Slashdot Mirror


User: Mindcontrolled

Mindcontrolled's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
2,781
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 2,781

  1. Re:MDSOLAR, REVEAL YOURSELF. on Could the US Phase Out Nuclear Power? · · Score: 1

    In other words, nuclear energy is holy. Discussing it is taboo. Asking questions is forbidden? Oh and by the way, you don't have an agenda? You'd be the first person in the history of mankind.

  2. Re:MDSOLAR, REVEAL YOURSELF. on Could the US Phase Out Nuclear Power? · · Score: 0

    You like to consider sources that fit with your preconceived notion of reality, you mean? God forbid something disturb that echo chamber.

  3. Re:MDSOLAR, REVEAL YOURSELF. on Could the US Phase Out Nuclear Power? · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How is asking the question whether the US could phase out nuclear power FUD? It's a perfectly legitimate question. The GP just does not want it asked, so he resorts to an ad hominem/poisoning the well against the submitter. It's perfectly fine to ask what we do with the waste, by the way. And if the answer - as you, and the GP seem to agree upon - is that we have no clue, that is a pretty strong argument to research possibilities of a phase-out, instead of accumulating more of it.

  4. Re:Longer Answer: on Could the US Phase Out Nuclear Power? · · Score: 2

    True. However, According to the CIA World Factbook, Germany exported 61.7 billion kWh (last estimate available from 2008). At the same time. The whole European super grid thing, you know. Germany is a net exporter - even after taking down half the nuclear capacity already.

  5. Re:MDSOLAR, REVEAL YOURSELF. on Could the US Phase Out Nuclear Power? · · Score: 1, Insightful

    A fascinating argument. We can't shut down nuclear plants because we have no plan for decommissioning and waste treatment. You seriously use that as an argument FOR nuclear energy?

  6. Re:Two words : on Man Tries to Patent His "Godly Powers" · · Score: 1

    Actually, wrong. I looked it up by now, and it has been finally rejected. The examiner chose the right reason, btw - and it is not prior art, because, obviously, there is none. The rejection was due to insufficient disclosure - not enough information for the man skilled in the art to reproduce the claimed effects.

  7. Re:Longer Answer: on Could the US Phase Out Nuclear Power? · · Score: 0

    You know who else permanently tried to shut up people? Besides, with the "world" you mean "a retarded subset of the world, membership: you"?

  8. Re:Longer Answer: on Could the US Phase Out Nuclear Power? · · Score: 1

    You got an argument except for Godwin? *crickets* Thought so.

  9. Re:What a stupid idea on Could the US Phase Out Nuclear Power? · · Score: 0

    How about we harvest the energy of your burning "leftist anti-human" strawmen? We could probably power a dyson sphere with it without the need for an actual sun in the center of it. The sun - in particular as an energy source - is after all part of the evil leftist anti-civilization conspiracy that is out to get you and drive you back into the caves. Well, intellectually, you'd fit pretty well in there, wearing a bearskin and grunting on about your imaginary enemies.

  10. Re:deaths on Japan Doubles Fukushima Radiation Leak Estimate · · Score: 1

    You think lives of anyone except their own do count for the likes of the GP? He removed himself from civilization long ago. Chernobyl is irrelevant to him- only socialist, slavic untermenschen died there. Saved his ilk some work rounding them up and exterminating them themselves.

  11. Re:Even 1986 ... on Japan Doubles Fukushima Radiation Leak Estimate · · Score: 1

    Dude, you always had your head up your arse, but now you really managed to stick it so far up that you can look out between your teeth. Combining straight out lies - and you are not just mistaken, you perfectly know that you are lying - with your socialist strawman is a great move. Fine trolling there.

  12. Re:Please grant it... on Man Tries to Patent His "Godly Powers" · · Score: 1

    Did you just admit that, by virtue of declaring yourself god, are infringing on this idea? Mate, time to lawyer up ;)

  13. Re:Prior art on Man Tries to Patent His "Godly Powers" · · Score: 1

    Hm. I still see a way to circumvent that, in the form of a claim directed at a "Method for controlling godly powers by a human". Jesus, being an aspect of god himself, would not qualify as prior art here. Other miracles are, according to the mythology, not controlled by humans, but granted by god. You can only ask for it, not control it. So, no prior art there. Obviously, I would raise the objection that he can't disclose his method in a clear and unambiguous way that would allow the man skilled in the art to reproduce it. Then again, who is the man skilled in the art here? As an IP professional, I am starting to find this intriguing. Might be that I - just coming from a hearing - am still in bullshit overdrive, but still...

