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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score 1, Insightful) 429 429

It'd be a small miracle if no other security issues have been found since the release of iOS 4. The fact that the jailbreak exploit is the only thing that's being fixed suggests that Apple values retaining control over their device higher than fixing other security issues.

Comment: Re:Hypocrasy (Score 0, Offtopic) 237 237

Come on, after the first couple of tests the destructive potential of nuclear weapons was perfectly understood. And I don't have a problem with the US telling Iran they shouldn't develop nuclear weapons. But I do have a problem with them doing it while they have been storing nuclear weapons in Europe, given the nuke to Israel and retain the worlds' second largest nuclear weapons stockpile.

Comment: Re:A word of thanks and a request (Score 2, Insightful) 368 368

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Maybe it's free to _you_, but someone is paying, in this case someone with a good old-fashioned newspaper subscription. Google doesn't have correspondents around the world, they just aggregate news form sources who do. Currently, these sources are being paid by their subscribers but subscriber numbers are falling.

Comment: Re:How about we pay the author not to write them? (Score 1) 426 426

Here's an idea. Don't read the new books. Just don't buy them. Maybe some people enjoy them, fine for them. Maybe they're crap, maybe they're not. But if the existence of a new trilogy detriments your enjoyment of the old series, that's on you.

Comment: Re:The technology isn't important (Score 2, Informative) 150 150

If someone developed a 99% efficient solar cell, would you really care what it cost?

You're kidding right?

For everyone who is looking for real solutions (unfortunately that's not quite everyone in the debate), the cost is a crucial factor in the equation. Economic efficiency is more important than energy efficiency.

Editorial

+ - Could a meteor have brought down Air France 447? 1 1

niktemadur writes: In light of an Air Comet pilot's report to Air France, Airbus and the Spanish civil aviation authority that, during a Monday flight from Lima to Lisbon "Suddenly, we saw in the distance a strong and intense flash of white light, which followed a descending and vertical trajectory and which broke up in six seconds", the Cosmic Variance blog team on the Discover Magazine website muses on the question "What is the probability that, for all flights in history, one or more could have been downed by a meteor?". Taking into account total flight hours and the rate of meteoric activity with the requisite mass to impact on Earth (approximately 3,000 a day), some quick math suggests there may be one in twenty odds of a plane being brought down in the period from 1989 to 2009. Intriguingly, in the aftermath of TWA flight 800's crash in 1996, the New York Times published a letter by Columbia professors Charles Hailey (physics) and David Helfand (astronomy), in which they stated the odds of a meteor-airplane collision for aviation history up to that point: one in ten.

"Conversion, fastidious Goddess, loves blood better than brick, and feasts most subtly on the human will." -- Virginia Woolf, "Mrs. Dalloway"

Working...