Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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:Me personally? no.. (Score 1) 216

I remember reading an article on building a cheap dipole antenna, is that still the smartest thing I can put up with minimal effort? Is it worth it to put it along the inside of my attic, or do I really need to have it outside? My home is on a rise. I have a HR2510 I scored for ten bucks and I want to see if it works. If it does, perhaps I'll learn how to use it :p

Comment: Re:Look at previous disasters (Score 1) 216

People with amateur licenses are helpful for some things, but they're absolutely useless for disseminating information over a wide area that's otherwise disconnected

Useless is a strong word, and "absolutely" is a strong modifier. Neither is warranted here. People with amateur licenses can put the word out manually to other people who can do the same. Meanwhile, those people are likely to have disconnected power sources, while many radio stations are in urban areas and are legally prohibited from having inexpensive, functional backup power.

Comment: Re:Obvious (Score 1) 216

Jokes aside, most of us live in areas that are not prone to hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, or Godzilla. If you do choose to live in such places, it is important to be prepared, and have an emergency kit. In which you can just pack in a good ole' FM battery.

It would be much wiser to pack in a good ole' hand-crank FM radio. Prices range from just a few bucks on up. Around $30 will get you a halfway-decent radio/flashlight combo.

Of course, $5 will get you a hand-crank cellphone charger...

Comment: Re:What? (Score 2) 216

It's not just you, but I'm guessing you've never been in a tornado/hurricane shelter without power huddled around a battery powered radio listening to storm updates.

I bet you're right. I haven't either, but I still own a wind-up radio that's stored with all my disaster relief supplies. (That's not mine, mine is not for sale, just the first link I found with the same thing. I got mine at a yard sale.)

Comment: Re:Question still remains (Score 1) 112

by drinkypoo (#49503869) Attached to: Google Adds Handwriting Input To Android

By 2001 or 2002, they cost $5, shipped direct from Sprint.

By 2001, Handspring was making its last Visor, and Sprint was dumping the modules in a vain attempt to attract the last three or four Visor users to their network, and get something for their investment. The Visor never really took off. But if anyone is interested, I have the second or third OmniRemote module made for it, with a blue LED flashlight in. I got it straight from the maker. I think I also still have a cradle around here. Actually, I think I found my last working [translucent blue, basic] Visor as well. I'm in the midst of recycling all my useless electronics right now, so I've been finding stuff. I have a GRiDPad 2390 with power problems, too. I always meant to get the OS off of it so I could freshly load it onto my GRiDPad 1910, also available. It's got a full-size XT keyboard port hacked in... You might say I am familiar with the devices of the era — except the Newtons, which I admired but could not afford at the time, not the good examples anyway. The low-end ones were poop.

Comment: Re:rule of law (Score 1) 218

Research requires you to be able to buy a copy and read it, so you may use the information held in it. That's the case with lots of works out there, such as all scientific research publications. They all fall under copyright, which doesn't seem to hinder research all too much.

That's the point, right? If you're not allowed to publish because copyright, then that will hinder the next person's research.

Comment: Re:Stupid NAT. (Score 1) 63

by drinkypoo (#49503807) Attached to: Google To Propose QUIC As IETF Standard

Do you think they are going to pull up all their existing systems renumber every internal machine, make them all publicly accessible, give each a unique IP from the range allocated, etc.

Wow, it's almost like you're completely ignorant of how networking actually works, and yet still posted on slashdot anyway!

UDP works JUST FINE with NAT, if you haven't noticed.

Yes, as long as the firewall is stateful. Otherwise you need protocol support to receive responses.

People have this thing about NAT being evil but it's not.

No, certain protocols are evil, like SIP, and NAT exacerbates that evil. As such, it's not evil, just a massive PITA.

"You must have an IQ of at least half a million." -- Popeye