×

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

MIT Designs Tsunami Proof Floating Nuclear Reactor

bigpat Re:Waste? (208 comments)

And there is a good solution for storage, but the allies of the fossil fuel industry have combined with the anti nuclear folks to block Yucca mountain from opening. Bury the nuclear waste deep in the earth, because that is where it came from in the first place.

It is very sad for the thousands of people that lost their homes because of radiation around Fukushima. But compare that evacuation to the effects of the earthquake and tsunami itself, which claimed the lives of 15,885 people and injured 6,148 with 2623 people still missing, the response to the radiation leak is just one after effect of the tsunami, but it hasn't caused any deaths.

As for "Such a fire will render the U.S "virtually" uninhabitable.".... a hundred nuclear weapons were detonated on the US mainland as part of above ground nuclear weapons tests. While I think that was incredibly stupid and irresponsible and there have certainly been health effects and increased cancer deaths in the decades afterwards, the radiation leaks at nuclear power plants pale in comparison to the radiation released by those above ground tests and as far as I can tell the US is still inhabitable.

yesterday
top

MIT Designs Tsunami Proof Floating Nuclear Reactor

bigpat Re:Waste? (208 comments)

And it is still a non-issue. When it is 30 years later and you can still store it on-site then it is not a lot of waste. Compare that to any other energy source, the amount of toxic waste, even solar panel manufacturing and you have your answer.

yesterday
top

Will This Flying Car Get Crowdfunded?

bigpat Re:Not getting funded. (157 comments)

I would love to do some recreational flying, but I can't afford to with a family and a mortgage and many expenses. And I couldn't justify it as an expensive hobby before then.

The point was simply that people don't fly because it isn't economically viable to do so. The number of pilot's licenses isn't an indication of people's ability to fly or their inclination to do so. It is an indication of the expense of flying which is partly the result of FAA regulations and the lack of efficient mass production of light aircraft.

3 days ago
top

Will This Flying Car Get Crowdfunded?

bigpat Re:Not getting funded. (157 comments)

Personally I don't have a pilots license because I don't have the money to waste on something that is of no economic benefit. If I could fly from point A to point B and get their in half the time and avoid traffic for similar costs to a car, then I would learn and adapt. And so would a lot of other people.

Even if not everyone is suited to flying, as you suggest, then getting a portion of the population off the roads would still make a huge impact on traffic and ultimately allow us to grow our economy without needing to make diminishing return type of investments in transportation infrastructure.

4 days ago
top

Will This Flying Car Get Crowdfunded?

bigpat Re:Not getting funded. (157 comments)

Why does a small jet engine have to cost too much? A quick search of jet turbines for model aircraft shows that the 52lbs max thrust P200-SX from JetCat costs $5,495. Sure you would need 6 or 7 of these to get an average sized adult off the ground vertically with some minimal airframe, but we aren't talking about millions of dollars we are talking about something under $100k to put together some sort of ultralight VTOL.

I think the best flying car hope right now is actually in the small autonomous UAV space, but we need the FAA to start allowing more commercial development of UAVs in certain areas away from heavily populated areas.

All the other technical hurdles seem pretty manageable for at least moving us along the cost/performance curve to make small VTOL aircraft more affordable for more people.

4 days ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

bigpat Re:Fuck Obamacare (722 comments)

Yes, I think you are right on the constitutionality issue. People get tax refunds for all sorts of things... "Cash for clunkers" comes to mind. And nothing in the Constitution prevents a regressive income tax. Which is what a tax penalty mostly applied to middle class families that feel they can't afford Obamacare or employer provided plans really is. I warned people ahead of the Supreme Court case that it wasn't likely to be overruled because the mandate was just a tax based on some criteria that wasn't constitutionally protected.

But I think there is probably a constitutional line someplace, I mean if the health insurance mandate was a criminal or civil penalty instead of a tax penalty based on income then it would be considered unconstitutional or if the money was spent towards supporting some particular speech or religion, like giving people a tax credit for buying just the books on Oprah Winfrey's book club list or a tax penalty if a person doesn't buy a cross, or mandating dues payments to the Party.

Funny enough I think the Massachusetts RomneyCare model is actually unconstitutional, under the state constitution. Because Massachusetts constitution specifies a flat income tax and only allows deductions under the income tax and not extra taxes ... like a penalty. But as far as I know there has been no legal challenge.

about a week ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

bigpat Re:7.1 million is pathetically low, so ya I believ (722 comments)

In 2-3 years the number uninsured will drop much farther.

Ya, no shit. Because the fine will go up more people will be compelled to buy the insurance. Still doesn't mean it is "affordable" or sustainable. This is a band-aid solution to prop up the health insurance system with more unwilling participants.

about a week ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

bigpat Re:"Obamacare Enrollment"? (722 comments)

Yes, it is propaganda. We are now back to the level of uninsured in the last years of the Bush administration.... Yippie?

about a week ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

bigpat Re:Fuck Obamacare (722 comments)

Or how about if the pro-gun lobby decided that anyone who did not buy a gun that year would get taxed an extra $5,000?

about a week ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

bigpat Re:7.1 million is pathetically low, so ya I believ (722 comments)

Now that Obamacare IS the system and it IS the problem, then maybe on one side of the isle we can talk about fixing Obamacare and on the other we can talk about replacing.... and mean the same thing.

