Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Energy Utilities Trying To Stifle Growth of Solar Power

archer, the Then Remove All Subsidies (449 comments)

I wouldn't mind paying the net metering fee, IF the subsidies for fossil fuels were removed as well.

An article at Forbes reports that coal increases health care costs by 19 to 45 cents a kwh. Oil increases the costs by 8 to 19 c/kwh, and natural gas by 1 to 2 c/kwh. Then there's the estimated cost of climate change, assuming we beat it. (Yes, I trust a near-unanimous group of subject matter experts. Heck, I bet those 97% would really like to be wrong, so we wouldn't need to do something about the issue.)

Summing up, I'd rather pay $168 a year for a connection, as opposed to paying an extra $1000/year for fossil fuel electricity. (5000 kwh * 20 cents/kwh). Actually, aren't we already paying that extra $1000/year in extra health care costs, property insurance, and natural disaster relief?

yesterday
top

Utilities Should Worry; Rooftop Solar Could Soon Cut Their Profit

archer, the Re:Here we go again (490 comments)

I agree with using renewables first. It bypasses the "subsidies" that the fossil fuel industry receive.

An article at Forbes reports that coal increases health care costs by 19 to 45 cents a kwh. Oil increases the costs by 8 to 19 c/kwh, and natural gas by 1 to 2 c/kwh. Mercury in fish is getting bad enough that Consumer Reports had an article on it last month. I'm pretty sure fish aren't mining mercury. Then there's the climate change issue.

Any one of those reasons, from three different sources, is good enough for me to prefer renewables over fossil fuels. For nuclear, I haven't decided yet, but I'm leaning in the direction of it being sold at the same time as renewable, not after all renewable supply is consumed.

3 days ago
top

How Deep Does the Multiverse Go?

archer, the Re:Math? (202 comments)

Does that cover speed as well? 23 Billion Light Year radius and 14 Billion years old implies stuff is/was travelling at 1.6c. And if 46Billion LY was the radius, average speed becomes 3.2c.

about 3 months ago
top

Supreme Court Rules Against Aereo Streaming Service

archer, the Re:Wrong decision (484 comments)

Yes, Netflix is public transmitting, but from a licensed archive. Aereo is only transmitting the channel that the customer has requested be transmitted. A customer who joined Aereo this year could not request the 2010 Fall Broadcast Season Premieres, since those premieres (probably) haven't been broadcast this year. Netflix has many of those premieres available to customers who sign up today. Aereo is one antenna, one customer, while Netflix is one copy, many customers.

If Aereo were to edit out the commercials in the broadcasts, then I would side with the plaintiffs.

about 3 months ago
top

Robert McMillen: What Everyone Gets Wrong In the Debate Over Net Neutrality

archer, the Re:SciFi come to life (270 comments)

Because when it began, the internet was not a necessity for the general public and economy, and it didn't have ISPs double-dipping or getting states/towns to sign exclusive contracts. Now, when the Internet is almost as necessary as electricity/shelter/food/water, and when ISPs are preventing competition, many people see the ISP industry as being broken and are trying to get it fixed.

about 3 months ago
top

IPCC's "Darkest Yet" Climate Report Warns of Food, Water Shortages

archer, the Re:We've gone beyond bad science (703 comments)

Parroting is the only thing that most of us can do. Both of you are doing it, unless one of you is an actual climate scientist with appropriate degrees and experiences, who has performed his/her own experiments and data collections to research how the earth's environment has behaved in the past.

97 out of 100 scientists are certain that the climate is going to become detrimental to our current society. That's enough for me.

If I didn't trust scientists, my next computer or cell phone purchase would involve the following: redevelop physics from scratch, including semiconductor, RF comms, and information theory. Build a 22nm lithography process. Test it. Otherwise, how do I know I'm not falling for a hoax?

Just because I don't understand something, doesn't mean that something doesn't exist. Yes, on the flip side, if one person tells me something, that person isn't automatically correct. That's where peer review comes in.

