Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


+ - Micron And Intel Announce 3D NAND Flash Co-Development To Push SSDs Past 10TB->

Submitted by MojoKid
MojoKid (1002251) writes "Both Micron and Intel noted in a release today that traditional planar NAND flash memory is reaching a dead-end, and as such, have been working together on 3D memory technology that could open the floodgates for high densities and faster speeds. Not all 3D memory is alike, however. This joint development effort resulted in a "floating gate cell" being used, something not uncommon for standard flash, but a first for 3D. Ultimately, this 3D NAND is composed of flash cells stacked 32 high, resulting in 256Gb MLC and 384Gb TLC die that fit inside of a standard package. That gives us 48GB per die, and up to 750GB in a single package. Other benefits include faster performance, reduced cost, and technologies that help extend the life of the memory."
Link to Original Source

+ - RSA Conference Bans 'Booth Babes"->

Submitted by netbuzz
netbuzz (955038) writes "In what may be a first for the technology industry, RSA Conference 2015 next month apparently will be bereft of a long-controversial trade-show attraction: “booth babes.” New language in its exhibitor contract, while not using the term 'booth babe," leaves no doubt as to what type of salesmanship RSA wants left out of its event. Says a conference spokeswoman: “We thought this was an important step towards making all security professionals feel comfortable and equally respected during the show.”"
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:So when are we invading Israel for possessing W (Score 1) 132

by Maury Markowitz (#49344895) Attached to: First Nuclear Power Plant Planned In Jordan

> That way the neighbors can conduct a full jihad against Israel without worrying about losing their capital cities.

Considering that three of its neighbours lost parts of their capital cities, and two others were under serious threat, Israel doesn't need nukes to do that.

And now that we're 50 years in the future, the neighbors have a lot more to worry between each other than Israel. There will be no repeat of '67.

Comment: Re:Economics (Score 1) 132

by Maury Markowitz (#49344841) Attached to: First Nuclear Power Plant Planned In Jordan

> Cost over-runs are rampant, they never cost what is projected, often this is 2 to 10 times projected,
> but maybe that's just in the USA where the winning lowest bid forces unrealistic expectations.

Cost overruns in Canada were 100%, both on initial construction and refurbs. Current cost overruns in Europe are the same.

If there is a *real* theoretical problem with nuclear power is that its economics scale with size. To compete with wind or gas they have to make really large plants. That complicates financing and construction. Construction becomes so complex that you end up with many critical paths, as we're experiencing with Vogtle. Wind power may not be a panacea, but it's highly modular so you can build out slowly. It's a lot easier to get $25 million for a turbine than $25 billion for a nuke.

The providers are dumping nuclear for that reason. All that's left of Europe's industry is Areva, which just lost more than it's entire book value in one quarter. The other German, French and UK companies have all left the industry. In the US, Westinghouse is bankrupt, Betchel, Babckock and General Atomics are all out of the industry, leaving only GE and the zombie "Westinghouse" (Toshiba). Canada sold off AECL's design side for negative $750 million.

Comment: Re:Not viable without subsidies (Score 1) 132

by Maury Markowitz (#49344613) Attached to: First Nuclear Power Plant Planned In Jordan

> Roughly a quarter of the cost of nuclear power in the US stems directly or indirectly from paying lawyers to go away.

I keep hearing this number, but I can't find a trustworthy source for it. The recent documents I've seen, covering Crystal and Vogtle put the entire compliance load around 5 to 6%.

Comment: Re:Economics (Score 1) 132

by Maury Markowitz (#49344575) Attached to: First Nuclear Power Plant Planned In Jordan

> and current designs are expected to last up to 60 years

No, they are designed to run for about 30 to 25 years, then be torn apart and re-built from new. All that remains is the containment building and the parts outside the nuclear island. This is supposed to get you a new reactor good for another 25 to 30 years (because now those other parts and breaking down) for about 50% of the cost.

However, those that have actually tried this have a 100% rate of overrunning the budgets, to the point where it's >100% of the original cost. That's why people are shutting down their reactors instead of refurbing them. The new designs are supposed to avoid these problems, but we won't really know for another 40 years.

Comment: Re:Economics (Score 1) 132

by Maury Markowitz (#49344509) Attached to: First Nuclear Power Plant Planned In Jordan

> I'd also like to know how this compares to hydro, gas, coal, solar, wind, tidal, and any other generation method currently in use.

Page 2 of this:

According to that, this is an *extremely* competitive plant. If you turn to Page 11 you'll see the problem - it seems *HIGHLY* unlikely that the plant can actually be built for this number. This is *well* below the worldwide average. They may be quoting the wrong number, this might be the overnight costs, which would put the total CAPEX (which is what's on page 11) into the 8 range depending on the financing, which makes it much more in-line with other examples.

Comment: Re:SOLAR (Score 1) 132

by Maury Markowitz (#49344327) Attached to: First Nuclear Power Plant Planned In Jordan

> Price per watt for solar is in the $5 range, not counting discounts for massive purchases.

Yeah, in 2011. Today, small residential installs are around $4.00 a watt, commissioned. Large industrial installs are $1.50.

Page 11 of this:

+ - Australia passes mandatory data retention law->

Submitted by Bismillah
Bismillah (993337) writes "Opposition from the Green Party and independent members of parliament wasn't enough to stop the ruling conservative Liberal-National coalition from passing Australia's new law that will force telcos and ISPs to store customer metadata for at least two years.

Journalists' metadata is not exempted from the retention law, but requires a warrant to access.

The metadata of everyone else can be accessed by unspecified government agencies without a warrant however."

Link to Original Source

+ - Now It's Easy To Tell Congress To Fight Patent Trolls

Submitted by Press2ToContinue
Press2ToContinue (2424598) writes "Application Developers Alliance is running two campaigns to help get the message to Washington. First is the Fight Patent Trolls initiative, which includes a tool for sending a letter to Senators and Representatives.

The second campaign is Innovators Need Patent Reform, an open letter to Congress that makes the same key points along with a public list of signers.

As both letters note, there are already proposals in both the House and the Senate, plus recommendations from the President, that contain some of the all-important protections that the victims of patent trolls need. Though the future of these specific bills is uncertain, the building blocks are beginning to fall into place, and it's time to run with that momentum."

Comment: Re:The App Store stuff is more interesting (Score 2) 258

by Maury Markowitz (#49335135) Attached to: Developers and the Fear of Apple

> Still, the over-arching point that I felt was useful was that criticism is not well-received at Apple

But what proof? The examples in the article were all about *end users* complaining about his posts. Fanbois. Just tune them out.

The evidence that *Apple* takes action (or even gives a crap) about these articles is tenuous, at best. I think Laporte at least has a claim, but this seems largely handwaving.

Opportunities are usually disguised as hard work, so most people don't recognize them.