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


Forgot your password?
Back for a limited time - Get 15% off sitewide on Slashdot Deals with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment Opportunities as well as problems (Score 1) 98

Yes, due to latency reasons they are probably going to put your satelites in < 1000km altitude.

But if you can do point to point communication via same satelite network without needing to go via base station, or if you have several base stations across the globe, then this will have LOWER latency than going via cables especially for long distance stuff say USA <=> Europe.

I assume they plan to launch small satelites, maybe bigger than cubesats, but definitely smaller than 100cm^3 and 1000kg. I think one rocket should be able to launch a significant percentagle of constellation, otherwise this whole thing becomes unfeasible.

On top of that, you have to weigh the cost of launching a constellation against the cost of laying enough cable to cover the whole world. Satelites are cheaper if you have reusable rockets. And regarding decaying orbit- I think the satelites, no matter what they are now, will be obsolete and replaced in ~10 years anyway, so they just need to last that long.

I wonder how will they deal with scalability with the number of clients, and what kind of antennas will this need on the ground. I imagine they'll have to be somewhat directional, otherwise power usage will be too high? Will they have to be outdoors? How will an individual satelite deal with the load when it passes over a huge city with lots of clients, say NY?


Comment Re:Driver model (Score 1) 199

Ok, I hear you. I KNOW vendor support is bad. Well, it's not as bad as it was in 1998, but it's still quite bad.

However the main problem with that is NOT the driver model. The main problem with that is Microsoft.

OEMs that cannot/do not get bullied by Microsoft DO provide open-source drivers. Intel, Atheros, Realtek, AMD, lots of others.

However Microsoft made sure Linux devices cannot be sold by usual popular vendors like Dell/Asus/Lenovo etc. Anyone who tries selling Linux laptops or desktops gets their windows licensing screwed up. This is bullying and monopolistic pratices at their worst, and they still continue. Similar with Intel/AMD- Intel effectively forces vendors to limit their AMD offerings.

Plese stop blaming this on Linus and his insistence on open-source drivers.


Comment Driver model (Score 1) 199

I just wanted to say- Linus is right regarding driver model.

I do NOT want binary blobs running in kernel mode on my machine. They screw up both stability and security of the system. And OEMs who cannot provide open source drivers can go fuck themselves.

If not for MS monopoly and bullying of OEMs, Linux would have had good driver support from OEMs ages ago. Don't blame Linus for problems caused by Microsoft. Any OEM who tries to sell both Microsoft and Linux systems gets visited by Microsoft and stops selling Linux systems very soon. Because of that quality drivers never get provided by OEMs.

I do agree with your doubt that SteamOS has a future. Valve should have shipped SteamBox after all the hipe. Now this looks like another piece of vaporvare.


Comment Could we please stop this Java is insecure crap (Score 1) 319

It's insecure ON THE CLIENTSIDE. Nobody uses it on the client-side any more. Applets are dead and have been for years. Clientside features are still around only to support some crap legacy apps which should have died years ago.

And on server-side, it's as secure as anything. Probably more secure, as you get none of the memory issues or buffer overflow issues or other issues C/C++ has had for years.


Comment Really? He caused 2 wars (Score 1) 70

War in South Ossetia/Georgia. War in Ukraine. Ongoing civil war/occupation of Chechnya, and he played quite a big part in that. You could argue that 2nd Chechen war was effectively started in order to make Putin popular and put him in power.

How has he been a better world citizen. He's been as bad as USA, probably more.

And I'm not saying this to praise USA. As someone else said, this is a choice between a thug and a crook.

Well, ok, unless you count the whole mass surveilance business. And then other shenanigans created by USA corporations. But I could argue Putin would have done the same and more, except his hands were too short- Russia is not as powerful as USA, and not as technologically advanced.


Comment Many VMs is about legacy crap, not Open-source (Score 1) 149

Ok, so you have several reasonably well maintained open-source (or close) things running with same JVM. Good for you. In your use-case, you only need one VM.

