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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Another Corporate rape of the commons (Score 1) 107 107

Rarely do they invent new law and policy to do something when an existing law covers it. Why declare you don't own the air when they can just as easily say you do? As you note, it's not like you can do anything about it, and if you claim a $0.10 toll per craft, the government can claim it's an easement just like the power lines above and below my property right now. Calling my ownership core to sky, with easements on both is quicker, easier, and consistent with all current laws. So why invent a new legal status for airspace?

Comment Re:Another Corporate rape of the commons (Score 1) 107 107

You are confusing "own" with "control". He is right, you are wrong. The standard land deal in the US has mineral rights and air rights. You own core of the earth to space. But, like the power lines under your property that you don't control, you don't get to dictate the rules for commercial flights over your property.

Comment Re:Amazon doesn't understand helicopters (Score 1) 107 107

The drones that Amazon is talking about will be big enough and heavy enough to bring down some helicopters.

Unlikely. I'd expect that 99.9% of helicopters "brought down" by a drone will be from boom strike (or other "pilot error") from the pilot's reaction to seeing one, not the impact itself. How would a dron differ significantly from a bird strike? A larger bird would be similar in weight to a drone, and with similar speeds. Does every hawk strike kill the helicopter?

Comment Re:Amazon doesn't understand helicopters (Score 1) 107 107

I've yet to see a definition of "drone" that didn't include model rocketry or RC model airplanes. Like RC, the military drones are primarily flown by humans remotely using RF to control them. So most definitions that catch one catch both.

Perhaps you should define "drone" before launching into problems with "drones", as that includes model rockets, and the RC models.

Comment Re:I don't get it (Score 1) 260 260

Why don't publishers put the ads in a section of the page that can allow the rest of the page to load and render before the ad loads and renders?

Because you could stop the loading once the content you wanted was rendered, thus skipping the ad.

So the pages are set up so the ad loads and renders first.

Comment Re:End of Google+ (Score 1) 165 165

Knowing Google, they will usually abort failed projects. They tried really hard with Google+ but it has failed almost as bad as windows phone so it's about time to abandon it.

Worldwide, Google+ is far from a failure. In fact, it has more users than Twitter.
I think a lot of Slashdot readers' comments are biased by an amerocentric point of view.

Comment Re:NVidea's problem, not Microsoft's (Score 1) 316 316

So you are buying into the Cupertino philosophy here...

The problem with Windows was not the users. The problem with Windows and the stupid shit they did. The recent remote exploit on Android is a classic example of the kind of nonsense they pulled. It's something that everyone should have known to avoid in 1990 just as it is today.

Microsoft turned the idea of an email virus from an absurdity into a reality.

You can't just blame the users.

The reason that Windows has a cult of constant patches is because it's a piece of crap that the market should have killed 20 years ago.

Comment Re: Windows 10 isn't Out Yet (Score 1) 316 316

What's the point of putting up with monopolyware if can't be assured that you will get a good experience with robust vendor support? That is kind of the whole point of using Windows.

It doesn't really matter who you try to shift the blame to.

The whole cabal and the whole platform is on the hook for problems.

A large number of installed systems work by fiat. That is, they work by being declared to work. -- Anatol Holt

Working...