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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:No one 3D printed a house (Score 5, Informative) 98

"Although, most of the cost of buying a house has more to do with procuring the land then it does with the actual cost of building it."

In the US, in 99% of the country, this is not the case. The land is fairly cheap. I've owned homes in NJ and FL. NJ is the most densely populated state. In both cases, the land was valued at about 5%-10% of the total value of the home. Even in the case where the property was on a pond on the 18th hole of a golf course.

"Might make sense in some places where cost of land is quite low. Although in many of those places, the infrastructure for building the "house factory" and transporting the house to the site would be the major problem to solve."

Also in the US, there are a good number of "pre-manufactured" home companies that already transport homes in sections to their final location. My sister has one.

And I'm not talking about "mobile homes".

Comment Lock S-Foils (Score 1) 701

I was watching Star Wars with my nephew one day and his mom heard the line "Lock S-Foils in attack position" although, that's not what she heard. What she heard was "Cock, Ass, Balls in attack position". That was 17 years ago. We still laugh about it today.

Comment Re:Actually it's both. (Score 2) 360

You just disproved your own point. What Pascal's experiment showed was that it wasn't a vacuum that created the siphon ( a vacuum would be a difference in air pressure), but when one beaker was placed higher, gravity caused the mercury to flow from the higher beaker to the lower beaker. Even without the vacuum normally associated with a siphon.

Comment Every year (Score 1) 139

Cisco lays off about 5% of its workforce every year. They have always done this. It is the corporate culture. 5%ers are generally people that are there for a year to get Cisco on their resume and then they are off to someplace else. A decent percentage of new hires only last one year. They simply aren't re-hired after their probationary period. So if you are constantly hiring 5% and you lose 3% every year to this process, they are only laying off 2% of their poor performers.

They announce these layoffs every year to get a little jump on the stock price from people that thing they are streamlining.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Mr. Watson, come here, I want you." -- Alexander Graham Bell