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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:New power source? (Score 1) 241

It's one thing to say, "water can't be a problem because there's no water in the design". It's quite another to say, "water can't be a problem because no water can ever get into the reactor".

Earthquake + tsunami = water in reactor
Catastrophic flooding = water in reactor

(do these things have sprinkler systems in them? Disaster + fire = water in reactor)

I'm curious how these things behave when water does find its way in...

Comment Re:Space elevator coming next? (Score 1) 159

I was replying to your assertion that islands couldn't make a suitable terminus. As I pointed out, the cable will tear long before that.

And even if we made the cable out of diamond, we don't know how to make an anchor so strong that it can lift an island. So if the cable didn't tear, you'd just rip the anchor out of the ground and it would float away...

Comment Re:Free market for the win (Score 1) 644

This is my favorite but now old joke about FF: FF doesn't have memory leaks! Well, except for the four we fixed in the new version. I've been hearing that story since 2.0, and I appreciated it about as much as you obviously do (which is not at all).

However, this is not entirely true anymore. There's a few sharp people working on improving both the high and the low water mark memory usage in Firefox. You should read this guy's whole blog, but this entry in particular stands out:

http://gregor-wagner.com/?p=36

There was substantial page fragmentation mis-feature, which was improved for FF 7. When you closed a tab, most of the pages allocated for that tab still had live objects in them. That's bad for memory usage.

Comment Re:Wisdom (Score 4, Insightful) 253

I don't say this often. Hell, I never say this: this is one place where the military has the right idea about how to manage people. Or at least, my poor, second-hand understanding of military chain of command suggests that is so.

Non-Commissioned officers are on a separate career path. They are expected to continue managing 'the workers' in some capacity for their whole career. They both know what has to be done and can sympathize with the poor bastards who'll get stuck doing it. They are not expected to seek a C level position. That's not their job. Getting shit done is their job, and no assignment or promotion will ever completely hamper that goal.

Meanwhile, the commissioned officers never manage the workers. Occasionally junior COs will try get things done that are a Bad Idea, and an NCO (eg, a warrant officer) will tell them to "Kindly fuck off, sir.". These people ARE expected to seek a C level position. Perhaps most importantly, if you demonstrate an inability to eventually achieve a C-level position, you may find yourself unwelcome, and encouraged to leave. "Up or Out"

I think where this breaks down when applied to civilians is that we don't distinguish people who DO from people who manage. If you can get things done, we should let you do that until the world ends. If you can't get things done, but you can kinda sorta interact with some people who do, should we really keep you around forever? It seems to me like maybe that's not such a good idea.

Comment Re:Space elevator coming next? (Score 1) 159

Not so sure about the anchor point bit, but the rest seems true.

One of the proposals terminates the cable at a boat. I dunno how they keep the thing from being pulled downwind (other than "because it's in the doldrums"), but the tension on the cable only needs to exceed the weight of the cars, the freight, and the safety margin. If you put too much tension on the cable, you'll snap it. If you're trying to hoist an island off its foundations, that would definitely be 'too much tension'.

Slashdot Top Deals

Intel CPUs are not defective, they just act that way. -- Henry Spencer

Working...