Now try running some legacy enterprise crap from 2003 which hasn't been touched for last 10 years on JDK8. And now imagine it uses JNI.


Comment That's the point! (Score 1) 293

All this hydrogen crap is done for only one reason that I can see- to keep oil and related companies in business. You still need some company to manufacture hydrogen, you still need complex transportation, you still need complex filing stations, and none of that you can do yourself. It's exactly the same business model, very similar infrastructure and process as dealing with gasoline. I.E. business as usual.

Purely battery electrical vehicles give customers control of charging their cars. You only need a charging station if you are on a long range journey. This will make lots of existing businesss obsolete, and it will be fought tooth and nail by the established companies. They will "invent" useless crap like corn alcohol or hydrogent to confuse the market and to slow down proliferation of purely battery electrical vehicles.

Theoretical research behind this- fuel cells and direct chemicals to electricity transformation with water as a byproduct is a cute idea, but it's very inpractical. Total energy efficiency of the whole system is low, transportation of hydrogen is tricky, and fuel cells are expensive. And it doesn't give you home-charging flexibility...


Comment Funny enough I'm neither (Score 1) 525

I've lived under Soviet Union. It wasn't much fun. I'm definitely NOT a communist, even though Soviet union wasn't really communist.

I don't pretend to know the solution. But I'll be the first to say that the current system of corporate demoracy is broken and must be improved.

I also believe that the solution will probably depend heavily on individual freedoms, and keeping computing, communications and the internet free and private. The alternative is a totalitarian regime backed by modern technology and that is the scariest thing I can imagine- and we are rapidly moving in that direction.


Comment That's my point (Score 1) 525

I just love this way of thinking. Oh, they are being dicks and screwing people over to make money. Well that's ok then...

I know businesses and corporations, most of the big ones at least, are being dicks to make money. That is still NOT OK. I know it's the "usual" way to do business. But it's still NOT OK. I know that's the way things have been for a very long time. That still doesn't make it OK.

And I do know Linux has it's share of problems, especially on desktop for newbie users. That still doesn't make it OK for Microsoft or any other organization to be dicks.


Comment 90% of big corporations ARE evil (Score 1) 525

Yes it does. And that's the problem with corporations and capitalism in general.

Corporation by design is supposed to do one thing and one thing only- earn money for shareholders. All other concerns basically do not exist. Corporations do not have morals, they cannot have morals, and yet they are legal persons. If you were to do a personality profile on corporate behaviour- you'll find they all act as maniac psychopats. Corporations will hapily pollute, externalize costs, screw up communities, bribe & corrupt as long as they can get away with it- and usually they can. If they cannot do it in the West, they'll find some poorer country and do it there.

While a corporation is small, you could argue that it follows moral standards of the founders. However, as soon as it gets bigger, it inevitably becomes evil. And that is because of the way we reward corporations and define their success. We don't consider a corporation successful because it cleaned something up or improved life, we say a corporation is successful because it earned record profits. Sometimes you can achieve both, but if people can be screwed over to improve profits, that will eventually happen.


Comment Microsoft is not less evil,more companies are Evil (Score 4, Insightful) 525

Microsoft still has dominance (monopoly) of desktop OS and office software. They still have incompatible office formats. They still corrupt international standards organizations. They still have the mindset of "Microsoft way or the highway". They still bundle their OS with most computers and vendors that want to sell computers without Windows still get in trouble. They still screw up their mobile phone partners.

They are still as evil as they used to be. They missed the boat with search/internet services and mobile- so they have a weeker position now. And now we have other evil companies like Apple and Google, and other evil organizations like NSA and GCHQ that affect the internet and computing world. But given emergence of new evils and reduction of power of Microsoft does not make them less evil.


At the source of every error which is blamed on the computer you will find at least two human errors, including the error of blaming it on the computer.