  14. Re:Please grant it... on Man Tries to Patent His "Godly Powers" · · Score: 1

    In that case, they still might be liable for indirect infringement. Would be worth a try. Also, if god does not abide by the decision, you could just target the pope - after all he claims to act as god's immediate proxy on earth.

  15. Re:anti-intellectuals, not anti-intellectualism on Is There a New Geek Anti-Intellectualism? · · Score: 1

    Well, you cite the motto of the Royal Society. That's not exactly a new one - that's the classic intellectual stance. How that translate into "anti-intellectuals" is beyond be. I haven't met many intellectuals who would have demanded me to bow to any authority. Sure, it happens that in a specific field some opinion gets overwhelmingly strong so that you have indeed problems to speak against it, but I never encountered that as a systemic problem. There are intellectual fads, each field has them, but in the end, healthy skepticism carries the field through that.

  16. Re:The whole premise is wrong on Is There a New Geek Anti-Intellectualism? · · Score: 1

    True - but the reverse is also true. Knowing that the Battle of Hastings happened 1066 is not intellectual. Intellectualism is integrating lots of facts, which, each for itself, are apparently trivial, to a bigger picture. Intellectualism is pattern recognition in a sea of seemingly unrelated and trivial facts. That should be a geek thing. At least for me, it is.

  17. Re:Renewable? Hah! on Google Files First Solar Patent, Builds R&D Team · · Score: 2

    And with a local maximum so short after a local minimum. Well played, Sir, well played ;)

  18. Re:Renewable? Hah! on Google Files First Solar Patent, Builds R&D Team · · Score: 3, Funny

    Not sure about peak sun, but we passed peak wit, obviously.

  19. Re:So this is a horrible, evil thing, on Anonymous Steals 10,000 Iranian Government Emails · · Score: 2

    True, but who is hit by this hack? Visa and passport applications, amongst various other correspondence? Nothing of importance there, then, else they'd have mentioned it. Only the dealings of ordinary citizens with their government. Great act of resistance there.

  20. Re:Greed on Chinese Boy Sells Kidney For iPad2 · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    You are the living proof that stupidity can exist without any compassion at all.

  21. Re:Only for a few hours on Researcher Claims Magnets Can Affect Blood Viscosity · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Tell me about it. Had some asshat janitor walk into our lab one day, carrying his leather tool bag, despite of all the huge-ass warning signs. The thing of course got ripped out of his hands and stuck to the magnet casing when he came too close. Had the pleasure of removing the contents - including a couple of hundred nails and screws - piece by piece. The magnet survived, at least. Just slightly dented and some of the shim coils where shot.

  22. Re:Only for a few hours on Researcher Claims Magnets Can Affect Blood Viscosity · · Score: 1

    Well, for just about 500k you can get that 1.5 T cryomagnet set up right in your home. The running costs for LN2 and LHe are negligible... Save that aspirin money, sleep in the MRI machine...

  23. Re:subtle issues on Researcher Claims Magnets Can Affect Blood Viscosity · · Score: 1

    Interesting. Never felt anything - and with the older ones, also in the 3T range, i used to crawl around right below them for calibration daily. Completely unrelated, but may I ask what your field of research is?

  24. Re:subtle issues on Researcher Claims Magnets Can Affect Blood Viscosity · · Score: 2

    Tried it all, man - magnets, radiation, toxic chemicals, gene manipulation. Nothing. Well, I might have become Nerdman in the progress, but, well....

  25. Re:subtle issues on Researcher Claims Magnets Can Affect Blood Viscosity · · Score: 2

    Just as anecdotal evidence, I used to hang around huge-ass magnets all the time. NMR spectrometers are in the order of magnitude of the fields discussed here. Haven't had any ill effects so far, except for erasing a couple of credit cards.