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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:How does one tell the difference? (Score 1, Troll) 103 103

I decided to log in for this one.

OP asked a question. You obviously do not know the answer because you just made a stupid, insulting reply. Perhaps if you don't know the answer, don't reply. I don't know the answer either, but would be interested in knowing the answer as well and would have asked the question had the AC not already asked. But instead of an answer you just shit all over it and are apparently offended that it got asked. Get over yourself and realize that some people aren't afraid to ask questions when they are ignorant... you might want to try it.

Comment Re:Here's a better idea (Score 1) 678 678

why don't we reserved all the residential usage and some quota for criticalinfrastructure. Agriculture and mining users can bid to use the surface and underground water - after general public has their fair share of water usage.

Free market at its best. Let them pay for the water they reap profit from.

Comment Re:BASICally my reply is... (Score 1) 259 259

Sorry, your argument still does not convince me that learning foreign is not a good thing. Learning languages are suppose to be difficult and the two years in HS only get someone an intro more than anything else. But honestly, with very little curriculum we are now providing students to learn what else can provide an positive learning experience besides keeping foreign language. It is not like students today will be picking up more rigorous science classes in-liu of the foreign language requirements.

If we drop two years of foreign language I expect ALL students to complete physics, biology, chemistry, and one advanced science course, plus a requirement to complete Calculus before graduating HS.

Sounds impossible or unrealistic? Yeah I think so too. Better keep the foreign language requirement then.

Comment Re:Mechanical stability? (Score 1) 34 34

In short, packaging would be a lot more expensive, unless they figure out a way to get volumes out of this one

Getting volumes out is exactly what the manufacturing engineering will be doing, and usually involves a bigger slice of wafer to increase yield.

Comment Re:Hold on (Score 3, Interesting) 188 188

Now that I think about it, if Philae did not bounce off of the comet, then the screws must be doing their job and I would think the harpoons might not be needed at all. I would assume the harpoons were in the plans because the engineers couldn't be sure the screws would work on the surface of a comet.

Comment Re:Hold on (Score 1) 188 188

My understanding is that the harpoons were one of two ways that ESA was going to secure the probe to the comet. There were also screws that were supposed to attach the legs to the surface. So if they can still fire the harpoons they ought not have an issue with Philae flying off into space, but does anyone with more information on the relative strength of each? And if the harpoons could not be fired... what is the real risk of the probe shifting? I mean what would cause it to shift in the first place once settled on the comet?

"Kill the Wabbit, Kill the Wabbit, Kill the Wabbit!" -- Looney Tunes, "What's Opera Doc?" (1957, Chuck Jones)

Working...