Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:yet if we did it (Score 1) 463

To be locked up over this is right.

I can't believe you got upvoted for advocating revenge (a.k.a. "retribution"). Revenge won't make the streets safer, so it won't really solve anything, and it makes a jury hesitant to convict.

No, the best way to deal with this is to permanently take away his driver's license, unless and until he proves, through a battery of psychological tests, that he no longer has a problem with distracted driving. What jury would say no to that?

United States

The Executive Order That Led To Mass Spying, As Told By NSA Alumni 180

An anonymous reader writes with this Ars piece about the executive order that is the legal basis for the U.S. government's mass spying on citizens. One thing sits at the heart of what many consider a surveillance state within the US today. The problem does not begin with political systems that discourage transparency or technologies that can intercept everyday communications without notice. Like everything else in Washington, there's a legal basis for what many believe is extreme government overreach—in this case, it's Executive Order 12333, issued in 1981. “12333 is used to target foreigners abroad, and collection happens outside the US," whistleblower John Tye, a former State Department official, told Ars recently. "My complaint is not that they’re using it to target Americans, my complaint is that the volume of incidental collection on US persons is unconstitutional.” The document, known in government circles as "twelve triple three," gives incredible leeway to intelligence agencies sweeping up vast quantities of Americans' data. That data ranges from e-mail content to Facebook messages, from Skype chats to practically anything that passes over the Internet on an incidental basis. In other words, EO 12333 protects the tangential collection of Americans' data even when Americans aren't specifically targeted—otherwise it would be forbidden under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978.
Businesses

When Customer Dissatisfaction Is a Tech Business Model 257

jammag writes: A new trend has emerged where tech companies have realized that abusing users pays big. Examples include the highly publicized Comcast harassing service call, Facebook "experiments," Twitter timeline tinkering, rude Korean telecoms — tech is an area where the term "customer service" has an Orwellian slant. Isn't it time customer starting fleeing abusive tech outfits?

Comment Re:Correction: (Score 1) 338

Those telcos are forced to provide service to everybody at the same price, which means they make a profit on tightly packed businesses in the city and that offsets their losses on the more widespread customers out of town.

Subsidies like this for suburban and rural residents is why we have sprawl.

I wouldn't mind paying $10 per gallon of milk in exchange for lower taxes and lower utility costs. (Especially because I'm lactose intolerant!)

Transportation

How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site? 190

cartechboy writes Tesla's Superchargers are the talk of the electric car community. These charging stations can take a Model S battery pack from nearly empty to about 150 miles of range in around 30 minutes. That's crazy fast, and it's nothing short of impressive. But what does it take to actually build a Tesla Supercharger site? Apparently a lot of digging. A massive trench is created to run high-capacity electric cables before the charging stations themselves are even installed. A diagram and photos of the Electric Conduit Construction build out have surfaced on the Internet. The conduits connect the charging stations to a power distribution center, which in turn is connected to a transformer that provides the power for charging cars. It took 11 days to install the six charging stalls in Goodland, Kansas. If you thought it was a quick process to build a Supercharger station, you were clearly wrong.

Comment Re:which turns transport into a monopoly... (Score 1) 276

the worst transport freeloaders are cyclists who pay zero usage taxes yet use the roads and have their own special lanes/paths built for them.

Those aren't really for bicyclists. They're for motorists, to get bicyclists out of their way, because motorists don't want to have to share the road with bicyclists.

But you're correct that bicyclists don't pay any user fees for the roads. I propose a mileage fee to cover the road damage caused by the vehicle which is proportional to the 4th power of the weight of the vehicle. If a 2-ton vehicle owner pays $200 per year for the roads, then a 200-pound bicyclist going the same distance would pay 1/8th of a cent per year. Plus maybe an administrative fee of $10 per vehicle. That's fair, isn't it?

Comment Re:which turns transport into a monopoly... (Score 1) 276

Airports are not expensive to set up and maintain...

In cities, they are extremely expensive, if you include the opportunity cost of capital. In other words, how much could you earn in a year by investing $(the monetary value of the land occupied by an airport) in the market? That is how much the land alone costs the city every year.

Comment Re:which turns transport into a monopoly... (Score 1) 276

Phoenix uses the Proposition 400 sales tax to finance freeways, San Francisco has Proposition K, Los Angeles has Measure R, and San Diego has TransNet. Texas found that "no road [in the state] pays for itself in gas taxes and [user] fees."

Are there any cities in the USA where cars are economical without road subsidies or preferential treatment such as minimum parking requirements?

Comment Re:which turns transport into a monopoly... (Score 2) 276

I'll never live anywhere that won't let me have a car or where for whatever reason cars are uneconomical.

Please name one city in your country where cars are economical without subsidies, such as sales taxes to finance freeways, and without preferential treatment, such as minimum parking requirements to force business owners to build more than the economically optimal amount of parking.

In my country (the USA), I don't think any such city exists.

Comment Re:Safety vs Law (Score 1, Insightful) 475

But bumping someone who's going 45 when you're going 90 will result in a major accident.

The one going 90 should have watched where he was going. Unless it's more important to pay attention to what's behind you than to what's in front of you?

It would be good if the USA adopted the Autobahn's rule of cruising in the right lane and passing only on the left, to separate fast moving traffic from slow moving traffic.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you have a procedure with 10 parameters, you probably missed some.

Working...