Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Wait til the kids start putting Telsa doors (Score 1) 322

Obviously, they were designed by someone who has unlimited garage headroom

They don't look to be over 7' to the top when open, based of seeing a man standing next to them when open.
Most garage doors are at least 7 foot tall, and 8 foot & taller are becoming far more common.

and doesn't regularly find a foot of snow on top of his car...

Put the snow broom in the trunk, like most people. Open the trunk, clear off the snow so you're not an asshole to everyone behind you on the road, then get in.

Comment Re:Designing good test regimens (Score 1) 569

I just can't take seriously the idea that one would have to be a software engineer to design the test well.

No, the test was designed well for automobiles that have existed for 100 years.
The goal of the tests was to reduce the number of variables, such as pollution from other cars going down the road in front of the one you're testing, or the nearby coal plant.

Putting them in the same room under the same conditions makes a very good baseline...until SOFTWARE allowed the cars to cheat the tests.

I'm sure the people designing these test are great hardware people. I also think they just didn't realize that software had advanced to the level to do this.

Comment Re:Speaking as an engineer... (Score 2) 569

If you make the test trivially detectable, then your test depends entirely on trust

I don't think they thought it was trivially detectable.
The people designing these test are not software engineers, and they're also government workers. Having an imagination for ways to defeat the test using software just isn't in their DNA.

Let's see if they change that after this. If they start doing actual road tests and hiring software people, we'll see that they've been incompetent, not overly trusting. There is a difference.

Comment Re: Stupid people are stupid (Score 1) 956

and help support other athletic programs in the school which are not revenue generators.

I recently changed my tune on football due to this.

Went to a BigTen women's volleyball game and admission was CHEAP.
I looked around at the size of the venue and the number of people there, and quickly did the math that there was no way admission was paying for this team, coaches, travel, etc.
The men's football and basketball teams, though, could pay for it with their scraps, and I'm pretty sure that is what is going on.

Comment Re:Black Boxes??? (Score 4, Insightful) 247

We've had it just fine on the shared publicly owned roads for decades now, without having this type of intrusive, electronic surveillance and got along perfectly good.

I don't know what you call "perfectly good", but over 30,000 people killed a year in cars doesn't meet my definition of perfectly good.

Well, you just get kids used to surveillance and they then accept it for normal and "good".

I don't support surveillance, which I think of as the ability to be monitored in real-time. I support reporting, where you plug into a box that can't be accessed without physical, interior access to the car.

Screw it, I'm gonna buy and old 60's-70's muscle car, with no computer and no tracking..and hell if old enough, no fucking emissions bullshit.

We're coming for those, too. I expect that at some point, things like Interstate highways will be restricted for automatic driving only.

You don't like it, build your own roads. The public roads are for public use, and we can & have constantly redefined how they can be used.

Comment Re:Black Boxes??? (Score 1) 247

But I should be able to choose if I "want" a flight..err...driving recorder black box type machine installed in my car.

Not if you're going to use your car on a shared, publicly-owned road. I think black box recording should be mandatory on the public roads.

Now, if you're talking about a car only used on roads you own, have at it.

Comment Re:Unibody? (Score 1) 345

Maybe you're thinking of body repairs.

Absolutely. Based off the feedback I've seen, I did a shit job at explaining what I'm saying.

Basically, I'm saying that older body designs for cars were heavier, not as strong, boxy, and easier to perform body repair work.

Modern body design is stronger, lighter, sleeker, and more likely to have very expensive not-at-home repairs, or more severe damage that can't be repaired completely, like a bent frame.

Modern phone battery replacement seems like modern car body work. It can be done, but it more expensive.

I never meant to talk about car repairs in general, but due to the increased dependence on software and car maker douchebaggery, there are comparisons to be made there, too.

Comment Re:Unibody? (Score 1) 345

I was referring to the difference between BODY ON FRAME and UNIBODY design, not cars in general. Learn to read. I know cars are modular, but their frames no longer are, in general.

I bet you've never hammed out a dent by unbolting the quarter panel. Hint- It's really easy, if you don't have a unibody car where the quarter panel is welded to the frame.

Otherwise, you're having to cut it off with a welder, which is about the same as the technical skill to replace a battery in a modern phone.

Comment Unibody? (Score 3, Interesting) 345

Since we love car analogies here, do you think the trend towards non-removable batteries is comparable to the changes in car body design?

It seems older cars used body-on-frame and other designs that basically allowed the person performing the repair to unbolt parts, work on them or replace them, and then bolt them back on.

The disadvantage to this was a weaker body, or a heavier one.

That seems to be the trend with phones: A lightweight and small phone means a sealed case.

Comment Re:Never understand jailbreaking an Apple iOS devi (Score 1) 217

As a consumer, my goal is to be as free as possible.

As a consumer, my goal is to purchases items to meet as many of my requirements for as long as possible with the lowest price.

Apps, that might be vapor one day, fit those requirements often. I can't imagine not buying one that will give me usefulness out of some sort of protest vote.

But, bully for you. Keep fighting the good fight.

Comment Re:Never understand jailbreaking an Apple iOS devi (Score 1) 217

A software is meant to be reusable

It isn't software. It's an "app".
I'm not being a smartass, I'm pointing out that smartphone apps are not comparable to PC software any more than a Big Mac is.
It is meant to work only on the ecosystem it was purchased in, which is highly hardware dependent.

It seems like you're cutting your nose off to spite your face.

Comment Re:Never understand jailbreaking an Apple iOS devi (Score 1) 217

It's a matter of principle. I don't want to support vendor lock-in.

Interesting. Where does the line exist for this in your mind?

Isn't watching a movie at a theater a type of vendor lock-in? You can only watch that movie while at the theater that one time, and you have no rights to watch it again.

What about a buffet? You're unable to take the food that you've paid for out of the restaurant.

A pay-per-view event? Movie rental?

A bug in the hand is better than one as yet undetected.