Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Re:iFixit is NOT unbiased (Score 1) 242

You are missing the point. When faced with a broken device and a very high Apple repair bill (have you see how much they charge for things like new keyboards, screens and batteries?) many people will just throw the device away and buy a new one.

Only if they are stupid. Instead of throwing the device away and buying a new one, they can return the broken device to Apple for an "out of warranty repair", which means Apple takes the old device and hands over a "refurbished" device, which in practice often is brand new. The price is usually about half the price of a brand new device.

Comment Re:Let them lease, but not screw with sales (Score 1) 242

When companies can claim copyright on screws, and use the DMCA to claim you can't refill your ink cartridges ... you're damned right the legal system needs fixing.

Lexmark tried that stunt with ink cartridges, and they got their legal ass handed to them. Because they didn't actually bother reading the DMCA. DMCA is supposed to prevent illegal copying of copyrighted software, and no such thing happens when you refill your ink cartridge. No copying, no DMCA.

Comment Re:Insufficient safety margin (Score 1) 366

Apparently the idiots that write these programs thought, hey, we don't need to use a reasonable Factor of Safety. They calculated they needed 93.1 units of thrust, but failed only 88.4. That means their Safety Factor was less than 1.12

They didn't actually fail. The tail touched the ground. Someone noticed the noise, some sensor went off, but otherwise the airplane was absolutely fine.

Comment Re:Data data everywhere and not a drop to think (Score 1) 366

They make airplane sized scales...perhaps just build them into the taxiway and have a wireless communications to the plane of the weight.

How many times has the total weight been entered completely right? Do you think you can make the system that you propose work with a lower failure rate? Good luck.

Comment If it was a fake... (Score 1) 39

... then you can be 100 percent sure that there wouldn't be a flag fluttering in the wind. "Hey boss, I checked the film, and the wind is making the flag move". "Don't worry, nobody will notice". Really? What kind of idiot do you have to be to believe that could happen? If there was a flag moving in the wind, the recording would have been repeated.

Comment Re:He's got his talking points (Score 1) 478

if he didnt see it as a threat, he would ignore it like all the other devices that compete.

Strange enough, half the Apple haters complain that Cook is an arrogant bastard because he tells the world what he thinks of this "surface book", and the other half claims that he must be afraid.

Comment About that prime sequence... (Score 1) 189

If you check the sum of digits, you find that five out of every six consecutive numbers are divisible by 2 or 3, and only one isn't. Normally two out of six numbers are not divisible by 2 or 3. That means these numbers are only half as likely as your average random number to be primes.

Normally, the probability that a random integer n is a prime number is about 1 / ln n. The probability that a random n digit number is a prime is about 1 / 2.3n. With these numbers, it is about 1 / 4.6n.

We can estimate the number of primes that we should find while adding all (0.9 * 10^k) k-digit numbers, ending with a number of (k - 1/9) * 10^9 digits: That estimate is about 0.5 + (1 / 4.6) / (k - 10/9). That's about 0.5444 for six digit numbers added, about 0.5369 for seven digit numbers, about 0.5315 for eight digit numbers. Hoping for a solution within the first million numbers is optimistic.

Comment Re:"It has to be perfect before it'll work" (Score 1) 258

" that can figure out where it is even if it has no map or GPS" ... OK, I'm going to drop you off in the middle of Kentucky mountain area with no GPS and no map, leave you stranded with noone to talk to and you should just magically know where you are.... sorry but NO. Unless I had been there before (i.e. prior knowledge or.... mapping) I will have no clue where I am and will have to basically start driving in one direction (which these cars can do) until I figure out where I am.

Note that a self-driven car will almost always have GPS and now its exact location. It will just sometimes not have an accurate map of the area directly around it. Both self driven car and car driven by me will proceed to the nearest road, then make a guess which direction to turn. The difference is that the self driven care will always know where it is and what direction it is going. It can't get lost. If it returns to a place where it was before it can take that into account.

Comment Re:That's nothing (Score 1) 258

Agree. People keep bringing up this scenario, but it really is very unrealistic. If you are travelling at motorway speeds, then why is there a crowd of people near the motorway?

I was told by British police that four percent of road deaths happen on the motorway (which makes it the safest place to drive by far). Of these four percent, 20% are pedestrians. Which makes the motorway an awfully dangerous place for pedestrians.

Comment Re:That's nothing (Score 1) 258

The issue is, human drivers have a strong instinct of self-preservation. Someone who has to decide between the parade and the tree in a split second will probably avoid the tree out of sheer instinct.

Actually, the most likely thing that person would do is nothing (and the car goes wherever it goes). The second most likely thing is that the person avoids whatever is happening without action. If the car aims at people, that's the immediate danger and the driver will try to avoid that without thinking about the secondary danger of killing himself. If the car aims at the tree, that's the immediate danger and the driver will try to avoid that without thinking about the secondary danger of killing many others.

Comment Re:That's nothing (Score 1) 258

The real test of artificial intelligence will come when the self-driving vehicle will have to decide between plowing into a crowd of people to protect the driver, and smashing into a tree to protect the crowd of people - but killing the driver, when the accident is inevitable.

The real test of driver intelligence and ethics will come when the driver of a human-driven vehicle will have to decide between plowing into a crowd of people to protect himsel, and smashing into a tree to protect the crowd of people but killing himself, when the accident is inevitable.

On the other hand, if you as the driver ever allow such a situation to arise, and you plow into the crowd, you'll hopefully go to jail for a very long time.

Comment Re:reality (Score 1) 576

If that post above does't make sense, it's Slashdot rubbish treatmen of ordinary text.

So one of these clever guys says that checking whether a + b lessthan a does not correctly find all unsigned integer overflows, because of integer promotions. Dead wrong. If there are integer promotions, then there is no overflow. So a + b lessthan a is pointless because it is always false, but it _does_ correctly find all overflows. Even when there aren't any.

And fuck slashdot with its stupid ass "slow down cowboy" shit that doesn't let you post of correction of a post that was messed up by slashdot.

Comment Re:reality (Score 1) 576

And Linus is right, while Hannes and Rasmus are dead wrong.

One of these clever guys says that checking whether a + b
Then they say that these macros allow to fix problems without any thinking. Dead wrong. Without thinking, every time you use these macros there is a 50% or greater chance to introduce a bug. On the other hand, if you check on theregister for Linus' replacement code, it is simple, trivial, and obviously correct.

An obvious sign of the brain damage involved is someone figuring out that they need a result of at least 8, and instead of checking "if (x 8)" they check "if (x = 7)".

Comment Re:Blame GCC (Score 1) 576

There were the very widespread Motorola 68k processors, used in Macs, Atari and Amiga computers for many years, where a signed integer addition overflow definitely invoked undefined behaviour.

Take "if (a + b > 0) { ... }". You seem to be someone who thinks nothing could go wrong. On these processors, an integer addition set the condition flags according to the mathematical result of the operation, ignoring overflow. So "if (MAX_INT + 1 > 0)" would produce a true condition. But store the result of MAX_INT + 1 and compare the stored result with 0, and it's false because there was an overflow, giving a negative result.

The trouble with being poor is that it takes up all your time.