Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:This is completely awesome (Score 4, Insightful) 97

Obviously, there's no way fusion results in free energy. First, let us count the advantage it provides:

* Virtually free & unlimited fuel.

Now we count some of the impediments:

* The machine to create fusion needs to be meticulously manufactured.
* Infrastructure to distribute the power needs to be built and maintained.
* The very best fusion reaction we currently know about ( p + B ) still generates side-reactions that produce Neutrons. There will be radioactive waste to deal with.
* Neutron flux means that the difficult to manufacture machine will need ongoing maintenance.
* The lack of a viable mass-scale superconductor means that many such fusion plants will be needed.

Neither of these lists are complete, obviously. But I feel that they do an OK job to demonstrate the point.

Comment Re:sunfire / in my stellerator / makes me... happy (Score 2) 97

I'm not particularly knowledgable, just an armchair physicist. I can only dream of a different path taken where I would have done this research. And keep in mind that fuel costs are a tiny drop in the bucket for a modern fission reactor. They could increase 100-fold without significantly altering the end-user cost of power. Fusion is still going to require big, expensive plants (they will just have lower fuel and waste handling costs). With that being said, there are a few BIG problems to overcome (but no one climbed a mountain with a single step).

Materials - Tritium / Deuterium fusion is NASTY, but it's what we're going to be able to get to at first. As in, higher neutron-flux than a commercial fission reactor nasty. Neutron damage causes lots of weird effects including metal embrittlement and radioactivation. Getting confinement good enough for net power generation is a big problem, but so is keeping the machine pieces operable for an economically feasible length of time.

Energy harvesting - T + D fusion is again unpleasant for this. Because a large portion of the energy released from this fusion is in the neutron it throws, most of the schemes for turning fusion into electrical power involve using the neutron to heat stuff up (like a liquid lithium blanket) and then go through a standard heat-to-steam turbine cycle. Less than ideal.

Confinement - We're going to start with T + D fusion. Which has already been super hard to get a magnetic field the right shape and strength to support. But where we want to end up is simple Hydrogen (a proton) + Boron. There are several challenges (power balance, temperature/pressure/density) here but they can be summarized as being 500 times greater than simple T + D fusion. This kind of fusion won't produce nearly as many neutrons, which means most of the energy will be in the form of charged particles that can be directly harvested for energy. Which is great, but it's 500 times as hard as the thing we haven't achieved yet.

Comment Re:Thanks, Obama (Score 1) 132

How about restoring the 5th amendment? How about abiding by the fucking constitution and protecting it? You know real important shit that has been ignored for the past 14 years because of the boogymen of terrorism.. Instead you are all upset about something that will actually help people?

This is why I don't call myself republican anymore, people like you prefer to hate instead of doing what is right.

Well said.

Comment Re:Thanks, Obama (Score 3, Insightful) 132

I absolutely agree with you, for what it's worth. I'd like to add the handful of points below:
  • * - The Republican frontrunners are all awful. Bigoted and racist, bought off, stupid-religious pandering turds.
  • * - Mind you, there's nothing wrong with religion by itself. You know how the Founding Fathers were pretty much all Diests? Why can't we get back to that, instead of today's superficial Cracker-Jesus?
  • * - Bush followed by Bush the 2nd should have taught us that anything resembling family dynasties are a terrible mistake. The Clintons had their time. I would avoid voting for Hillary on that basis alone, even if she wasn't an awful liar and generally horrible person.
  • * - On a personal level, my policy for the last 16 years has been to vote for the strongest third party candidate that emerges. I'd love to see an end to the two-party system, however impossible that actually is.
  • * - It really doesn't matter, because the state I live in votes so strongly for whoever the Democrat candidate is that there's no hope of it changing.

Lastly, for my single point of contention with you I offer this. The USA's current Healthcare system is already awful, expensive, and sub-standard. The situation exists that SOMETHING will be done about it, unfortunately the something will likely be worse. The "Free Health Care Giveaway" Sanders proposes is probably going to be awful. I also remember how terrible Hillary's healthcare proposal from the early 90's was (and trust me, she hasn't changed in the past 30 years). Basically, I feel that whichever Democrat wins (I really hope the Republicans can't win), we're in for another round of grab-your-ankles-without-lube.

Comment Re:Yeah, right... (Score 5, Insightful) 132

It's already here, they are just getting more brazen about revealing its existence. I don't really know how many fig leaves are left, this might be the second-to-last one.

NSA can't "legally" wiretap everyone in the US? That's ok, let the GCHQ do it and turn the results over to the NSA through a 'cooperative' agreement. GCHQ can't "legally" wiretap British citizens? Why look at that nice cooperative agreement just sitting there!

Comment Oh good, a reason (Score 5, Insightful) 342

I hadn't read or heard much about this guy, but since he seems like he'll be the #3 between Cruz and Trump (who are both so unelectable it hurts) it's good to know that he's as awful a candidate as anyone else the Republicans have up.

Never expect anything from a politician, and you might be disappointed by them only half the time ...

Submission + - Bethesda To Unleash Hell On May 13th, Doom Release Date Confirmed In Trailer (hothardware.com)

MojoKid writes: Bethesda and id Software are in the process rebooting the Doom franchise and it seems like it's been in development for ages. When we last visited the upcoming Doom remake, Bethesda had posted a giblet-filled trailer which showed some pretty impressive gameplay visuals, killer hand-to-hand combat and plenty of head stomping. Today, Bethesda clued gamers in on something that Doom fans have been anticipating for years, an actual release date. Mark your calendars for May 13th, because that's when Doom will be available for Xbox One, PlayStation 4 and of course, the PC platform. Bethesda also dropped a new campaign trailer for you to ogle over.

Submission + - Google starts blocking sites with fake download buttons (blogspot.co.uk) 1

Kobun writes: Google is now rolling out automatic blocking of websites that use fake download buttons or deceptive ads to trick users into downloading Malware. The original blog post from Google can be found here, with additional commentary at Ars and Gizmodo. CNET and Sourceforge are mentioned by name in the Ars article, although this doesn't take into account SourceForge's recent sale and the subsequent reversal of their malware-distribution policy.

Comment Re:Ditto sourceforge on the bad financial models (Score 1) 1822

I did not initially understand what you meant with this post; it was very helpful to go hunt down your other contribution which included the layout of your 'charity share'. I'm not able to fully picture what you mean, but It's an interesting thought. http://ask.slashdot.org/commen...

As for the greedy assholes who signed up for DevShare, they did so knowing full well they were putting a paltry few dollars in their own pockets at the expense however-many person-hours lost to malware infections. Not to mention PII compromises, hacked accounts, etc. I'm sure they justified it with "well it's not like I'm the one writing the Malware".

There are plenty of successful projects that fled Sourceforge to distribute clean software outside the confines of SourceForge's ruined reputation. Notepad++, Gimp, VLC, to name a few. Do you believe that replacing their support-by-donation model with charity sharing would enhance their popularity and development?

I also missed in the charity share description - is this a global pool to SourceForge? If so, who determines (and how so) which projects deserve funding?

Comment Re:Random list (Score 1) 1822

How about adding readers who can spell correctly and understand English grammar while you're at it? There are more important worries ...

The critical difference is that posters don't get paid (well, at least the non-shills). Editors are presumably paid for their work.

Slashdot Top Deals

"It takes all sorts of in & out-door schooling to get adapted to my kind of fooling" - R. Frost

Working...