Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Enough of the Tesla circle jerk (Score 1) 178

by arth1 (#47736151) Attached to: How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site?

Using the total figures is as uninteresting as saying that the Chinese have more sex than anyone else, because the total number of fucks is higher than any other country.

You have to look at the per capita figures, not the total.

And for car sales, subtract exports, because they don't increase the domestic adoption rate.

Comment: Re:Enough of the Tesla circle jerk (Score 1) 178

by arth1 (#47733489) Attached to: How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site?

The problem is that with Lithium batteries, you can't tell the usable capacity from the charge. A battery might be 100% full and give you a fraction as much kWH as another 100% full battery. You have to measure how much is actually pulled out of it, or it will be a crapshoot, and the whole system won't be workable.

We deal with electric meters on the wall, so this shouldn't be much different, apart from the battery sending the information to the service station instead of to the electric company.

Comment: Re:Enough of the Tesla circle jerk (Score 1) 178

by arth1 (#47733469) Attached to: How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site?

If EVs continue to develop, and become cost-effective, they will be widely adopted, and it will be Europe that lags behind and at a disadvantage, not EVs.

With the adoption rate of electrical vehicles being several times as high in Europe as in the US, I don't think you have to worry about that. There will be challenges, yes, and the European way is to solve those through legislation when corporations aren't willing to adapt.

Comment: Re:Enough of the Tesla circle jerk (Score 2) 178

by arth1 (#47725333) Attached to: How Does Tesla Build a Supercharger Charging Site?

And my fossil fuel car gives me 400 miles range in less than two minutes of fueling.

Electric cars are good for many things, but long range driving is not one of them. Not only do you have to plan your driving based on where you can find a suitable outlet, but waiting for half an hour every two hours isn't very competitive compared to gasoline and diesel engines.

What could work in the future is standardized batteries you can exchange at any station for any car (no proprietary solutions), and a sealed meter in your car measures how much juice you actually pulled out of the battery (so you won't have to pay full price for a half-dead battery). But without standards, it's going to be tough.

Comment: Re:Yes, Please (Score 2) 247

by arth1 (#47663739) Attached to: The IPv4 Internet Hiccups

This means that their DNS resolver will know to only return IPv4 routes since IPv6 routes aren't usable. Thus no problem.

That depends. The "filter AAAA on ipv4" option is quite new in bind 9, and probably not available on the majority of DNS installations out there.
My guess is that a majority of ISPs will gladly send IPv4 clients the AAAA records. Which, in my opinion, is a good thing. Just because the query goes through IPv4 doesn't necessarily mean a client doesn't have IPv6.

Comment: Re:This guy might be overvaluing his files (Score 0) 100

by arth1 (#47663647) Attached to: Password Gropers Hit Peak Stupid, Take the Spamtrap Bait

Why is this "insightful"? By the time the spam is processed by the trap and is blacklisted, the million e-mails have already been delivered.
The next time the spammer sends e-mail, it will be a different e-mail, so the existing rule won't trigger.

The only real effect this has is adding fat to the spam checkers, making mail delivery slower for everyone. Except the spammer.

Comment: Re:This guy might be overvaluing his files (Score -1, Offtopic) 100

by arth1 (#47662935) Attached to: Password Gropers Hit Peak Stupid, Take the Spamtrap Bait

Right, it is irrelevant for the spammer. He's not using his own resources. Whether he sends e-mail to a million real and a million fake addresses, or to a million real and two million fake ones does not matter.

What's "peak stupid" here is the submitter not understanding how spamming works before posting on it.

Comment: Re:Yes, Please (Score 3) 247

by arth1 (#47662885) Attached to: The IPv4 Internet Hiccups

And most people don't need router technology in their home that's newer than 10 years old.

Once their OS is told that www.google.com has internet address 2607:f8b0:4009:805::1010, they sure do.
Or once their ISP switches to IPv6.

What's sad is that slashdot.org does not have an AAAA address.
News for whom?
Stuff that what?

Comment: Re:Automated notice not necessary here (Score 1) 364

by arth1 (#47657705) Attached to: Comcast Drops Spurious Fees When Customer Reveals Recording

If they notify you that the call is being recorded then that's all they have to do. If you don't consent then hang up, that's the purpose of the notification.

That's a Hobson's choice as far as the call goes.
Given that for many of their services, you cannot do them though the web site or e-mail, that's a showstopper. They've pretty much responded with "you have to call us for that" whenever I needed something done and tried to do it online.
If you're disabled or without transportation to get you to an office, that pretty much leaves you with no options at all.

Comment: Re:Alternatively... (Score 1) 102

by arth1 (#47623133) Attached to: Massive Russian Hack Has Researchers Scratching Their Heads

It's basically looking for a needle in a haystack, but for a router, the haystack is a lot smaller than on a full OS.
Any code affecting normal operation speeds would also be easier to spot - additional packet inspection can incur a noticable hit on a device that prides itself on passing packets as quickly as possible and allowing as many simultaneous connections as possible.

Comment: Re:we offered a similar service, it costs to opera (Score 1) 102

by arth1 (#47622629) Attached to: Massive Russian Hack Has Researchers Scratching Their Heads

A Billion dollar security firm won't sign up for a $120 per year service to see the data behind the breach?

A billion dollar security firm won't sign up for a $120 per year service per site to not see the data behind the breach, but to be given an unsubstantiated statement of whether they allegedly are affected or not.

Why would they? That would just be opening up for all kinds of protection rackets.

Comment: Re:Objection! (Score 1) 102

by arth1 (#47622583) Attached to: Massive Russian Hack Has Researchers Scratching Their Heads

Could be worse:

- Here, my $120, what's going on with this?
- You're affected. Change your password, goodbye.
- But, hey, my web site doesn't have any passwords, how can it be affected?
- Yes, you're affected, goodbye.

Until they pony up some evidence, this sounds like scam much like the cold callers who tell you you have a virus.

Comment: Re:Well at least they saved the children! (Score 1) 790

by arth1 (#47613091) Attached to: Google Spots Explicit Images of a Child In Man's Email, Tips Off Police

That's just what Jesus said, sir.

It reminds me of a televangelist who was a teetotaler. When confronted with Jesus having made wine out of water, his response was "Yes, we know about this, but we do not like it".

Religion can justify or condemn pretty much anything, so the only rational thing to do is to take religion out of the equation. It certainly should not influence our laws.

To be a kind of moral Unix, he touched the hem of Nature's shift. -- Shelley

Working...