Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment Re:"Clock parts" wired together in an adhoc fashio (Score 1) 781

Yes, but to be a hoax *bomb* there would have to be a hoax *explosive*.

Where's the fake explosive in any picture of this device???

There isn't one.

Did he even claim it was a fake bomb at any time??? The answer seems to be: no.

It's all a load of rubbish, and the police knew that, which is why they let him go.

Comment Re:Hmmmmm.. (Score 1) 313

This goes back to the days of Netscape. I remember having a discussion here in the Mozilla Suite days before Firefox took off about how they should at least separate browser, calendar and mail/news tools in to separate processes. Devs at the time claimed it was too difficult and would break tight integration between these parts of the app. Same story now with the whole multi-process browser thing, and it all points to poor architecture and poor engineering skills at Mozilla.

Comment Re:newer replacement for TrueCrypt users (Score 1) 42

Any idea whether they've fixed the performance issues with TrueCrypt? I tried to use it to secure some large customer movie files (e.g. 75 - 250 GB range) and found that when writing these files that it gets slower and slower, from tens of MB/s dropping steadily down to KB/s after several hours of copying a large file. Files beyond a certain size take so long to write that I couldn't use it (gave up after waiting 24 hours).

Comment Electrolysis project (Score 4, Informative) 313

Meanwhile another year has passed and they still haven't completed the Electrolysis project (multi-process browser).

The monolithic process with all its memory leaks and unrestrained memory growth, and no way to figure out which tab was eating all the CPU and draining my laptop battery meant I switched to Chrome and Safari years ago. FF is not fit for purpose.

Comment Quite the opposite (Score 1) 131

My experience is that my iPhone under reports my runs by at least 100m every 5km (I get variances of 100-300m under reported for the same 5.7km loop that I run once it twice a week.

I ran the Richmond-upon-Thames 10k last year and after crossing the line I had apparently only gone 9.8km. Other people at the finish mentioned their Garmins had reported even less. I wrote an email to the organiser who came back to me with a plausible explanation and a defence that they were IAAF measured (with a certificate confirming the length): the sample frequency of these devices isn't frequent enough and will cut-off corners, which was particularly bad for this event which zig-zagged through Kew Gardens, with 17 right angles and a long curve along the river Thames.

Comment Re:Not so fast (Score 1) 226

> Their tech works and they built it.

LOL, I don't think so.

This is the tech that keeps lithobraking and exploding when it's supposed to be landing on a barge. They've been trying to pin a landing since the first flight of Falcon 1. They're currently on Falcon 9.

Maybe they'll succeed one day, but the very high performance rockets they build are obviously *very* fragile.

And that's the problem with their approach, pure rocket reusables have to be super lightly built, and then it's very difficult to make it back down to the ground.

Comment Re:the interesting part (Score 1) 63

> Even the most devoutly religious would not actively wager money to put their faith to the test.

People do this kind of stuff all the time.

Many people wager their lives on their belief in a God, and... usually die.

George R. Price famously gave all his possessions to the poor; got evicted, fell into depression and then killed himself.

Comment Re:Not so fast (Score 1) 226

Actually, I once did a computer model of SpaceX-style reusability, and that's actually what my model showed me, that it would be extremely hard for SpaceX to get it to work.

But my modelling shows that Skylon ought to make orbit, and return and land safety with comparative ease, Their design is very insensitive to weight growth; and they actually have spare mass built into their design in case things are harder than they look.

But yeah, I do agree with you pretty much on the economics, that's the worst part of their design. But compared to the economics of the Space Shuttle... ;)

The easiest way to figure the cost of living is to take your income and add ten percent.