Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Gatling guns? (Score 0) 157

"A failing road car stops on the road. Not always ideal, but generally a controllable event"

Far from ideal, quite often fatal. A failing car on a crowded interstate can result in an accident involving many vehicles with lots of casualties, and this happens shockingly often.

"A failing flying car drops out of the sky."

Unlikely. You have redundant systems,  if your main control system fails the backup kicks in, you have 8 engines and still have limited flight abilities even if over half of them fail simultaneously, and even if absolutely everything else fails there is a parachute big enough to bring the entire car down relatively gently.

"Therefore it has to be orders of magnitude more reliable than your typical car."

Yes, that part is correct.

Comment Re:Gatling guns? (Score 0) 157

Yeah, because Sealand is such a huge market.

Things like light-sport and ultralight aviation met a lot of resistance and took years to be accepted, but they work just fine. Yes, they are dangerous but lots of things are dangerous and we cope nonetheless. Driving a car is incredibly dangerous, the roads are overcrowded, and people are dying every day from that already.

But it's a politically safe choice to do nothing about it, because people are used to it. Whereas it's politically risky to allow people to choose another route, even if it's clearly safer, because undoubtedly there will be some accidents either way, and if you made a change that allowed a new type of accident you would be in the news and people would blame you, while you are unlikely to be blamed for all the accidents you could have prevented but did not if you simply preserve the status quo.

Comment Re:Gatling guns? (Score 0) 157

1. Flying cars exist, and have for decades. Look up Moller. They have a really good product already engineered, they just need to pay off the FAA before they can start selling. So I would back their project rather than this one.

2. Adding a third dimension actually expands the driving space dramatically, alleviating congestion and making collisions less likely since there is so much more space to use. Certainly there would be safety issues but there is no reason to think they would be more severe than the issues with groundbound automobiles. Are you in favor of banning them too?

Comment Re:Stop calling it 'blood moon'! (Score 1) 146

I agree, it's a lunar eclipse, why cant they just call it what it is?

And it's not like they just made up a cutesy name that wasnt in use - a blood moon is an actual thing, but it's still many months in the future.

Marketing and advertising will never be satisfied until they destroy the language so completely that it can no longer be used to communicate at all.

Comment Re:Useless (Score 1) 187

"Road side illumination should be generally restricted to built up areas"

Very true.

But the article is set in Holland. There is absolutely nowhere in Holland that is not a built up area, and it's been that way for centuries, possibly millenia. So it makes sense they have a lot of street lights. They have relatively little crime and if glowing markings on the road can be made to work reliably in that climate (which I suspect may take some time) it might actually make things safer. Street lights can blind but a soft red glow off the road would not.

Comment Re:Propaganda much? (Score 1) 313

I wasnt there and and I dont believe you were either. Standard sources seem to disagree with you a bit. The Tatars were more widespread before the Communist terror, but Crimea was still significantly ethnically Russian long before that.

And I have no need to apologize for Putin. He's a brutal criminal. But he's a brutal criminal that at least seems to have a good idea of his own nations interests and pursues that and for the most part avoids working directly counter to it. It would be nice if our own 'leaders' could do that as well.

Comment Re:Blacksmithing (Score 1) 737

You don't need good charcoal to produce basic tools. As for making good charcoal, all that takes is time and manual labor once you know how the process works. I suppose there are those who think anything requiring manual labor is hard, but I'm not one of them.

  As for the pejoratives, you should look in the mirror first if you're going to trot them out. They almost always apply more easily to the person using them.

Nothing in my comment implied anyone would work from scratch in normal circumstances. The discussion is not about normal circumstances. You can make basic tools when you have nothing but primitive materials. Period.

Unless all the iron and steel in the world magically disappears in this hypothetical catastrophe, mining ore isn't an issue. Getting metal to work with is trivial, and would remain so after just about any catastrophe.

Comment Interesting (Score 0) 83

I far prefer an online shop. The difference between 'it's on the shelf there' and 'we can order it quickly enough to deliver it to you on time' is not something I care about. Wide selection is. Supposedly I am their target demographic.

Unfortunately Amazon as a company is pure evil, and every penny given to them is potentially a penny in the fund for lawyers to subvert our system. I never gave them a penny and, barring rather unlikely and shocking events, I never will be.

Comment Propaganda much? (Score 1) 313

""Having established its presence in the Crimean Peninsula"

Like this was recent.

Crimea has been Russian since 1783.

For my fellow Murricans, that was 7 years after our Declaration of Independence, 4 years before our Constitutional Convention, and 17 years before we moved the Federal Capital from Philadelphia to Washington.

Just so you know.

Slashdot Top Deals

Saliva causes cancer, but only if swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time. -- George Carlin

Working...