For the computer purchase example, I could test a new computer. That's a great solution for that scenario. But from where do we get a second earth to test Climate Change?

Yes, shutting down coal plants overnight is bad: it would cause massive chaos. That's exactly what climatologists are trying to avoid. However, we can work towards getting those plants offline, and work towards zero emission vehicles. On the off-chance all those scientists are wrong about climate change, at least our cities would have better air.

about 6 months ago
top

IPCC's "Darkest Yet" Climate Report Warns of Food, Water Shortages

archer, the Re:Short Sighted Fools, the lot of you. (703 comments)

If you found an odd lump on your body one day, what would you do? You could see a licensed doctor, whose knowledge has been gained from mostly objective, clinically tested, and peer reviewed research. You could see an oil tycoon who has made millions by being a wise businessman. You could also just do nothing.

I'd go to the doctor, myself. Yes, there's probably a small percentage that are bad, so I'd probably ask a second, or even a third to see if I get a consistent answer. If I went to 100 doctors, and 97 of them said the same thing, I'd put my money there, simply because they have knowledge from looking at history. If not, I might as well believe the sun still revolves around the earth, and that if I walk too far, I might fall off the edge of the "world".

Or, if astronomers predicted a 97% chance that a meteorite would land in your town, would you take a day trip? Or stay at home? The trip is pretty cheap: drive/take a bus to family or friend in another state.

Yes, fixing CO2 emissions is much more expensive than a day trip; we can't do it all in one day. We can start though, and give future generations a little more time to figure out a good solution.

about 6 months ago
top

Largest-Yet EVE Online Battle Destroys $200,000 Worth of Starships

archer, the Re:I wonder if it will hold true (463 comments)

Same way you hit a running receiver with a football: lead the target.
You would need to change your acceleration such that you never are where you were headed 30 seconds ago.

about 8 months ago
top

Should the US Copy Switzerland and Consider a 'Maximum Wage' Ratio?

archer, the Re:Huh? (1216 comments)

When I go to the voting booth, the only options I seem to have are "status quo" and "status quo". Corporate profits are at record highs, yet wages are getting lower. Unless the country forms one union, there's nothing stopping Corps and CEOs from bleeding the 99% dry. Right now, the only way I could "fight" this is to do a one-person strike. You can guess far that would go.

about 10 months ago
top

How Big Data Is Destroying the US Healthcare System

archer, the Makes Perfect Sense (507 comments)

Several years ago, I was called by the company providing the extended warranty on my appliances. The were offering me a renewal of the warranty. I said I'd only renew on the dishwasher. They responded that it was the only appliance they wouldn't cover. When I declined the extension, they reminded me that things are more likely to break the older they get.

I didn't feel like pointing out the reason they were declining coverage on the one appliance was probably because it was the only one that needed to be repaired, and twice at that. As such, it would be the most likely to fail again. And it did.

Still don't make it right though.

about a year ago
top

Facebook Comment Prompts Arrests In Cyberbullying Suicide Case

archer, the Re:This (734 comments)

The parents of all three girls failed in my opinion.

One set of parents did not teach their daughter how to deal with bullying, nor did they monitor her social life. Words *do* hurt, if one doesn't know how to handle bullying. We are not born with this ability.

Two sets of parents did not monitor their daughters. Not only could this protect the daughters from abuse/predators, it should've stopped the girls from abusing the victim.

about a year ago
top

Teaching Fractions: The Tootsie Roll Is the New Pie

archer, the A New Product Line (194 comments)

Now Tootsie can sell a bunch of new lengths: halves, thirds, quarters, fifths, sixths, etc. Schools would just need to go out and buy a few bags.

