Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:But what about ... (Score 1) 209

by Rudisaurus (#49488333) Attached to: Google Sunsetting Old Version of Google Maps
You know what? I appear to be uninformed or behind the times on both scores.

(1) apparently there's a way to export MyPlaces maps in KML format from old Maps and then import them into new Maps. I haven't tested it yet, but the Google Maps Help Forum group reports that it does exist.

(2) new Google Maps has both a line drawing tool (for custom route display) and a distance tool (for measuring distances over a single distance or a custom route).

I'll make the switch.

Comment: But what about ... (Score 1) 209

by Rudisaurus (#49488155) Attached to: Google Sunsetting Old Version of Google Maps
(1) my old personal maps (MyPlaces)? I've generated a few over the years that I still refer back to once in a while. I didn't see any migration path to the new version for those.

(2) the custom tools in the old version? One of the most useful for me personally was the distance measuring tool which gave a straight line distance between 2 points (or a series of points) that you marked on a map. Don't think that's there in the new version either.

Loss of these functionality alone means that being forced onto the new version is going to suck.

Comment: Re:OSM for practical navigation (Score 1) 39

by Rudisaurus (#49427875) Attached to: Getting Started Developing With OpenStreetMap Data

Google appears so overwhelmingly better at handling all of those complex mapping scenarios to the point where OSM can't be seriously considered for people trying to use it to navigate that city.

Interestingly, for one of my favourite mapping application -- establishing coastal sea-kayaking routes -- Google Maps is worse than useless. Google fuzzes out the offshore regions, leaving large blank areas where I know that islands/archipelagos exist. OSM does not do this, making it a much better tool for the job.

Comment: Enhancing users shopping experience (Score 2) 266

by Rudisaurus (#49095945) Attached to: Lenovo To Wipe Superfish Off PCs

"When asked whether his company vets the software they pre-install on their machines, [Lenovo CTO Peter Hortensius] said, "Yes, we do. Obviously in this case we didn't do enough. The intent of loading this tool was to help enhance our users’ shopping experience. The feedback from users was that it wasn’t useful, and that’s why we turned it off. Our reputation is everything and our products are ultimately how we have our reputation."

Far too little and far, far too late!

If Superfish was merely not "useful", some people would carp about it and most would just ignore it. It is far more dangerous than that because it deliberately behaves in a way that undermines the integrity of the trust system on which internet is based and so jeopardizes the security of the user. To claim that this was done in order to "enhance" the user's experience is cynical beyond belief. I'm certain Hortensius is right when he says that the software was vetted at Lenovo. I'm also quite sure that it performed precisely the way it was intended to. But who on earth thought that was a good idea?

There has to be a price to pay for this major failure of judgement and I can only hope that it is both hefty and that it impacts those at Lenovo who were ultimately responsible for it, Hortensius among them.

Comment: Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation? (Score 1) 288

by Rudisaurus (#49031271) Attached to: Quantum Equation Suggests Universe Had No Beginning
How does the cosmic background radiation -- Penzias/Wilson's discovery -- fit in with this new cosmological theory? I thought that was supposed to be significant supporting evidence for the Big Bang? Neither TFA nor TOFP says anything about it (although there is some speculation in the commentary which follows TFN).

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

Great explanation! Completely agree.

In fact, you could take it a step further and apply Bernoulli's equation to the fluid in the system. The difference in pressure between the source reservoir and the destination reservoir is exactly offset by the effective pressure loss due to friction between the flowing liquid and the tube wall.

The difference in pressure between the source reservoir and the apex will include part of this friction pressure loss (proportional to the length of the tube from the source to the apex relative to the overall length) + reduction in pressure due to the velocity of the fluid in motion (static liquid is at a higher pressure than liquid in communication with it at the same elevation but in motion -- the principle behind the pitot-static tube).

This is why flow through the siphon can be regulated by raising or lowering the apex of the tube. Make it higher, the total friction pressure loss is increased and the velocity must decrease to offset that loss. At some point, the tube is sufficiently long that the flow is slowed to a standstill.

A rolling disk gathers no MOS.