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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: This is why we can't have nice things (Score 1) 256

There are plenty of ways that NIMBYs (Though I guess that's a misnomer in this case. The top of a bloody volcano is hardly anyone's "backyard".) can throw a monkey wrench into plans to build on private property as well. So no, privatizing everything is really not a solution to the problem at hand.

Comment The problem is lackadaisical battery manufacturers (Score 1) 309

Efficiency is good, no doubt. But the electricity to run your computer, tablet, or phone, vs. the rest of your house, is comparatively very little. It's almost trivial even... except for those mobiles devices that are dependent on a battery. And the sloth and complacency of the battery manufacturers vs. the tech industry is what's holding us back. If they were investing into the R&D to keep up with Intel and Moore's law... doubling their capacity every 18 months as well... performance compromises like this would be unnecessary. Every laptop would be useful for a full business day, not just MacBook Airs and Chromebooks; and our iPhones and Androids would last 2 weeks to the charge like our old-school Nokias did.

Comment Re: APorsche Self-Drive? (Score 1) 212

Exactly. Any car is boring unless you take it near to its limits. (Except an MX-5, those are 100% unadulterated joy distilled into its purest form.) The thing with the GT-R is that its limits are so far beyond other cars' that it's hard to get there and harder to stay there. And the GT-R's limits are, in a not insignificant number of cases, actually beyond what the driver himself can handle. Recall, for example, Jermey Clarkson test-driving a GT-R and pulling so much lateral G-force that he threw his neck out of whack.

Comment Re:APorsche Self-Drive? (Score 1) 212

I suspect that holds mostly true for 911and Boxster drivers, and for older models like the 944 and 924 (Once they put in the turbocharger on the latter.). Hell, one could even almost forgive a 911 driver for getting an automatic these days so they can get the DSG & launch control (Almost). But what about the Cayenne, Macan, and Panamera? Those three sure do give the impression that they were designed by Porsche specifically for douchebags who want to be seen driving a Porsche, but can't, or don't want to, actually drive a Porsche.

Comment Re:"trolls" got teeth (Score 1) 134

But do you actually produce and ship a product? That's exactly what these east Texas clowns do NOT do. They just sit around spamming the USPTO with any random idea that they think of in the hopes that someone somewhere else has the same idea, but actually uses it, so that they can sue. It's one thing if you were actually using that patent, then $bigevilcorporation comes along, copies said product, and puts you out of business. But that's not what happens in east Texas. It's just a lawsuit factory.

If this legal climate had been around a couple generations ago, we wouldn't have put men on the moon until the late '80s. Heinlein, Asimov, and Clarke would have owned so many patents that NASA wouldn't have been able to function.

Or, to put it succinctly: "Real artists ship."

Comment Re:British Airspace (Score 1) 198

This isn't some random appeal to "I'm right because *I* say so." au-thor-i-tah. This is a case of easily-verifiable facts. The error in question was about the organization and legal status of the various entities which comprise the United Kingdom. One can goto any number of sources to find the correct answer. One of the cited sources was the UK government itself.

To present a falsehood as a fact, and continue to hold said falsehood as true even when you are corrected and provided an authoritative source is either moronic or trolling.

Comment Re:British Airspace (Score 1) 198

The first person in the thread to get it wrong was immediately corrected by half a dozen people, some citing the UK governments own published material on the matter. So yes, I think it's perfectly fair to consider people who continue to get it wrong... while in many cases insisting on their own false correctness... to be morons.

Comment Re:They read one Tom Clancy novel (Score 2) 95

That's something at least. The game's not in San Francisco. We don't even have a football team or stadium anymore, after all.

That doesn't stop us form absorbing more than out share of the BS and headaches. And even worse, those nitwits in City Hall let the city get fleeced by the NFL. Santa Clara, at least, got it written into their contract that the NFL has to pay for all of their expenses. Ed Lee didn't bother to insist on a similar clause for San Francisco, so we're on the hook for all of the costs. At this point, I really hope it does pour down rain on the day of the game and that the black lives matter crowd really does manage to follow through on their promise to shut down "Superbowl City".

Comment Re: Assumes it ever lived (Score 0) 456

Likewise.

I'm firmly in the Apple camp too. But Windows Phone was actually kind of nifty in a number of ways. And it was impressive to see Microsoft, of all companies, trying something new instead of slavishly copying Apple as per usual. And with Nokia actually making pretty decent hardware, I've actually considered buying one, as a secondary device, on a few occasions. That tiled UI would be ideal as a unified controller/hub for Hue lights, Nest, Netatmo, and other home automation kit.

Comment Elementary school in Florida (Score 1) 320

Whenever the shuttle was scheduled to launch, most classes took a break and we filed out to the playground to watch. And that day was no exception.

I got in my first significant playground fight that day. While most of us were staring in horror at what had happened, the new kid was pumped, thought it was "totally wicked" and was cheering enthusiastically. This being Florida, where school kids practically worshipped astronauts and it was very obvious that seven of them had just died, I punched him right in gut. By the time the teachers got to us, a few others had joined in on my side. This being the '80s, when "boy will be boys" was still a thing, and the teachers were probably even more aghast in grief and horror at what happened than we were; we were separated for the day and nothing else was said.