For adults learning fractions, they could use alcohol instead, but they'd just have one fraction: fifths.

about a year ago
top

Upper Limit On Emissions Likely To Be Exceeded Within Decades

archer, the Re:High Certainty. (324 comments)

Was "Certainty" their 3 sigma error band on an estimate? Or was "Certainty" their confidence that they know everything about this massive system? It is a black box after all. They can't just open it up and read the source code. They have to allow for the fact that they don't know everything, but are still giving their best model.

Any estimator can be off high or low for a long period of time. "Long" is relative. If for a significant number of samples, more than half the estimates were high and the rest were spot on, then yes, the estimator is probably wrong. The charts from climate audit show the estimates being high for a run as long as 1/7th of the data. The charts also show the estimates being low for other portions of the data. I don't see how that can be used as convincing proof that the estimator is horribly wrong.

Especially since the climate audit chart itself shows a rise in temperature over 110 years.

1 year,3 days
top

My favorite season:

archer, the Season (346 comments)

Rabbit Season!

1 year,8 days
top

LinkedIn Accused of Hacking Customers' E-Mails To Slurp Up Contacts

archer, the Re:Something Odd (210 comments)

Doctors and Lawyers shouldn't be searching for you on social media. Doctor-Patient Confidentiality and Attorney-Client Privilege should take priority, no?

1 year,9 days
top

Should the U.S. bomb Syria?

archer, the Re:should slashdot be asking if the U.S. should bo (659 comments)

I think your metaphor may be a little off. With Syria, it feels more like I'm walking down the street and happen upon two adults duking it out. I call the police. Then, one of the combatants pulls out a gun. I also have a gun. Do I let the armed fighter shoot the opponent? Do I shoot the armed fighter? Either way, I do not know who the "good guy" is. If I shoot the armed combatant, the unarmed guy (who might be the real bad guy) might pick up the loose weapon and shoot me. If I leave them alone, the armed fighter could shoot his opponent and then me.

I think I would be happy with Syria giving up its chemical weapons to international control.

1 year,21 days
top

Mechwarrior Online Developer Redefines Community Warfare

archer, the Cool Shot (189 comments)

The top tier Cool Shot is what the author is saying was pay-to-win. I never used one. I built my mechs to not overheat and thus take advantage of opponents who did.

I've been playing the game for 6 months. It's been fun, but I've just been finding it too repetitive lately. I'd still recommend it to anyone who likes the MechWarrior concept. Just be prepared to spend time on the forums learning how to play, as no tutorial is provided by the developer.

about a year ago
top

Syria: a Defining Moment For Chemical Weapons?

archer, the Higher casualties among civilians (454 comments)

Since this is happening in the city, instead of some huge open field, if Assad uses chemical weapons, he'll greatly increase the number of casualties of civilians who are loyal to him.

When an explosive detonates, those civilians who aren't supporting the rebels have some protection from the shrapnel because they're hiding indoors.

When a chemical is released, it can spread for blocks, seeping into the buildings through existing cracks or new holes made by shrapnel made by conventional ordnance and increasing the number of casualties in those people who aren't supporting the rebels.

If this were happening in an open field where only the two sides of the fight were present, I can't see any difference between explosive and chemical attacks. Here's a guess: Maybe the explosive attacks are more likely to be immediately lethal or have a higher chance of being healed, as opposed to chemicals which may be more likely to burn enough of a person's body that they can't enjoy life again ever, yet don't kill the victim outright.

about a year ago
top

The Golden Gate Barrage: New Ideas To Counter Sea Level Rise

archer, the Re:Steady State (341 comments)

bah! "33% change to one variable in this massive system".

about a year ago

Submissions

top

What's your opinion on humanity's oil usage?

archer, the archer, the writes  |  more than 4 years ago

archer, the (887288) writes "1. We're using too much and messing up the environment.
2. We're using too much foreign oil, increasing the trade deficit and possibly indirectly funding terrorists.
3. Both 1 and 2.
4. Just about right.
5. We should be using more.
6. Do you really want a CowboyNeal option in a poll about oil?"

Journals

archer, the has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?