Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Sounds Great (Score 4, Informative) 66 66

Um, no, a 1000 unit vial (10 mL of U-100) costs $25 for regular and NPH insulins. (If you're paying more than this, blame the pharmacy. This is one of the few cases where I root for Walmart - they've managed to get Novo onboard with selling Novolin R and N for $25/vial)

Unless you're purchasing Lantus or Novolog/Humalog (which most diabetics including myself are), which are MUCH newer than 1978 and still have active patents. (Some of Lantus' are about to expire or recently expired, but Novartis played some legal games to manage to block generic Lantus from the market until late 2016...) Even after "generics" of the "designer" insulins launch, the FDA's rules on "biosimilars" are going to slow down this market. (IIRC, generic Lantus IS available in India at significantly reduced prices.)

Comment Re:Faa rules for RC planes (Score 1) 1176 1176

I don't see a single one of these that the pilot definitively violated. "Don't fly near people or stadiums" is the only thing he might have violated, depending on where in this guy's yard it was. (I don't consider shotgun range to be "near enough to be dangerous" - well for danger to people from the aircraft. Obviously the shotgun is dangerous).

What if he was taking pictures of the neighbor's house, at the request of the neighbor? (In fact this is what he claims he was doing.)

Comment Re:Or... just hear me out here... (Score 2) 1176 1176

To play devil's advocate:

The drone pilot claims he was asked by one of the people in the neighborhood to take some pictures. I've done this before.

In the case of the guy with the shotgun - can he confirm that the camera was indeed pointed towards him, as opposed to someone else's house (that someone else who could have given permission and possibly even requested the photography)? Same for the 16 year old who waved at it - did she know for sure that she was seen on camera, or was the camera aimed elsewhere and it's just coincidence the pilot moved the thing for a different camera angle after a bit?

That said, if you're trying to take pictures of friend A's house, and want to get an oblique (from the side view) shot which requires you to be over the neighbor's property but with the camera aimed at A's property - you should probably chat with A's neighbors just to give them a heads up what you're doing.

Comment Re:Meh (Score 3, Interesting) 471 471

I started buying 5.11 tactical pants made out of lightweight, stretchy nylon with a Teflon finish. They look like business casual pants but move like pajamas, and anything you spill on them rolls or wipes off. I don't think I've worn any other kinds of pants to work since I bought my first pair.

Comment Re:Please sir can I have more mass! (Score 1) 69 69

Never had a problem with carrying lithium batteries on an airplane. Carried v-mount and many others, as long as the terminals have tape over them or have a case so they do not short they allow them onboard. Also, you can buy batteries (alkaline or lithium AA's for example, even digital camera batteries) in duty free and carry them on-board, this is after check-in and security.

Comment It was a BlackHat / DEFCON publicity stunt (Score 2) 26 26

Hackaday is pretty much spot on:

There's always posturing for PR before BlackHat and DEFCON. This was to get the researcher's name on people's radar.

Many a competent unix sysadmin could come up with something similar.

What's hilarious is that despite how easy it would be to make something like this, the "researcher" just bought a yagi antenna and posed for a picture. They didn't even bother to point the yagi antenna towards the ground, for that matter.

Comment Physics called... (Score 2) 549 549

It's preferable for the car that is struck to not release its brakes. Basic physics. The more the struck car moves, the more injuries from the passengers in it. Also, the struck car moves and hits another car, etc.

The struck car's momentum is what mitigates the impact for its occupants. Ideal would be deploying a system to keep the struck car from moving at all. Mercedes has a braking system they've been testing that would probably do the job. It's basically an airbag on the bottom of the car, with a very high friction surface.

The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth. -- Niels Bohr