Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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).


Comment: Re:Only if they drop in price a bit more (Score 1) 93

by OBeardedOne (#39304553) Attached to: Teaching Robot Learners To Ask Good Questions
What "robots"'are you referring to? your dish washer or your roomba? Neither are "robots" in my point of view or what the fine article is alluding to. It's a about giving direction to a "multi-functional" piece of hardware in the true sense of the word "robot". Do this, do that, bend over etc. Not "clean under the tv" type of instruction.

Comment: Am I a robot? (Score 1) 93

by OBeardedOne (#39304233) Attached to: Teaching Robot Learners To Ask Good Questions
I'm pretty sure I'm not a robot, but can someone teach me how to read that article... Look, when it comes down to it, it should have nothing to do with humans adjusting to how we can best teach a robot and adjusting our teaching methods to fit. It should be about designing machine intellegence to learn in a "human" way. If it's the former then no, "robots" as they say will not be predominant in the household. If its the latter and we design the "robot" to fit our needs and learn as we learn then yeah, they will actually be useful and become ubiquitous. But until then we are going to be stuck with the roomba, which unfortunately is classified as a "robot", and may well take over every living room in the country, as per the article... Much to the fanfare of the press, to me it's still not a "robot".

Comment: Re:You still don't get it !? (Score 1) 158

by OBeardedOne (#33559098) Attached to: Fujitsu Eyes Wireless Gadget Charging For 2012

With all due respect, I get it perfectly well thank you. I think you are not getting it or have misunderstood what I wrote. Note that the presenter specifically states that "the lamp has the technology embedded". In this case "the technology" is the power source! Using a lamp as a demonstration is disingenuous though as lamps don't need batteries and the techs reason detre is battery powered devices. As my original post suggested, they are going to have trouble fitting "the technology" in with the battery in order to make the end product palatable to finicky users that want their tech products as small and sleek as possible.

Comment: Re:Already here for a while now (Score 5, Interesting) 158

by OBeardedOne (#33558842) Attached to: Fujitsu Eyes Wireless Gadget Charging For 2012

As a follow on to my earlier post, this is the clincher for the tech - from the article:

"Fujitsu's system couples a coil with a capacitor in receiving devices. The size of the device determines the size of coil it can accommodate and that in turn affects the capacitance."

So the bigger the coil in the receiving device the better. That aint going to go down so well for mobile phones, ipods etc where the size of the battery/power supply is absolutely crucial to the success of the product i.e. smaller is better. If it doesn't make sense for the mobile market then it won't be anything more than a niche product for the foreseeable future. Particularly when the benefit hardly comes close to outweighing the cost - really, how hard is it to plug a phone in?

Comment: Deleted Facebook account (Score 2, Interesting) 152

by OBeardedOne (#33558806) Attached to: Burglary Ring Used Facebook Places To Find Targets

I recently bit the bullet and deleted my FB account - I've had concerns about privacy on there from the get go. I did however start a new account using a name that is similar but not quite the same as my real name. I figure it will be hard for most people to find me that aren't in my immediate circle of trusted friends.

So, now I am starting to re-friend everyone which also has a couple of advantages. I get to say hi to a few people I haven't been in direct contact with when I drop them a new friend request and also have an excuse for dropping a bunch of people I should not have added in the first place (very old people from school I never really liked nor wanted remain friends with anyway). Further to this I can explain to a few people that ask why I deleted my account why I did so and spread the message of FB privacy issues.

Overall, I feel that at least now with a semi anonymous name/profile I am much less likely to be faced with these major privacy issues cropping up and can enjoy FB that much more.

Comment: Re:Already here for a while now (Score 4, Interesting) 158

by OBeardedOne (#33558738) Attached to: Fujitsu Eyes Wireless Gadget Charging For 2012

I thought wireless power looked fantastic until I took a closer look at what you are actually getting. You can't just chuck your phone on the wireless charger pad and have it magically charge the phone. You need to either add a special "sleave" to the product you want to charge wirelessly or actually plug the product into the charge pad using various adapters which completely negates any real benefit from "wireless" power.

So for gadgets that currently are not "wireless power" enabled the tech kinda sucks and it is being overhyped in a major way - at least based on the product packaging and in-store displays that I've seen. It will be interesting to see if it takes off when manufacturers find a way to seamlessly incorporate this into new devices

Comment: Re:Four Square (Score 1) 220

by OBeardedOne (#33284232) Attached to: Facebook Takes On FourSquare

Some of this stuff just reminds me of stuff I got bored with in the early-mid 90's and stopped using. Some of the technologies are the same, but it's largely the same inane gibberish as before.

Ok then, here's an idea, why don't you have a bit more of a think about that stuff that you got bored of in the early 90's, make some new shiny revamped apps and make a bucket load of money.


Nuclear Energy Now More Expensive Than Solar 635

Posted by samzenpus
from the sunlight-is-free dept.
js_sebastian writes "According to an article on the New York Times, a historical cross-over has occurred because of the declining costs of solar vs. the increasing costs of nuclear energy: solar, hardly the cheapest of renewable technologies, is now cheaper than nuclear, at around 16 cents per kilowatt hour. Furthermore, the NY Times reports that financial markets will not finance the construction of nuclear power plants unless the risk of default (which is historically as high as 50 percent for the nuclear industry) is externalized to someone else through federal loan guarantees or ratepayer funding. The bottom line seems to be that nuclear is simply not competitive, and the push from the US government to subsidize it seems to be forcing the wrong choice on the market."

"If truth is beauty, how come no one has their hair done in the library?" -- Lily Tomlin