Considering the number of coal plants compared to nuclear plants, I'd say that nuclear plants are far more dangerous. And what exactly do you do with the waste You can't keep dumping it in the sea forever. And what do you say to all those people who get cancer from living next to nuclear plants?
Face it, fission power is shite. Why the fuck haven't those so-called intelligent scientists invented fusion plants yet?
I don't know a SINGLE person - not one solitary soul, who uses Linux, but I know scores who use Windows every day, for everything from world processing to Internet browsing.
Is ANYONE out there using Linux for anything?
Obviously, the more people use something, the better it is. In fact I bet the ratio of Windows/Linux users is much bigger than the ratio of Google/Yahoo users. It's funny how popularity counts on Slashdot when the Slashbots' favourite is the popular one.
The more sites, the more likely you are to get a relevent result. For instance if Google couldn't be bothered indexing some obscure site which is the only site which is of any use to you, then Google isn't any use, no matter how much hype it generates. And even if it did index it, it would probably be on page 11 behind a hundred sites trying to sell you crap.
Don't worry, Google will be innovating these services in a few years time. Slashdotters the world over will be full of comment about how great Google's innovations are and how their competitors can only steal ideas. Google's services will be better than the alternatives due to the slow loading times and crooked javascript.
I don't think you can read. He didn't say he was investing in a search engine, he was USING a search engine. In this case, and probably most cases, Yahoo provided the best results.
Google is like a lot of popular organisations, they're too busy listening to people tell them how good they are to actually improve.
That's the most stupid thing I've ever read. By your definition, nothing is zero emission because of how it was made. Zero emission means it doesn't give anything out when you use it. How do people like you remember to breath?
We already have places to go on Earth, like Siberia, the Sahara, and Antarctica. All with plenty of space.
But people won't want to live there, because they're barren, either very cold or very hot, or very dark and miserable. And yet, they're still more hospitable than anywhere else in the universe.
If people don't want to live there, what makes you think they'll want to live on the Moon or Mars?
The answer is yes, they're better off with companies not acting as collaborators to their own opression.
Collaborators? You make it sound like Google is actively ratting out dissidents to the government. If they're better off without Google's censored website, then they can just not use the site at all.
Here's the main point: All search engines doing business in China have to follow Chinese law, and if that involves blocking pro-democracy information then they have to do it. The only alternative is to not operate there. Would the Chinese people be better off with no search engines at all?
BTW the chinese are better off when no company decides to do business with their government if they impose laws and make them enforce things that violate basic human rights.
Obviously in China free speech is not a basic human right, the same way in America smoking cannibis is not a basic human right. Does that mean if a shop refuses to sell you cannibis are they evil for collaborating with the government? Would people be better off if all shops were closed down?
There's nothing evil about following a country's laws. If they didn't follow the laws they wouldn't be able to do business there. Google are not removing any rights from the Chinese people.
The Chinese dissidents in fact have MORE rights and abilities with a restricted Google than they would if Google was banned outright. Imagine if Google refused to cooperate with Beijing, and Google was banned in China. Would that aid the cause of Chinese democracy? No, it would just remove a useful service.
If Google is evil for not providing information in democracy, then every single company in China which doesn't disobey the government outright is also evil.
If a website blocks child porn in a country where child porn is banned, it the website evil?
Why should there be public investment at all? Only a few hi-tech yuppies have a need for wireless access, why should everyone else have to pay more taxes to fund it? Surely the yuppies can spare a few pounds from their massive salaries, there's no need to take even more from the poor.
It's the same reason people buy Star Wars 'light sabres' for tens of thousands, they're saddos with more money than sense. There's no actual point in an old car, they probably don't even start.
Thank god there are some real men left in this world who haven't turned into tree hugging yuppies.
Of course, in order to be a real man you need a car that gets 2 miles to the gallon, is thirty-feet long and falls to pieces upon going round a corner. The rest of us have grown up.
but nearly everyone should look in to investing in to a home.
No, that's just a good way to end up losing money and bankrupting yourself. For a start, the housing market is in a bubble, which means it's not the time to be buying. The price is going to go down. Secondly, if you lose your job, or can't keep up with the payments, then your investment disappears. Thirdly, that's assuming you can get a mortgage in the first place. With even small shitty houses costing 200k, you need to be in the top 10% of earners before the bank will even give you a loan. And you'll probably have to spend your life savings on the down payment.
