Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Anonymous business == spammer/scammer (Score 1) 86 86

There are a few exceptions. A few. A legitimate business, though, almost always has some sort of presence in the the real world, and wants customers to be able to contact them to transact business. If a business wants to be anonymous, fine, but don't expect me to do business with you. A business with a "privacy protected" whois is inherently very, very suspicious to me.

Comment: Re:Phase out fossil-fueled power plants by midcent (Score 1) 308 308

If you are espousing 0 emission energy in the next 35 years, and you don't mention nuclear as a necessary component, then you are lying.

He's typical of the "we can run industrial civilization on sunny days when the wind is blowing energy" types... Arithmetic denialist.

Comment: Re:Spamassassin and Greylisting.. (Score 1) 269 269

There's a reason that SpamAssassin is a core component to so many commercial spam filters.

I've been using Gmail for years, and have it popping my mail from a couple of other accounts, or setting them to forward it. For email sent directly to my Gmail address, their spam filtering seems pretty good, but for forwarded or popped email, they get way too many false positives. Their filtering sees the IP address the mail is being popped or forwarded from as the "connecting address" for SPF, DKIM, etc., testing. This is a rather large pain in the butt. There's no way I have found to tell Gmail "These IP addresses are to be considered trusted forwarders for my email." The other conveniences of using Gmail are keeping me there, though. So far.

My old shell account email uses Mailguard, which is yet another SpamAssassin based filter, and it's pretty good, but I do get some false positives, at least, when I set it to the most aggressive setting. The thing I like best about it is that I can view my spam quarantine sorted by SpamAssassin score. Skim the low scoring ones; all the false positives are going to be there.

Comment: Orbital plane changes (Score 4, Informative) 59 59

This would probably be useful only for groups of satellites in the same orbital plane. The application that comes to mind is all the satellites in increasingly crowded geostationary ("Clarke") orbit, with the orbital plane going through the equator. Orbital plane changes are one of the most expensive maneuver there are in orbit. (This was one of the criticisms of the movie "Gravity". The only way a space shuttle can get from the Hubble's orbit to the ISS orbit is to land and get re-launched into the proper orbital plane. Doing it in a backpack? Ludicrous.)

A satellite repair bot making its rounds through Clarke Orbit could be extremely useful.

Comment: Access to the back of media equipment. (Score 1) 557 557

One thing that's on my list for if/when I ever have a custom house built (in addition to all the other good ideas here) is decide where my TV/Stereo/etc. is going to be, and have shelves for all the equipment with easy access to the rear of them via a closet, or a door in a hallway.

Comment: How to kill the US tech inudstry (Score 2) 203 203

The piece of this that hasn't gotten nearly enough attention is this: Requiring U.S. tech companies to put backdoors in encryption will make U.S. technology anathema in every other country on this planet. U.S. tech companies will lose virtually all of their non-US market immediately, and the rest of it as soon as alternatives become available. (Which they will; the demand will be huge.)

Comment: Re:Does This Make Sense? (Score 1) 318 318

Do you happen to know how long they have to be stopped before they shut down?

My Prius? Something like two seconds. That was one of the hardest things to get used to; it felt like "the car stalled at the light." A non-hybrid, I'm more dubious about. Maybe they just have to have a beefy enough starter motor that it can start out electric for the second or two it takes the regular engine to get going.

Comment: Re:This again? (Score 1) 480 480

If they simply wrote a paper saying "we noticed an anomalous force in this experimental setup, and we don't understand why", then nobody would have a problem with it. They're not doing that. They are claiming that it can be used as a reactionless propulsion system, a claim which is entirely incredible without a solid physical theory to justify it.

Eppur si muove always trumps "all the laws of physics say." Always. No exceptions. Our understanding of the laws of physics will just have to try to catch up to the reality. That's assuming, of course, that the gizmo really does muove.

Aren't you glad you're not getting all the government you pay for now?