Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Electric trucks make a lot of sense (Score 1) 223

I'm not sure about that. The range for long range hauling semis might not be there, but there's a ton of semis that get used in limited geographic areas. Lots of places have a central depot or two in a city, that services all their stores/outlets/etc. Many of those semis don't really need huge range, they're just bigger moving/freight trucks. Heck, if you designed it right you could include easily swap-able battery packs with quick charge capability. The truck comes back to the depot, as it's getting refilled or getting a new trailer, the battery pack gets swapped for a new one, and bam, away you go, while your other battery pack charges up again for your next go round. Hell... I don't know why you couldn't do the same type of thing with large highway truck stops, which could certainly make long haul electric trucking a reality. And with the amount of gas that gets spent on these trucks, even with the high cost of batteries there's probably a substantial savings to be had.

Comment Re:Musk Needs to Focus (Score 1) 223

I'm going to be honest... I have no problem with someone doing that that is really working to advance and better the human race. Most people like that like to talk about how amazing they are, or to brag about how great something they've done is. I don't really see or hear about Musk acting like that. He's always looking for the next project and trying something new. Some of the new projects he talks about are flat out ridiculous. Some of them seem ridiculous, but are actually far more doable than anyone is willing to admit until he goes and does them. Some of them are just pretty run of the mill improvements. So if Musk wants to stay in the public eye by talking about wild shit, I've got less than no problem with it as long as he also keeps acting in the way he has in the past. The state of cars, space travel, and battery storage are all objectively better off for Musk's desire to stay in the public eye. If only every narcissist acted that way.

Comment I like my LEDs... (Score 5, Insightful) 338

Aside from questions of longevity, I honestly much prefer the availability of light color options that LEDs provide. After getting several LEDs that are substantially cooler in color than normally available incandescents/CFLs, I never want to go back. Add to that the fact that I can GET warmer colored LEDs if I desire, and the fact that I can use LED lights that package other abilities into their package (like wireless speakers), and I just don't see the consumer draw other than some rose colored glasses. (Maybe for dimmable bulbs, which I know LEDs struggled with for awhile but they seem to have overcome that also... This also ignores the brightness of the lightbulb, as LEDs have just generally been brighter [a good thing imo] than comparable incandescents and CFLs in my experience. Maybe the new tech solves that, but still probably not worth it as a consumer is my feeling.)

Comment Re:Requirements (Score 4, Informative) 181

I would argue that in the agile world, it matters just as much if not more, especially with their desire to charge a flat fee. From the article: " A sales engineer discusses proposals with clients, and using the AI engine, comes back with a price quote and production schedule in about 10 minutes. Then Gigster manages the entire development process through delivery of the fully-functional app." This implies to me that they are coming up with this fee and the full schedule at the start, from someone who isn't going to be that closely invested in the actual development of the app (and who likely is going to miss a LOT of what's going to go in that development. I know some very good sales engineers, but they are almost all behind the development curve just due to the fact that they don't DO development regularly, if at all.) That's not agile. That's the antithesis of agile. The entire point of agile is that you can't know right from the start how exactly a project is going to turn out, and what kinds of roadblocks you'll encounter. And especially with the development of original apps, unexpected events are going to crop up. The agile method is built to zero in on requirements during the process of development, and to actually allow an estimate to be just that, an estimate of time and cost. And yes yes, I know that agile can't be completely open ended, but the entire point is to be flexible in your development so you can easily adjust when problems arise, which, again, is NOT what this company seems to be doing. This company is not doing that at all, they're like the epitome of waterfall style development. Which means they have to be nearly perfect at requirements and estimating, which is nearly impossible. And I think you're right that it will almost certainly come back and bite them in the ass. (And that's ignoring the bullshit sharing economy/labor issues involved.)

Comment Re:Sounds good to me. (Score 1) 165

For the first point, I see what you're saying and agree, but at the same time, it sounds like it's not actually going to be a 'star' based system (which is why I was saying 'star equivalent), and I think that gives them the ability rate older models in the new system alongside newer models, without the confusion, since the rating system isn't going to be just the one measurement, if that makes sense. For the second part, I think it's totally fair. I mean, if Tesla is the only company that has put in the work to make their car that safe, right out of the gate, then that's how it it. Tesla, as far as I know, hasn't been doing anything that any other high end car manufacturer couldn't do if they had prioritized it. If they designed their car so that it's already so far ahead of the pack that even under stringent new standards it STILL performs amazingly, I think that's great. AND it provides a very hard incentive to other companies. Unlike with the newer MPG regulations, they won't be able to whine about something being impossible... because it's clearly already been done. Personally, I actually kind of like that even better. :D