You're joking. Classic cars are cheap and rusty. They're not very reliable, not even slightly safe, inefficient, polluting and don't have anything over modern cars. At all. Other than nostalgia.
No it's just not a very good article. How about before working out how to grow plants on Mars, those scientists work out how to actually get people to Mars, or even the Moon. Or even a reusable spaceship which isn't falling to bits.
Hiroshima was nothing. How many millions were killed, tortured and raped by the Japanese in Korea and China? A lot more than were killed by nukes. Yet the Japanese get all the sympathy. Last I looked, the Japanese started the war. They attacked Pearl Harbour, they invaded China. And now they're crying because they lost. America didn't start the war, they finished it.
If you don't want to get bombed, don't start a war.
It doesn't matter if women don't go to spacestations, astronauts are gay anyway, especially on the ISS. I mean, what straight man would want to spend months at a time in a small tight space in the middle of nowhere with just another man for company? I bet most of that garbage pod is filled with used condoms.
I must admit I don't know much about orbital mechanics. It's all too complicated for me. I don't know why orbits can't all just be circles, it's easier that way.
First, what about the dangers of dispersed matter floating around in space, hitting satellites and other spacecrafts?
By that logic, we shouldn't have anything in space, as it might crash into a satellite. In fact we shouldn't send up a shuttle in case it crashes into something.
Second, do you even have a clue on pressurization? Even the tiniest hole will leak enough air out of the station to pose a serious health risk to it's inhabitants.
That's where the clever bit comes in: There'll be a sort of lid over the hole to keep the air in, you just open the hole when you need to use it. It will be airtight.
Not really. If you throw it out of the window towards the Earth, it will have velocity towards the Earth. This means it will de-orbit. Orbit velocity is higher at lower altitudes, so as the shit gets closer to Earth, it will not be able to sustain orbit, so it will burn up.
If the shit is ejected from the shuttle at a mere 10m/s, it will burn up in a few hours.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering the number of coal plants compared to nuclear plants, I'd say that nuclear plants are far more dangerous. And what exactly do you do with the waste You can't keep dumping it in the sea forever. And what do you say to all those people who get cancer from living next to nuclear plants?
Face it, fission power is shite. Why the fuck haven't those so-called intelligent scientists invented fusion plants yet?
I think with all the problems had at places like Sellafield show that nuclear (fission) power can never be safe.
Actually, there are three:
OV-103 Discovery
OV-104 Atlantis
OV-105 Endeavour
Maybe he's posting from 6 hours in the future?
How about this metric: users
I don't know a SINGLE person - not one solitary soul, who uses Linux, but I know scores who use Windows every day, for everything from world processing to Internet browsing.
Is ANYONE out there using Linux for anything?
Obviously, the more people use something, the better it is. In fact I bet the ratio of Windows/Linux users is much bigger than the ratio of Google/Yahoo users. It's funny how popularity counts on Slashdot when the Slashbots' favourite is the popular one.
The more sites, the more likely you are to get a relevent result. For instance if Google couldn't be bothered indexing some obscure site which is the only site which is of any use to you, then Google isn't any use, no matter how much hype it generates. And even if it did index it, it would probably be on page 11 behind a hundred sites trying to sell you crap.
Don't worry, Google will be innovating these services in a few years time. Slashdotters the world over will be full of comment about how great Google's innovations are and how their competitors can only steal ideas. Google's services will be better than the alternatives due to the slow loading times and crooked javascript.
I don't think you can read. He didn't say he was investing in a search engine, he was USING a search engine. In this case, and probably most cases, Yahoo provided the best results.
Google is like a lot of popular organisations, they're too busy listening to people tell them how good they are to actually improve.
Miss it? It's still here. My modem doesn't appear to have any way to turn off the speaker, so I'm stuck with it. What sort of modem are you using?
That's the most stupid thing I've ever read. By your definition, nothing is zero emission because of how it was made. Zero emission means it doesn't give anything out when you use it. How do people like you remember to breath?
We already have places to go on Earth, like Siberia, the Sahara, and Antarctica. All with plenty of space.
But people won't want to live there, because they're barren, either very cold or very hot, or very dark and miserable. And yet, they're still more hospitable than anywhere else in the universe.
If people don't want to live there, what makes you think they'll want to live on the Moon or Mars?
Have you seen any pictures of those women astronauts? I don't think even going without for a hundred years would make them look 'sexy'.
The answer is yes, they're better off with companies not acting as collaborators to their own opression.
Collaborators? You make it sound like Google is actively ratting out dissidents to the government. If they're better off without Google's censored website, then they can just not use the site at all.
Here's the main point:
All search engines doing business in China have to follow Chinese law, and if that involves blocking pro-democracy information then they have to do it. The only alternative is to not operate there. Would the Chinese people be better off with no search engines at all?
BTW the chinese are better off when no company decides to do business with their government if they impose laws and make them enforce things that violate basic human rights.
Obviously in China free speech is not a basic human right, the same way in America smoking cannibis is not a basic human right. Does that mean if a shop refuses to sell you cannibis are they evil for collaborating with the government? Would people be better off if all shops were closed down?
There's nothing evil about following a country's laws. If they didn't follow the laws they wouldn't be able to do business there. Google are not removing any rights from the Chinese people.
The Chinese dissidents in fact have MORE rights and abilities with a restricted Google than they would if Google was banned outright. Imagine if Google refused to cooperate with Beijing, and Google was banned in China. Would that aid the cause of Chinese democracy? No, it would just remove a useful service.
If Google is evil for not providing information in democracy, then every single company in China which doesn't disobey the government outright is also evil.
If a website blocks child porn in a country where child porn is banned, it the website evil?
Since when is the Earth a 2-dimensional object? Maybe Hiroshima in 1945, but most places on Earth aren't a perfectly flat plane.
Why should there be public investment at all? Only a few hi-tech yuppies have a need for wireless access, why should everyone else have to pay more taxes to fund it? Surely the yuppies can spare a few pounds from their massive salaries, there's no need to take even more from the poor.
You're saying that America has more roads than Europe? I very much doubt that, most of America is open wasteland.
It's the same reason people buy Star Wars 'light sabres' for tens of thousands, they're saddos with more money than sense. There's no actual point in an old car, they probably don't even start.
Thank god there are some real men left in this world who haven't turned into tree hugging yuppies.
Of course, in order to be a real man you need a car that gets 2 miles to the gallon, is thirty-feet long and falls to pieces upon going round a corner. The rest of us have grown up.
but nearly everyone should look in to investing in to a home.
No, that's just a good way to end up losing money and bankrupting yourself. For a start, the housing market is in a bubble, which means it's not the time to be buying. The price is going to go down.
Secondly, if you lose your job, or can't keep up with the payments, then your investment disappears. Thirdly, that's assuming you can get a mortgage in the first place. With even small shitty houses costing 200k, you need to be in the top 10% of earners before the bank will even give you a loan. And you'll probably have to spend your life savings on the down payment.
You're joking. Classic cars are cheap and rusty. They're not very reliable, not even slightly safe, inefficient, polluting and don't have anything over modern cars. At all. Other than nostalgia.
No it's just not a very good article. How about before working out how to grow plants on Mars, those scientists work out how to actually get people to Mars, or even the Moon. Or even a reusable spaceship which isn't falling to bits.
Hiroshima was nothing. How many millions were killed, tortured and raped by the Japanese in Korea and China? A lot more than were killed by nukes. Yet the Japanese get all the sympathy. Last I looked, the Japanese started the war. They attacked Pearl Harbour, they invaded China. And now they're crying because they lost. America didn't start the war, they finished it.
If you don't want to get bombed, don't start a war.
It doesn't matter if women don't go to spacestations, astronauts are gay anyway, especially on the ISS. I mean, what straight man would want to spend months at a time in a small tight space in the middle of nowhere with just another man for company? I bet most of that garbage pod is filled with used condoms.
I must admit I don't know much about orbital mechanics. It's all too complicated for me. I don't know why orbits can't all just be circles, it's easier that way.
First, what about the dangers of dispersed matter floating around in space, hitting satellites and other spacecrafts?
By that logic, we shouldn't have anything in space, as it might crash into a satellite. In fact we shouldn't send up a shuttle in case it crashes into something.
Second, do you even have a clue on pressurization? Even the tiniest hole will leak enough air out of the station to pose a serious health risk to it's inhabitants.
That's where the clever bit comes in: There'll be a sort of lid over the hole to keep the air in, you just open the hole when you need to use it. It will be airtight.
Not really. If you throw it out of the window towards the Earth, it will have velocity towards the Earth. This means it will de-orbit. Orbit velocity is higher at lower altitudes, so as the shit gets closer to Earth, it will not be able to sustain orbit, so it will burn up.
If the shit is ejected from the shuttle at a mere 10m/s, it will burn up in a few hours.