Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:WIMPs (Score 4, Interesting) 236

That the thing about dark matter... it has a perfectly reasonable explanation (WIMPs). It's not that weird of a "thing".

Dark energy on the other hand, that's just WEIRD ;) It doesn't act like any "energy" as we know it, even though everything is clearly moving into a higher energy state. A question I've had for a while... if space itself is being inflated (or any sort of mathematically equivalent scenario) - everything inflating in all directions at all scales - wouldn't there be some sort of weak radiation signal from electrons expanding into a higher energy state due to dark energy and then collapsing back down? But I have trouble picturing how to reconcile an absolute, varying distance at the atomic scale with quantization of energy states, positions, etc...

Comment Re:Ummmm ... duh? (Score 1) 385

Sure there is: add this to the CPDLC standard and make all of the hardware modifications needed to support it:

----
Message type: Revert flight plan and lock
Message arguments: TIME: the time of the flight plan to use
Message description: Revert to the flight plan that was active at TIME that had been approved by both ground control and the pilot; engage autopilot; and disable all pilot / copilot access to all systems. If there is no approved flight plan then the flight plan is to return to the nearest suitable airport in the most direct route possible.
----

Additional modifications: Make sure that the pilot can never disable datalink communications with ground by any means that ground wouldn't have time to respond to.

Result: Nobody is ever "remote controlling" the plane from the ground. A murderous / terrorist ground controller can't crash the plane, only make it autopilot itself on a previously approved or otherwise reasonable flight plan. A pilot behaving suspiciously can't crash the plane, as ground control will just engage the autopilot and lock them out. To abuse the system both ground and the pilot would have to agree on a suicidal flight plan.

Comment Re:Silly two person rule (Score 1) 385

Two persons in the cockpit won't help a thing.

There's already been at least one case of a homicidal pilot being overpowered by the other people in the cockpit. if I remember correctly, some people on board died, but, if the pilot had been on his own in the cockpit, they'd probably all have died.

So... BZZT... wrong.

Comment Re:Flight Attendants Can Fly Better Than Pilots (Score 1) 385

So, if a pilot decides to crash a plane into a mountain, do they think the flight attendant will be able to overpower the pilot and bring the plane back up to a safe cruising altititude on their own? Crashing a plane is a lot easier than flying one safely.

There's a thing called an autopilot. A few hours with MS Flight Sim would be enough to train them how to set a safe altitude and ensure it's turned on.

But that would only matter if the other pilot couldn't get into the cockpit.

Besides which, even someone who's willing to take a ten minute ride to certain death probably wouldn't do so if someone else is sitting there watching them. They could have crashed the plane into the ground during the takeoff or landing, with the captain right beside them, but waited for him to leave instead.

Comment Re:Memorizing site-unique passwords isn't possible (Score 2) 267

Yeah, the suggested method for generating passwords generates needlessly long passwords. The total entropy is good, but the entropy per character is pretty poor. You get much better entropy per character with abbreviation passwords, where you have a sentence or group of random words and you use the first letter from each, or second, or last, or alternating, or whatever suits you. It's still not as much entropy per character as a random pattern, but it's much better than writing out full words - and pops into your head just as fast (because it is, in essence, the same).

Comment Re:Reminds me of one thing (Score 2) 737

We (almost) have self-driving cars. Aircraft generally self-drive themselves almost all time now. Why not have self-driving aircraft?

Because then everyone dies when the computer fails. Autopilots regularly fail and expect the pilot to take over; sometimes, like AF447, the pilot flies it into the sea, but most times they resolve the problem and continue.

This is particularly problematic when sensors fail, as they did in AF447, and the computer doesn't know what's going on any more.

Comment Re:what will be more interesting (Score 5, Insightful) 662

Are people really going to miss yet another totally fake show pretending to be reality? Is it just because this one combined cars and Daily Mail-style politics?

Sorry, but I have no sympathy for a primadonna for whom curses at an employee for 20 minutes and then physically assaults him up for half a minute (without any resistance from his victim) before someone pulled him off, all because the Clarkson's food wasn't warm. And this is hardly the first time Clarkson has behaved like this, he was already on "final warning" after a string of other incidents. What befalls him is his own bloody fault. And all of the abuse that the victim got over this whole thing... my favorite tweet on the subject was:

"Man assaults another man and victim receives abuse because people can’t watch a TV show about cars. Bravo society. "

Slashdot Top Deals

"Engineering without management is art." -- Jeff Johnson

Working...