Comment Re:AMD was their own worst enemy (Score 1) 225

Thank you. The summary was pretty biased. I've never been a fan one way or the other, I mainly just try to get the best processors and video cards that I can with the money that I have. I've had AMD machines and ATI cards plenty in the past, and I still feel they deliver good low end chips and solutions. But with the introduction of the Core 2 Duo, Intel really started to shape up, and lately they've been blowing it out of the ballpark (for the most part). AMD, on the other hand... hasn't been. Now, yes, Intel screwed over AMD in the early 2000s. But AMD has had PLENTY of opportunity to not only come back from that, but to turn out seriously competitive hardware, and they've almost always failed to do so. Don't get me wrong, they have had real winners here and there, and they still do turn out good parts for a person on a budget. But they just keep falling down when they move outside of that area. And since I have enough money now that I don't need to buy low end systems, I just... don't buy AMD.

Comment Sounds good to me. (Score 1) 165

Sounds good to me. Part of the point (maybe the biggest part) of these evaluations is so that consumers are equipped to make good, educated decisions when it comes to the cars they purchase. Another is to provide incentive to car manufacturers to actually improve tech. That means evolving standards to always get better. It's very similar to the fleet MPG standards... the best outcome is complete protection for passengers and pedestrians. We know that's not possible, but we know we can do better than we are, so we can evolve our standards to always be improving the status quo. At some point you do hit diminishing returns, but I don't think we're even close to there yet. Imo, they should rank a current average '4' at the equivalent of a 2 in the new scale, and then make the equivalent of a 5 basically impossible to get now, but attainable in 5-10 years with heavy focus on the development of safety systems. And in 15~20 years when most cars are again getting towards the top of the scale... reset again.

Comment Re:native USB 3.1 is not that big of a thing (Score 4, Insightful) 117

One of the issues that I've been running into for a long while, and expect to be running into even more with the expansion of the M.2 and related slots, has been the serious lack of PCI-E lanes that Intel supports. It's very easy, running SLI and one of two other things that use PCI-E, to run out of PCI-E lanes on today's boards, especially if you're a power user. And with new expansion slots for SSDs and other applications starting to enter the market, using multiple PCI-E lanes (up to 4 for a single M.2 slot), it's going to be even easier to suck all those lanes up and still need more. Honestly, for some power users, Intel could probably double the number of PCI-E lanes natively supported, and still not provide enough.

Comment Re:FTFA a big laugh (Score 1) 153

I beg to differ. The new Comcast Xfinity X1 boxes are the biggest pieces of shit ever. Super slow, unintuitive, and full of bullshit like not allowing you to rewind a current show if you're not using the 'main' box (of which you get ONE per house, so good luck if you have 2 or more TVs!) It also drops connection regularly, and god help you if it gets turned off. You won't have TV again for at least 20 minutes, maybe more. Of course, Comcast's solution to all of this is 'don't ever turn it off, and all the other stuff is just the way it is, sorry, not sorry.' The most heartbreaking part though, is that when you look at it, it's got great ideas. The basic design is there, and it had the potential to be really amazing. But the implementation is SO BAD that none of the good about the system comes through. I think that's what I really can't forgive Comcast for about the X1... they built my hopes up, and then crushed them mercilessly beneath their cold, unfeeling heal. One would think I would be used to it by now. *sigh*

Comment Re:The Nazis Could Have Won (Score 3, Interesting) 295

If Hitler had supported Rommel in North Africa with as little as a few more battalions of ground troops and hardware, it's pretty likely that the Allies would have lost the campaign there, and Hitler would have been able to take the Middle East basically unimpeded. But Hitler didn't like Rommel, and he didn't trust him, which is one of the reasons Rommel was in North Africa in the first place... and because of that, Hitler wasn't going to provide the support that Rommel needed to succeed, since he believed he could easily seize the Russian oil fields. He saw the North African campaign as a minor offshoot of the war, and didn't realize the huge potential involved in being able to easily secure the most rich oil fields in the world without pissing off one of the more crazy dictators of the modern world.

Comment Longevity breakthrough? (Score 1) 60

I know for a while it's been thought that one of the main causes of aging (and hence death from aging) may be the bodies tendency to build up waste products over time. This technology sounds like it may be a first step to a potentially huge breakthrough in human longevity research... if much of aging really is about waste build up, the ability to clean that waste out by various means could mean that we start breaking the known barriers on human lifespans. It's going to be interesting over the course of the next 50 years or so to see what happens on this front.

Slashdot Top Deals

The herd instinct among economists makes sheep look like independent thinkers.