Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Stable enough? (Score 1) 96

by Zordak (#48525415) Attached to: Windows 10 Adds Battery Saver Feature

Depends on what im going to use it for. I know XP inside and out. There is nothing wrong with XP, its a perfectly useful OS, with some strings attached. Its not dead, its not even fully deprecated.

In fact, Windows XP doesn't want to go on the cart. It feels fine! It thinks it'll go for a walk.It feels happyyyyyy.

Comment: Re:Deliberate (Score 1) 652

by Zordak (#48469605) Attached to: Two Google Engineers Say Renewables Can't Cure Climate Change

Why is that, in every discussion about renewable sources (hydro, wind, solar), the pro nuclear crowd has to bring the coal, only to try to make nuclear look better? Those pushing for renewable sources also don't like coal, so don't hide the nuclear problems with the coal problems.

The point is that by pushing for renewables at the exclusion of nuclear, the tree huggers have successfully kept coal firmly entrenched. Renewables are expensive, and they don't have the energy density of coal, much less Uranium. Without the political and emotional baggage, nuclear could have completely replaced coal decades ago, not "hopefully some time in the next 20 or 30 years, if we're lucky."

Comment: Re:Deliberate (Score 4, Insightful) 652

by Zordak (#48461207) Attached to: Two Google Engineers Say Renewables Can't Cure Climate Change

That's true but nobody has been able to solve these problems. The EIR and lawsuits are the result of demanding perfection for what is inherently a very dangerous process with catastrophic consequences for any mishap and this is technically not possible. So it is a technical failure. You can design a system that will work perfectly most of the time. You can't design a system that will work perfectly all of the time.

A coal plant, working absolutely perfectly according to its design parameters, will cause much more environmental and health damage than even a "catastrophic" nuclear failure. So no, it's not a technical issue. It's an emotional issue. We have all but cut off access to the cheapest, most abundant "green" energy source we have. It's like God handed us a big chunk of nearly-free magical energy and said, "Here, use this." Then Jane Fonda said, "But it's scary!" She's done more harm to the planet over the past 35 years than BP ever did.

Comment: Re: writer doesn't get jeopardy, or much of anythi (Score 1) 455

by Zordak (#48459999) Attached to: Alva Noe: Don't Worry About the Singularity, We Can't Even Copy an Amoeba

Why would artificial people designed to be like people be any more likely than people to want to design and build new people?

Well, if we paid off making a new AI with a massive, hyper-euphoric, temporary endorphine rush, they might want to do quite a bit of it.

Comment: Re:To me this is good news (Score 3, Interesting) 111

by Zordak (#48389279) Attached to: An Applied Investigation Into Graphics Card Coil Whine
My anecdotal experience is that sometimes it's a ceramic diode getting hammered by out-of-spec back-voltage and ready to explode, and sometimes it does explode spraying ceramic shards all over the electronics lab. Root causes may include a dodgy transformer (pulled out of an old Hammond organ) with a highly questionable output waveform because you're a broke undergrad and it was cheaper than buying a new one.

+ - Why spiral galaxies will never be the largest

Submitted by StartsWithABang
StartsWithABang (3485481) writes "The largest galaxies in the Universe all have a few things in common: they all contain many trillions of stars, they all contain many times their stellar mass in the form of dark matter, and they’re all found towards the centers of great galactic clusters. Oh, and one more thing: none of them are spiral galaxies! Why are the largest spiral galaxies in the Universe only a few times the size of our Milky Way, but the largest galaxies overall are hundreds or even a thousand times as big as our home galaxy? The astrophysics behind the largest galaxies in the Universe."

+ - Rosetta Records Eerie Predator "Sounds" from Comet

Submitted by Zordak
Zordak (123132) writes "IFLScience is reporting that Rosetta and Philae have recorded an eerie "sound" coming from comet 67P/C-G. Rosetta’s Plasma Consortium (RPC) picked up variations in the magnetic field around the comet, due to interactions between 67P/C-G’s coma and the plasma from the Sun, better known as solar wind. These variations resulted in frequencies between 40 to 50 millihertz, about 10,000 times lower than can be detected by humans. ESA scientists altered the frequency of the comet’s song into human hearing range, and discovered it was a series of clicks that are very reminiscent of Predator’s growl."

Comment: Re:This is *not* what Michal Jordan actually belie (Score 1) 145

by Zordak (#48214765) Attached to: Machine Learning Expert Michael Jordan On the Delusions of Big Data
Dangit, I clicked on the comments hoping for some good "+5, Funnies" about "Michael Jordan," and all I got was a stupid on-topic, well-researched, and educational comment on what the real Michael Jordan thinks about the challenges of "big data." And the best we could do on the name is "A man of many talents"? That does it. Slashdot is dead. (Netcraft confirms it.)

Comment: Re:Ho-lee-crap (Score 1) 275

by Zordak (#48190121) Attached to: The Largest Ship In the World Is Being Built In Korea
Copyrights don't apply in this case. Patents might. The Supreme Court has recently been struggling with drawing a line between "abstract ideas" (which are not patent-eligible) and concrete methods (which are patent eligible). In general, you can't patent the math per se, but you can patent (for example) a space craft programmed to perform that particular maneuver. As applied to ship building, if it's sufficiently novel, you may be able to patent a ship having certain hull parameters, but you won't generally get a patent just for "make it BIGGAR!" The patentability will usually lie in your solution to the problems you encountered in the process of making it bigger, which means that if somebody finds a different way to make it bigger, you may not be able to stop them. (This isn't legal advice, of course.)

Comment: Re:May I suggest RTFA? (Score 1) 334

by Zordak (#48189521) Attached to: No More Lee-Enfield: Canada's Rangers To Get a Tech Upgrade

You're an idiot. WWII-vintage firearms eventually wear out, and the SMLE is no exception. Even if you could source replacement springs and firing pins, there's no replacement barrels easily available - and once the rifling is finally shot out of them, their accuracy goes right to hell.

I call BS. I can buy a brand-spanking-new replacement for literally any part of my Garand except the receiver. In fact, when I bought it, the receiver was probably the only part that was still original. I know for sure that the spiffy walnut stock and Criterion barrel were new off-the-shelf. I can also buy clips, bayonets, ammo pouches, and other accessories on the cheap. I don't personally own a Lee-Enfield, but it's a fairly popular hunting rifle. You can get parts for it. This reeks of a contract for the contract's sake.

"It's what you learn after you know it all that counts." -- John Wooden