated franchise laws aggressively defended by car dealerships, there are still at least six states where it is literally illegal to buy a Tesla. One of them, last time I looked, was Texas, where everybody will tell you the Invisible Hand rocks the cradle and runs the universe...unless you're trying to sell an electric vehicle, apparently.
Anyway, Musk is one of those people who has a vision for the future, and will drag the naysayers along kicking and screaming, whether they like it or not.
Please try to be kind. The person whose comment you're eviscerating probably hasn't been out of school very long.
This means they're used to being bumped on to the next year even if their report card features a solid wall of "Incomplete" (no F anymore), and they're used to getting a three-foot trophy and a parade in their honour for finishing 11th in a ten-person race. And they probably believe they deserve a CEO job for writing a couple of hundred words that actually contain discernible sentence structure, punctuation and capital letters.
Perhaps I'm being too harsh. Probably not, though. Literally every adult I know between the ages of 19 and 91 owns a PC, or has easy access to one.
The people who created and updated this software deserve a huge "Thank You" from people who used it for years, including me. I mostly use VideoLAN now, but still have MPC on my computers, where it has lived happily since Day 1 (and will continue). It has always done exactly what it promised without gobbling a lot of resources and without trying to make itself the star of the show. The best thing about it is that the developers never fell into the "bloatware" trap.
So whatever happens, thank you Kacper Michajlow, XhmikosR, Goran Dzaferi and JellyFrog (still listed as "Active People"), and many now listed as inactive who contributed in the past.
People forget that when Media Player Classic came along, it was at a time when Microsoft seemed determined to force non-tech users to use Media Player, which was becoming more bloated, invasive and greedy with every update. MPC was a breath of fresh air.
"How can Australians protect themselves from a rogue leader who is hell-bent on usurping any sort of privacy the common citizen holds on to?"
If guns actually helped citizens protect their sovereignty, we wouldn't need to ask exactly that question of Americans. It does need to be asked, though, since the United States has blatantly surrendered its sovereignty to a Russian dictator...and without a shot being fired.
I suspect the argument you'd get back is that the potential to commit mass mayhem is much higher now, which justifies giving governments the power to put anybody under a microscope whenever they like.
As far as it goes, it's a good argument. What's ignored...always...is that when governments get that kind of power, they inevitably misuse it.
Sooner or later, citizens living in democratic countries will have to suck it up and choose between security and a certain irreducible level of terrorism.
First of all, you obviously didn't read what I wrote very carefully.
So since you want to single Islam out from the other "desert religions", I'll just say this: If its body count is lower, it's only because it hasn't been around as long as Christianity and Judaism, and hasn't really hit its stride yet.
Except most of the killing done by churches was not as part of a war, so it's not covered by your war stats. For example, church practices during the Middle Ages were largely responsible for spreading the Black Death across most of Europe.
If Islam's total numbers are a bit lower, it's because it's the youngest of the three religions. Of course, Islamist fanatics are now trying to make up for lost time.
Three of the most hate-driven religions on Earth have their origin in the Middle East. They've been slaughtering each other for millennia, so I have to whether anything sensible people can do will pry these people away from each others' throats.
Might just as well buy popcorn and watch the show.
There were actually some pretty good reasons for the McDonald's scalding coffee payout. If you weren't a clueless, Koolaid-sucking moron you'd already know that. But since you are, I suggest you do just a wee little bit of research.
Facebook's enthusiastic promotion of fake news was a major factor in Trump getting elected. Now he's giving them the kick in the teeth they so richly deserve. Zuckerberg and his cronies will have to buck up or else, because Trump's telcom buddies will be able to carve a nice, big slice out of Facebook's revenue in return for bandwidth.
It is widely accepted that the first cash machine was put into use by Barclays Bank in its Enfield Town branch in North London, United Kingdom, on 27 June 1967. The first US ATM came a year later, in 1968, followed by Canada in 1969. If you want to talk about "bank from home" on-line, then the UK and US were pretty much the same time, give or take a few months either way.
In any case, your contention that US on-line bank security sucks because it was a first adopter doesn't bear scrutiny.
By the way, it's funny how much Americans sound like Checkov from the original Star Trek. You know, the whole "Dis vas inwented first in Russia" thing, except substitute America.
Thanks, but I think I'll keep the comparison at a nation to nation level, since the relevant decisions are being made at the national level. And Norway's situation presents many challenges the well-run states don't face, such as a miniscule population scattered over an area that would extend pretty much from Maine down to Florida. If Norway is "a speck", so is your eastern seaboard.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with almost everything you said. We part company a bit on nuclear plants, though. My argument against them probably isn't what you think. It's that "all in", they're just a very, very expensive way to generate electricity. For starters, there has never been one built that was on time, on budget, delivered electricity at the promised cost and met its maintenance targets. And when you don't externalize the cost of dealing with uranium tailings, transportation and storage of waste, you don't get a lot more energy out than you've put in generating it.
This is a little bit of a sensitive subject for me, since where I live, we're now paying sky-high electricity rates, mostly to pay for maintenance of nuclear plants that spectacularly failed to deliver on promises made when my province committed to going mainly nuclear. And of course the local Conservative Party is blaming the high cost on a solar/wind initiative so modest most European countries would laugh themselves silly at it.
I can give you numbers if you really care, but trust me when I say nuclear in Ontario has been a huge pain in the rectum.
There seems to be a concerted effort to turn Slashdot into another little amplifier in the right wing echo chamber. Bashing Musk, and anybody else whose efforts could be construed as "environmental" or "progressive" has become the norm, and you can watch the comments of anybody who mentions this get modded into oblivion with depressing regularity.
