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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Can some one explain the efficiency claims? (Score 1) 65

by dabadab (#48852133) Attached to: Microsoft Researchers Use Light Beams To Charge Smartphones

The most easiest way to explain is that it is made up by the submitter: this claim is not present in the linked article.

What IS there is the following:
"Using a light beam to charge a smartphone could be as quick as many wired chargers, the researchers found, depending on the size of the PV panel."

It is certainly true, however, the best panels being rated at about 190 W/m2 max output you would need a PV panel about three time the size of an iPhone6 to charge it as fast as its wired charger does (or six times the size if you want to match a 2 amp charger's speed) - all of it presuming ideal conditions.

Comment: Re:Wha?!?!!! (Score 2) 172

by dabadab (#48558291) Attached to: Just-Announced X.Org Security Flaws Affect Code Dating Back To 1987

Windows 95 is long gone from modern Windows version.

Actually that's not true, as demonstrated by the MS14-064 (it's a bug that affects Win8 and also Win95).

As a sidenote, Win95 is not an ancestor of Windows8. Win8 is a member of the WinNT family, its lineage going back to the first version of Windows NT, which was curiously called Windows NT 3.1 (released in 1993).
The other line of Windowses (the one going from Windows 1.0 to Windows ME) ran in parallel and the two families sometimes shared some code but that's all, Win8 does not come from Win95.

Comment: Re:Waiving data charges is fine with net neutralit (Score 1) 134

by dabadab (#48473885) Attached to: Wikipedia's "Complicated" Relationship With Net Neutrality

Either all packets are equal (which is frankly stupid given that people want QoS)

Do they?
I, for one, would rather have net neutrality than QoS.
And I guess most people do not want QoS, they want enough bandwith and low enough latency in general so QoS does not even come into play.

Comment: Re:They need to get their shit together (Score 0) 169

by dabadab (#47983223) Attached to: South Australia Hits 33% Renewal Energy Target 6 Years Early

Solar thermal power plants covering 2/3rd of Mojave Desert could supply the current electricity needs of the entire USA.

No, they could not. That power plant may produce as much energy in a year as the consumption in the USA but alas, that's not enough: it has to produce the energy when it is needed - either by actually producing it on-demand (not really pausible considering that you need elecricity also in the night) or to have some energy storage system (also not really pausible on such a scale).

Comment: Re:Radicalization (Score 2, Insightful) 868

by dabadab (#47557159) Attached to: Gaza's Only Power Plant Knocked Offline

So what do you think should Palestine's response to the constant checkpoints, blockading of their ports, airport and border crossings, as well as the occupation and continued confiscation of their land by Israel should be?

I ask you the same and if you would come to the conclusion that randomly firing rockets on Isreal and demanding the death of all Jews is the rational reaction that has a very good chance of bringing prosperity and happiness to the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip, I am very much interested in your reasoning.

Comment: Re:what's wrong with public transportation? (Score 1) 190

by dabadab (#47142193) Attached to: Is Google CEO's "Tiny Bubble Car" Yahoo CEO's "Little Bubble Car"?

Conventional public transportation has lots of problems that all are well known and most of it comes down to the simple fact that mass transport needs masses and while some part of your route may coincide with enough other people (especially in rush hours of densely populated areas) but most probably not all of it.

The driverless cars actually could be the foundation of a new generation of public transport: you could think of these bubble-cars as the atoms of a peronalised public transport.

Comment: Re:Prior Art Disallows Patent Applications PERIOD. (Score 1) 56

by dabadab (#47084077) Attached to: Questionable Patents From MakerBot

Can we please stop spreading this stupidity?

The difference between first to invent and first to file has absolutely nothing to do with prior art. Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

It only comes into play when two patent applications are filed for the same invention in roughly the same time because it is how it will be decided which one will be accepted.
(And, should I elaborate this even more, in this case there are no conflicting patent applications, it's about prior art and prior art has nothing to do with first to file.)

Comment: Re:Communism is the only way forward (Score 1) 870

by dabadab (#46582183) Attached to: Job Automation and the Minimum Wage Debate

What about the impending failure of capitalism?

Yeah, what about it?
I have grown up in a socialist country and I was told that the capitalism will fail anytime (though it did not stop people from trying to escape there from our socialist utopia to the hell of capitalism, even though they could be (and many of them were) shot dead on the border). And here I am, thirty years later, and the doom of capitalism is still impending while "the only way forward"-communist has failed spectacularly.

So please, lecture me on how communism is the only way forward.
.

"How to make a million dollars: First, get a million dollars." -- Steve Martin

Working...