But seriously, on the left I think we/they should be happy with a compromise that sees an expansion of medicaid and some sort of very basic universal healthcare paid for with a broad base progressive tax. Not single payer for everything, just emergency medicine for all and a few sick visits. Figure another 2% on top of the medicare tax.

And for conservatives, introduce an option to opt out of the insurance market and not get fined under the individual mandate. Instead of an Insurance mandate, give people an option for a savings mandate. So you have to save up to 5% of your income every year until you have saved a certain amount of money, say $50k or $100k (indexed to inflation).

Treat the savings option like a Traditional/Roth IRA where you can invest the savings however you like, but only take it out tax free for medical expenses until retirement age. But then at retirement make it tax free up to a certain amount. Encouraging more savings and investment should also help with a retirement savings problem that we have in this country.

about a week ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

bigpat Re:7.1 million is pathetically low, so ya I believ (722 comments)

They're talking about the 40 million or so Americans who cannot get affordable coverage due to preexisting conditions, income restraints, and the like.

The problem is that they are talking about them and not actually offering people affordable insurance.

about a week ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

bigpat Re:7.1 million is pathetically low, so ya I believ (722 comments)

Um.. most of US population is already covered though their employers/family plan. They're talking about the 40 million or so Americans who cannot get affordable coverage due to preexisting conditions, income restraints, and the like.

And apparently most of those people still can't get affordable coverage

about a week ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

bigpat Re:7.1 million is pathetically low, so ya I believ (722 comments)

Are you sure that's the right comparison?

Like I said 60 million is the better comparison. So, 7.1 million would just be 12% of the uninsured. Or 23% if you exclude a bunch of groups like you would.

But really a lot of those 7.1 million people were previously insured last year. Bottom line is that Obamacare hasn't really addressed the uninsured problem, let alone actually made structural reforms to the health care system. It is a band-aid on the current HMO/health insurance system in order to stem the tide of people dropping overly expensive insurance plans. We still are left with a system which is the most expensive in the world with poorer health outcomes.

about a week ago
top

Can the ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers Be Believed?

bigpat 7.1 million is pathetically low, so ya I believe (722 comments)

In the first year of Obamacare we will still have more uninsured than in the last year of the Bush administration

7.1 million sign ups out of over 300 million people for a "mandatory" participation program is truly pathetic regardless whether it is above or below what was expected. Yes yes, I know the number of uninsured was closer to 60 million, so basically you are getting adoption among the intended uninsured population of just 12%. Just 12% of uninsured people are choosing Obamacare/ACA, that is what is remarkable.

Regardless of how you feel about the fact they decided to use a regressive fine on middle class taxpayers in order to force people to buy insurance... it simply ain't working.

Sure that meager adoption rate will go up over the next two years as the fines for not having insurance go up, but that is basically it. We are still left with millions and millions of uninsured.

about a week ago
top

Mozilla CEO Firestorm Likely Violated California Law

bigpat Re:Bu the wasn't fired (1111 comments)

"asked him to stay on in another role"

about two weeks ago
top

Why There Are So Few ISP Start-Ups In the U.S.

bigpat Re:You people are so ignorant... (223 comments)

with the cost per home at $500 to $674

So, the original post makes that sound like a lot of money... but when monthly subscriptions are in the $80 to $120 range then that is a pretty good return on investment. Sure there are operating costs too, but your capital costs are paid for in less than a year at that rate and the infrastructure is meant to last for many years.

A local non-profit/coop/municipality could build out the network based on a per household investment of $500 to $700. Get a municipality to issue municipal bonds to cover the upfront cost and I think you have a pretty straightforward way to build out a fiber optic network

about two weeks ago
top

Why There Are So Few ISP Start-Ups In the U.S.

bigpat Re:Different views on a free market (223 comments)

Unfortunately it is often the monopolies that have the power to influence the regulators and lawmakers in order to write the regulations in such a way as to keep out competition. So, when people are against "regulation", it is often the mind numbing regulations that big companies write in order to keep smaller companies from competing that they are really against.

Calling for less regulation or more regulation are two sides of the same coin, what we need are 'better' regulations that promote competition.

about two weeks ago
top

Ask Slashdot: Experiences With Free To Air Satellite TV?

bigpat Re:Dish/Direct TV should offer free basic channels (219 comments)

I am not suggesting that people hack their way to free premium content. I am suggesting that the advertising model could provide valuable content to viewers in order to entice them to connect their tvs to a satellite dish and still be a profitable part of the business and that for the satellite companies they would be in the living rooms of millions more households so they would have greater opportunities to sell additional content and services in addition to making money off the advertising. Heck try it with 5 channels like USA network, TNT, TBS or whichever ones might fit under the advertising revenue only model. It is a model that used to work for the big broadcasting networks, so there is no reason to think it won't work again for broadcast.

about two weeks ago

Submissions

bigpat hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

bigpat has no journal entries.

Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...