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


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:I guess the FDA hates birds (Score 1) 265

There was a RadioLab podcast on this very subject about ten months ago: http://www.radiolab.org/story/...

The prevailing wisdom seems to be that the ecosystem will not take a huge hit. I believe the quote was something like, "It will just be like Los Angeles is all the time". The best they could come up with was that it could allow some better predators to thrive, but they seemed pretty unsure.

However, I do agree that people tend to underestimate these sorts of impacts. More ethanol use == more dying people in Africa, for example. At least someone figured out before Bill Gates implemented his idea of using barges to steer hurricanes away from the SE and Caribbean that it would have apparently caused famine in the UK...


Comment Re:I guess the FDA hates birds (Score 1) 265

Dear FDA, Please consider the ecological side-affects. With mosquito repellent & decent medical care most humans can survive mosquito born illness, but birds and other bug-eaters will starve.

You left out mosquito repellent manufacturers and decent medical care providers.

Comment Re:= $912,000,000,000 (Score 1) 247

There will be a fine, but I'll be surprised if it ends up being more than even $30M.

I think you're right. But basically what that means is that they will only be penalized for 1,875 of 57,000,000 calls. Sends a clear message: please violate this law -- you won't be penalized for 3/1000th of one percent of them.

Comment Re:math (Score 2) 181

It's very likely that the people with money to buy a Tesla make too much to qualify for the tax credit.

Everyone qualifies for the BEV tax credit. There is no income qualification other than that you've had to pay enough tax to be able to use the tax credit. So it's possible that you make too *little* to use the tax credit; not too much. I actually had to manufacture tax spend to make sure that I could use it. I paid my property taxes earlier than I would have so that it would be in the right tax year.

Comment How much bandwidth *do* they have? (Score 1) 219

I read here that they have a single IPv4 block.

At 100mb/s (with nothing else using it) it would take 3 months to download the "100TB" that is said to have been downloaded. At 10mb/s it would take 30 months. (All approximate). This is end-to-end bandwidth, including all of the hops in between, like these proxies (for when they weren't sloppy).

Comment Re:Drake equation (Score 3, Insightful) 219

This impacts Drake equation and might shed light as to why we have not detected any other sentient life in the universe.

No, it does not impact the Drake equation at all. The drake equation is based on R* and f(p) which are the the "rate of star formation" and the "fraction of those stars that have planets" (from your link on wikipedia). Both of these numbers are not affected by this finding.

Comment Re:Tesla wasn't the target, it was China (Score 1) 256

Reinforcing an already existing ban was to make sure foreign markets don't try to muscle in and sell direct.

The last minute change to the law was to change one word; the word that caused Massachusetts to lose the case against Tesla. This had nothing to do with foreign cars.

Comment Re:So now he has no nose? (Score 1) 161

(Forgive me. The first image that came to mind when I read this story was the movie "Sleeper", when they were trying to clone the assassinated leader using his nose.)

Yes, I am shocked at the lack of quotes from "Sleeper" in here.

"I've seen him shoot a nose!"
"Checking the [nose] cell structure!"

Comment Re:Hmm, strong evidence of null-activity by NSA? N (Score 3, Insightful) 20

"... our detector" = "strong evidence of a negative we're trying to prove..."

It's interesting how one detector can be "strong evidence" that the NSA didn't do something in secret, I think.

The research had nothing to do with the NSA (the article about the research decided to bring them up). To me, the main objective of the study was to see if the widespread revocation of certificates in a short period of time was really warranted. IMO, it was not, and my opinion seems to be validated by this study.

It *is* possible to prove this sort of negative (I'm not saying they did). For example, if you wanted to prove that heartbleed was not used on a particular system, you could set up logging in advance. You could then extend that to multiple systems, and so on. My point is that you can't use the "you can't prove a negative" argument for things like this (and also that the NSA had nothing to do with this study).

Comment Re:...really? (Score 1) 157

Simple solution: they can see them in the showroom, and buy them online..

This is already Tesla's model. You can't buy a car at the showroom; only online. Each showroom has at least one Mac you can use however you want, and an employee will help you if you have any questions. But you can't pay there.

Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso