Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:"UN Says: Why Not Eat More Insects?" (Score 1) 626

Personally, the "gross" part about eating insects is that they're too small to easily remove the guts and other undesirable portions from. With a large mammal it's (relatively) easy to chop off chunks of meat and fat and not much else. Even if it's not particularly harmful, I don't want to be eating insect brains, indigestible exoskeleton, and guts with my small amount of insect muscle.

Comment Re:Do the waves matter? (Score 2) 112

"The boundary between cold water and warm, the Thermocline, has been important to undersea warfare for hundreds of years of man's history. Now we have found away to harness that power for constructive purposes. Once what cloaked us can now feed us. Once what shielded us from death, now brings us life."

Captain Ulrik Svensgaard, "The Ripple and the Wave"
The Media

What Does It Actually Cost To Publish a Scientific Paper? 166

ananyo writes "Nature has published an investigation into the real costs of publishing research after delving into the secretive, murky world of science publishing. Few publishers (open access or otherwise-including Nature Publishing Group) would reveal their profit margins, but they've pieced together a picture of how much it really costs to publish a paper by talking to analysts and insiders. Quoting from the piece: '"The costs of research publishing can be much lower than people think," agrees Peter Binfield, co-founder of one of the newest open-access journals, PeerJ, and formerly a publisher at PLoS. But publishers of subscription journals insist that such views are misguided — born of a failure to appreciate the value they add to the papers they publish, and to the research community as a whole. They say that their commercial operations are in fact quite efficient, so that if a switch to open-access publishing led scientists to drive down fees by choosing cheaper journals, it would undermine important values such as editorial quality.' There's also a comment piece by three open access advocates setting out what they think needs to happen next to push forward the movement as well as a piece arguing that 'Objections to the Creative Commons attribution license are straw men raised by parties who want open access to be as closed as possible.'"

Comment Re:All Edison's fault (Score 1) 1080

My bathroom has had few-dollar CFLs running fine for >6 years without a single replacement, and that includes moving apartments (and reusing the same bulbs). They just came from the cheapest Costco CFL-pack I could find. I have no idea how people are killing CFLs, I have never seen one die, and they're all I use.

Comment Re:Methinks people don't appreciate the scales her (Score 2) 299

The problem with constant acceleration is energy. It doesn't really matter how long or how hard you're accelerating, with 100% matter to energy conversion and a photon drive (100% energy to thrust), you would only be able to reach 0.6c by converting half your ship's mass. A constant 1g trip to anywhere interesting would take unimaginable amounts of energy.

This requirement can be slightly reduced via external acceleration (eg. laser boosting), but then you're talking planetary-scale focusing mirrors if you want to beam power out of your local Oort cloud. That would only get you a moderate gain, though: 0.7c for a ship-mass of beamed power at 100% efficiencies. All this is of course ignoring the interstellar medium, as well.

Slashdot Top Deals

You have a message from the operator.

Working...