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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Really? (Score 5, Insightful) 119

First of all, why not simply upload a PDF with the new menu every day? That is easy, and scriptable. (For example, copy finished menu in any format in a folder. This folder is polled occasionaly for new content, if new content is there, eventually convert (doc, docx, odt to pdf), and upload to FTP server. Done.)

Second, you could just take a stock webcam, attach it to an RPi, let it make a picture, let's say every 15 minutes and upload it to the desired FTP server. 100% scriptable.

Personally, I think this idea is ripe for abuse. Somebody is going to draw penises on the menu and it will be there on the site for all to see. Overthink your workflow instead of doing this.

Comment: Re:"Support" != actually sacrifice for (Score 2, Interesting) 420

by Ichijo (#48943507) Attached to: Most Americans Support Government Action On Climate Change

ALL Taxes are regressive.

A revenue-neutral carbon tax would be quite progressive. If the tax were $1 per gallon of gasoline, and if the average person used 500 gallons of gasoline in a year, everyone would receive a $500 tax rebate every year. For a poor person, that's a lot of money. And since the truly poor don't drive, they won't be the ones paying the tax in the first place.

Comment: Re:Demand (Score 1) 216

by Ichijo (#48942407) Attached to: New Study Says Governments Should Ditch Reliance On Biofuels

We're taking food and converting it to fuel...

That makes bicycles, which get 48 miles per gallon of orange juice, sound bad.

And if it's wrong to use a natural resource for transportation when that same resource can also be used to produce food, then why are we using fossil fuels for transportation?

And is it wrong to use land to produce biofuels if the biofuel is used to produce or transport food?

For these reasons, the "no food for fuels" argument doesn't make perfect sense to me.

Comment: Re:Not just slashdot. (Score 1) 128

by JWSmythe (#48927125) Attached to: Local Motors Looks To Disrupt the Auto Industry With 3D-Printed Car Bodies

I never really thought about them being any different. I always thought of them as being the same.

It looks like Suzuki and Honda have both ATVs and UTVs. I found on another site the major difference is the seating arrangement (side-by-side for UTV). The UTV can have seatbelts, and have motorcycle type controls rather than golfcart/car type controls.

I've always thought about it by engine and general style. Well, I learned something today. :)

What I said before about seeing them still applies. When I lived in a rural area, I saw people riding ATVs on the road, but they would also get pulled over if a cop saw them. I got pulled over a few times riding a street/trail bike, even though it had all the required equipment, license plate, and I had (and have) a motorcycle endorsement. Because of the gearing, it had lots of torque, but maxed out at 60mph.

It looks like they plan to do the cooler thing, the printed body on a performance rolling chassis. It'll probably be looking at them again in a few years.

Comment: Re:Not just slashdot. (Score 1) 128

The problem is, it looks like they're trying to sell it as a car, when it's really just another glorified golfcarts.

It's funny that you mentioned Florida, since that's where I am at the moment. I'm only quoting parts of the laws, so this doesn't become a huge message. You can follow the links to read the rest of the statute and other relevant statutes if you want.

Golf carts can only drive on roads in certain communities and only in certain circumstances.
See Florida Statute 316.212

316.212 Operation of golf carts on certain roadways.â"The operation of a golf cart upon the public roads or streets of this state is prohibited except as provided herein:

The "Local Motors" vehicles would appear to be classified in Florida as LSV (Low Speed Vehicles). They're covered by Florida Statute 316.2122

316.2122 Operation of a low-speed vehicle or mini truck on certain roadways.â"The operation of a low-speed vehicle as defined in s. 320.01 or a mini truck as defined in s. 320.01 on any road is authorized with the following restrictions:
(1)âfA low-speed vehicle or mini truck may be operated only on streets where the posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour or less. This does not prohibit a low-speed vehicle or mini truck from crossing a road or street at an intersection where the road or street has a posted speed limit of more than 35 miles per hour.

The UTV is classified here as an ATV (All Terrain Vehicle), and covered by Florida Statute 316.2074.

316.2074(5) Except as provided in this section, an all-terrain vehicle may not be operated upon the public roads, streets, or highways of this state, except as otherwise permitted by the managing state or federal agency.

That's not to say people don't drive them on the road. I've seen them do it. They're breaking the law, and if the police are so inclined, they will be more than happy to give you a stack of tickets.

I've seen both golfcarts and various designs of ATVs used in a lot of places. A agree, they are popular for both industry and off-road applications. But with them implying it's a car it's a problem.

Honestly, it wouldn't be safe to drive any real distance in most metro areas in Florida, if it is accepted for road use as a LSV.

For example, I can't think of any routes that you could safely use to get from downtown Tampa to downtown St. Petersburg. You can't cross any of the bridges in that car, because they don't go fast enough. It would be virtually impossible to even find a route where you wouldn't be under the speed limit and significantly under the average speed.

Even downtown St. Petersburg to downtown Clearwater would be risky at best.

"Consequences, Schmonsequences, as long as I'm rich." -- "Ali Baba Bunny" [1957, Chuck Jones]