There was kind of a half-hearted attempt on the part of the teachers at resuming the lessons for the day. But not much got accomplished, especially after the principal confirmed the destruction of the shuttle on the school's intercom. And no homework was assigned.

Comment Re:Okay! Let me shed a tear for Apple! (Score 1) 269

I don't think the xServe and xSan sold very well. After all, had they been runaway successes, I doubt Apple would have discontinued them. No public corporation is going to throw away easy money "just because". If the server products were really thriving, and Apple *really* wanted to just be all about consumer hardware; they'd have just spun the business off into a subsidiary, like they have in the past with FileMaker and Claris.

And really, Mac OS X doesn't make much sense as a server anyway, Unix underpinnings and their token OS X Server development notwithstanding. The big advantage OS X has over other Unix/Linux OSs is a GUI that doesn't suck and the availability of a good number of commercial consumer software products. Neither is relevant to a server. And a GUI and most of the other OS X features are a liability for a server. A server should have exactly and only the packages it needs to perform its specific job, and nothing more. That's not Mac OS X.

Perhaps Apple could publish some RPMs to be installed on RHEL, CentOS, or Amazon Linux with customized services targeted at the "classroom full of Macs" they used to cite as the use case for OS X Server... CalDav, CardDav, Wiki Server, Open Directory with non-sucky directory templates, and so on. Combine this with an easy-to-use client that'd run on a Mac to manage these services and you have a server offering that makes sense for Apple. But dedicated Mac server hardware always was a really odd duck out and never made a whole lot of sense. And I say that as someone who likes Apple, owns many of their products, and practically grew up with their computers. All the way back to that first Apple ][+ I can hardly recall a time when I did *not* have Apple kit. But for a server in any kind of production environment? As much as I like Apple and hate, for example, Dell; I'd choose CentOS on a pair os R220s (for redundancy) over Apple's offerings... even the xServe when it was available... every time.

Add to all that the fact that many businesses these days... especially the startups that are open to Apple products in general (It's not like you'll see many Macs in an SAP building or on a Lockheed Martin campus.)... don't even want to own their own rack mounts or datacenter space in the first place; but would prefer to to just spin up infrastructure in AWS and avoid the headaches of owning and maintaining hardware. Why would Apple... or anyone, really... want to jump into the 19" pizza box market now?

Comment Re:The body dies were destroyed, maybe not? (Score 1) 276

How big of a deal would it be to just make new dies? Or, perhaps, is there some alternate process they could use to make the panels?

I don't know enough about that sort of manufacturing to have a good idea. But it *was* the early '80s. And they didn't do much in the way of "curvy", "aerodynamic", or "low coefficient of drag" back then. The DMC-12, like most cars of that era, is predominantly a collection of nearly flat surfaces and straight lines, with some minor curves at the wheel wells and corners.

Comment Re:How smart? (Score 1) 464

Your linked article cites a law in New Jersey. The incidents I'm referring to concern a gun shop in California, where New Jersey's laws obviously do not apply. So that's irrelevant.

As to your other point, a .22 LR pistol with a 10-round capacity is hardly the choice for someone buying a handgun for self-defense in the first place. And for other purposes, (Really, what's a .22 pistol good for anyway, besides casual target shooting at a range?), if it's really so true that no one wants an additional failure mode, why not just let the free market prove it a failure? The campaigns of harassment, intimidation, and threats were 100% un-called for, and belie the hypocrisy of the NRA crowd; with their very own declaration of: "We don't want one of these. Therefore no one should be able to have one." Pot, meet kettle.

Also, I don't buy the notion that consumers won't tolerate additional points of failure. Pretty much every technological product I can think of, from cars, to computers, to ovens, to TVs, to coffee makers, have accumulated additional points of failure as they've advanced. We tolerate additional points of failure all the time.

Comment Re:How smart? (Score 2) 464

http://www.armatix.de/iP1-Pistol.779.0.html?&L=1

.22 LR calibre, 10 round magazine

That probably has something to do with it. .22 LR isn't exactly a law enforcement, hunting, or home defense round. It's more like a: "Goto the range occasionally to shot holes in paper targets. Don't want especially clever and explorative children to be able to fire it if they find the thing." round.

In any event, once again, the point is not the technical effectiveness of this, or any other, "childproof" safety system. It's not about the calibre of the gun or what use one would put it to. The question asked was: "Who would NOT be in favour of a "childproof" gun?". And the answer is the hordes of anti-any-kind-of-safety-feature whack jobs who threatened the lives of the gun shop owners who dared to sell a product that deviated from their orthodoxy. Their reaction to the Armatix was ludicrously nutters. And, in said reaction... which amounted to: "I don't want this. Therefore no one should be allowed to own it"... they outed themselves as raging hypocrites.

Slashdot Top Deals

Power corrupts. And atomic power corrupts atomically.

Working...