Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment: Re:Ask these folks... (Score 1) 110 110

by Nehmo (#49853623) Attached to: How To Store Your Data For 1 Million Years
Correct. It seems DNA will correct it'self by eventually dumping unnecessary data. What's not needed to be fit has no reason to be selected by the environment. Plus, what's to guarantee the species with the DNA will survive?

To keep the data indefinitely, you could easily put the storage medium in a stable orbit around the sun or something. It would survive, but I'm not sure if anybody would ever read it.

Comment: Re:I guess that if a Mathematician... (Score 1) 176 176

by Nehmo (#49764013) Attached to: <em>A Beautiful Mind</em> Mathematician John F. Nash Jr. Dies

When... Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize for doing ... nothing, the entire credibility of all Nobel prizes took a swift kick ...

I can't and won't get over that either. (BTW, I supported O's election considering the opposition.) Every time I hear "Nobel," I think tainted. And if O had any dignity, he would have declined accepting it.

Comment: Re:I, for one... (Score 1) 615 615

by Nehmo (#49709751) Attached to: The Economic Consequences of Self-Driving Trucks

...the problem is so much stuff gets sent by truck when rail would be cheaper and faster. ...

What makes you say that? Have you done any comparisons? What type of cargo are you referring to?

It would seem that using a steel wheel on a steel rail would be the most friction-less means of transportation and thus the cheapest, but the realities of shipping make the air-filled tire on the asphalt road to be preferable.

There are exceptions, though. I would suppose shipping by rail is most efficient when the cargo is comparatively heavy and the tracks go directly to the destination. Coal shipped from a mine to a power plant is my best example.

But for discrete manufactured items that need to go to a particular address, rail isn't efficient because tracks don't go to most places. This necessitates the cargo needing to be transferred from one transportation means to another for "the final mile".

Thus, because the cargo item needs to go through expensive transfers before it reaches its destination, rail comes out to be more expensive than truck.

Comment: Re:Won't save most of the 4000 lives (Score 1) 615 615

by Nehmo (#49709723) Attached to: The Economic Consequences of Self-Driving Trucks

Implementing autonomous vehicles AVs on the roadways will reduce the cost of transportation - not increase it. Computer technology is already cheap enough to tackle the routines needed by an autonomous vehicle, and the sensors, even the lidar systems, are rapidly coming down in price.

Many modern new cars, particularly the high-end ones, already have many of the necessary systems: Vehicle tracking; adaptive braking; self-parking. Mass production will make these available and affordable on every new car or truck.

But it doesn't matter much what your opinion is on this issue. It has already been decided by economics and technological evolution. Autonomous vehicles are coming to your town soon.

Comment: Re:Privacy? (Score 1) 776 776

by Nehmo (#49706201) Attached to: Worker Fired For Disabling GPS App That Tracked Her 24 Hours a Day

I would argue that, "sign this or your fired", qualifies as duress.

It would be duress in the common sense, but it's debatable if it's legally considered illegal duress. Every day people have to agree to things to keep their jobs. If they don't like the deal, they can turn it down.

However, don't misunderstand me. I don't see how a company can claim it has rights over an employee's private activities.

Comment: Re:Games Done Quick (Score 1) 34 34

Every "charity" that I've looked into was actually a money-making enterprise disguised as a benevolent one. Some of them have exposed publically, like Easter Seals, Boy's Home, and the Clinton Foundation. In these organizations, a small proportion of the collected money actually goes to the advertised cause, but that's just for show.

To add to the list, a guy was staying at my house for a while who previously worked for Make A Wish Foundation. He talked like almost 100% of the money went to those who collect it. In fact, while he was at the house, he was collecting for the Fire Department's book on fire safety for children. In reality, there was no such book.

Thus, anytime I hear the word "charity", I think "rip-off".

If you want to give money, find the recipient yourself and give directly. If you must use a big organization to move your funds, make sure it's ran by someone you trust.

Regarding the charity the article is about, I don't know anything. But, to me, it smells funny.

Comment: Re:Leonard Nimoy is why we have nice things (Score 1) 411 411

by Nehmo (#49149363) Attached to: Leonard Nimoy Dies At 83

Seriously - Leonard Nimoy's Mr. Spock probably inspired more people to enter science, engineering, and intellectualism in general than any other figure in pop culture. He turned anti-intellectualism on its ear by making being a "nerd" not just cool, but even sexy.


Maybe, but Nimoy was not a scientist; it was Spock who was the scientist. Indeed, Nimoy himself exclaimed this by titling his biography I Am Not Spock 1975. {But later when Nimoy realized he misjudged public reaction, titled the next volume I Am Spock(1995).}

After Star Trek, Nimoy MCed In Search of..., a show no real scientist would support. In the show, scientific explanations for witchcraft, alien abductions, or whatever, were given only footnote attention.

In terms of promoting science, the writers of Star Trek deserve more credit than the actors.

The rate at which a disease spreads through a corn field is a precise measurement of the speed of blight.