Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:The USA (Score 1) 182

by Whatanut (#47194091) Attached to: Rising Sea Levels Uncover Japanese War Dead In Marshall Islands

I fail to see how we're "very close to a large percentage" being able to do this. Sounds plausible on the surface. But I still see a huge amount of infrastructure that needs to be put in place. It's not like it's good enough to just have a power outlet somewhere in the building that you can use. Number one, a parking garage would basically need a receptacle at every parking space. Along with a system for charging the person recharging their vehicle. Energy is not free.

That being said, are these difficult obstacles to overcome? No. But it's still a lot of infrastructure somebody needs to invest in before it becomes a plausible solution.

Comment: Poor experience for those that do have kinect (Score 5, Insightful) 174

Doesn't that then lead to a bad situation for kinect users? If you design a game that relies on that overhead, then those that don't have it will have a poor experience. Granted, you can probably just disconnect the kinect and be just fine. Be all know what the general masses will do. Complain.

Comment: Re:Around here (Score 2) 392

by Whatanut (#41809899) Attached to: 26 Nuclear Power Plants In Hurricane Sandy's Path

The wikipedia page on containment buildings has this blurb.

In 1988, Sandia National Laboratories conducted a test of slamming a jet fighter into a large concrete block at 481 miles per hour (775 km/h).[14][15] The airplane left only a 2.5-inch-deep (64 mm) gouge in the concrete. Although the block was not constructed like a containment building missile shield, it was not anchored, etc., the results were considered indicative. A subsequent study by EPRI, the Electric Power Research Institute, concluded that commercial airliners did not pose a danger.[16]

While not a direct proof of design criteria, it seems to line up with the original statement.

Comment: Re:More reasont to give up hope on a good dumb pho (Score 1) 247

by Whatanut (#40974605) Attached to: Motorola To Cut 4,000 Jobs, Focus On High-End Devices

Of course, you realize this is nowhere near being in the best interest of manufacturer. You're asking for a low priced phone (margins aside) that you'll buy today and use for 10+ years. It's much more in their interest to get you to upgrade every couple of years. Repeat customer.

I'm sure your answer to that would be "Screw 'em! I'm the customer! This is what I want!" However, I'm sure we're all aware that it doesn't work this way. There is always the other spectrum where they are simply losing overall sales because they don't provide you what you want. But I don't see that happening with phones much these days. Most people want the bling...

Comment: Re:Please sign in to your cable or sat account (Score 1) 378

by Whatanut (#40626661) Attached to: DirecTV Drops Viacom Channels

Why would they. Those sites are a complete end run around the cable/satellite companies. With the the cable/satellite partners they sell their content and walk away. The cable/satellite companies charge the end users for the content and then lather it up with advertising to get as much money as possible out of it. The web sites that make the shows available provide the content straight from the source and tack on the same advertising. It's just straight profit for the content creator (used loosely). Why should they care if you have a cable/satellite account? They're still making profits either way.

Blinding speed can compensate for a lot of deficiencies. -- David Nichols