The bottom line on Musk is that he's consistently done what people said was impossible, and he's done it against opposition from powerful vested interests. For example, car dealerships have a huge amount of influence at the state and municipal level in the United States. As a result, thanks to antiquated franchise laws aggressively defended by car dealerships, there are still at least six states where it is literally illegal to buy a Tesla. One of them, last time I looked, was Texas, where everybody will tell you the Invisible Hand rocks the cradle and runs the universe...unless you're trying to sell an electric vehicle, apparently.
Anyway, Musk is one of those people who has a vision for the future, and will drag the naysayers along kicking and screaming, whether they like it or not.
In the original 70's "By your command" Cylon voice: "I call bullshit. The idiot drives like a Bombay cab driver on crack"
Please try to be kind. The person whose comment you're eviscerating probably hasn't been out of school very long.
This means they're used to being bumped on to the next year even if their report card features a solid wall of "Incomplete" (no F anymore), and they're used to getting a three-foot trophy and a parade in their honour for finishing 11th in a ten-person race. And they probably believe they deserve a CEO job for writing a couple of hundred words that actually contain discernible sentence structure, punctuation and capital letters.
Perhaps I'm being too harsh. Probably not, though. Literally every adult I know between the ages of 19 and 91 owns a PC, or has easy access to one.
The people who created and updated this software deserve a huge "Thank You" from people who used it for years, including me. I mostly use VideoLAN now, but still have MPC on my computers, where it has lived happily since Day 1 (and will continue). It has always done exactly what it promised without gobbling a lot of resources and without trying to make itself the star of the show. The best thing about it is that the developers never fell into the "bloatware" trap.
So whatever happens, thank you Kacper Michajlow, XhmikosR, Goran Dzaferi and JellyFrog (still listed as "Active People"), and many now listed as inactive who contributed in the past.
People forget that when Media Player Classic came along, it was at a time when Microsoft seemed determined to force non-tech users to use Media Player, which was becoming more bloated, invasive and greedy with every update. MPC was a breath of fresh air.
"How can Australians protect themselves from a rogue leader who is hell-bent on usurping any sort of privacy the common citizen holds on to?"
If guns actually helped citizens protect their sovereignty, we wouldn't need to ask exactly that question of Americans. It does need to be asked, though, since the United States has blatantly surrendered its sovereignty to a Russian dictator...and without a shot being fired.
Nice straw man you've got there. Did it take long to make?
I suspect the argument you'd get back is that the potential to commit mass mayhem is much higher now, which justifies giving governments the power to put anybody under a microscope whenever they like.
As far as it goes, it's a good argument. What's ignored...always...is that when governments get that kind of power, they inevitably misuse it.
Sooner or later, citizens living in democratic countries will have to suck it up and choose between security and a certain irreducible level of terrorism.
"the Department of Homeland Security is saying it deletes all data pertaining to the images after two weeks."
Bull. Fucking. Shit.
First of all, you obviously didn't read what I wrote very carefully.
So since you want to single Islam out from the other "desert religions", I'll just say this: If its body count is lower, it's only because it hasn't been around as long as Christianity and Judaism, and hasn't really hit its stride yet.
Thanks for that. I keep getting modded down for saying anything that could be construed even vaguely as "not god positive".
What's happening to this site!
Except most of the killing done by churches was not as part of a war, so it's not covered by your war stats. For example, church practices during the Middle Ages were largely responsible for spreading the Black Death across most of Europe.
If Islam's total numbers are a bit lower, it's because it's the youngest of the three religions. Of course, Islamist fanatics are now trying to make up for lost time.
Hope I didn't ruin your day with cruel facts.
Are you including all the subsidies to the fossil fuel sector, as well? Did you even know oil, gas and coal get all kinds of them?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies
Yeah, those three. Over the years, they've amassed quite a body count.
Three of the most hate-driven religions on Earth have their origin in the Middle East. They've been slaughtering each other for millennia, so I have to whether anything sensible people can do will pry these people away from each others' throats.
Might just as well buy popcorn and watch the show.
There were actually some pretty good reasons for the McDonald's scalding coffee payout. If you weren't a clueless, Koolaid-sucking moron you'd already know that. But since you are, I suggest you do just a wee little bit of research.
Facebook's enthusiastic promotion of fake news was a major factor in Trump getting elected. Now he's giving them the kick in the teeth they so richly deserve. Zuckerberg and his cronies will have to buck up or else, because Trump's telcom buddies will be able to carve a nice, big slice out of Facebook's revenue in return for bandwidth.
Nice straw man you've got there. Did it take long to build?
I hope you realize your parents aren't going to drive you around forever.
Wish I could give you a point, my friend. Your comment is spot on.
It is widely accepted that the first cash machine was put into use by Barclays Bank in its Enfield Town branch in North London, United Kingdom, on 27 June 1967. The first US ATM came a year later, in 1968, followed by Canada in 1969. If you want to talk about "bank from home" on-line, then the UK and US were pretty much the same time, give or take a few months either way.
In any case, your contention that US on-line bank security sucks because it was a first adopter doesn't bear scrutiny.
By the way, it's funny how much Americans sound like Checkov from the original Star Trek. You know, the whole "Dis vas inwented first in Russia" thing, except substitute America.
Thanks, but I think I'll keep the comparison at a nation to nation level, since the relevant decisions are being made at the national level. And Norway's situation presents many challenges the well-run states don't face, such as a miniscule population scattered over an area that would extend pretty much from Maine down to Florida. If Norway is "a speck", so is your eastern seaboard.
Norway has a long history of doing things better and smarter than the US. So yes, it's going to happen.
Your bees are not dead. They are merely pining for the fjords.
How dare you get all fact-y at conservatives! It's just not fair!!!