Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Polls on the front page of Slashdot? Is the world coming to an end?! Nope; read more about it. ×

Comment: Re:This is a great example. (Score 1) 66

by Rei (#49828835) Attached to: Mystery Company Blazes a Trail In Fusion Energy

Well.... any long-term confined high temperature isotropic quasi-neutral maxwellian plasma has to be large. Of course, if you start changing those requirements, you start changing the required size for your reactor. It's not theoretically impossible to have a viable fusion power plant that does not follow those constraints; the challenge is achieving it without either imposing a new, even more onerous series of challenges on yourself. Drop the concept of long-term confinement (for example, inertial confinement) and you find yourself with incredibly extreme compression challenges and having to deal with blowing your target apart on every fire. Don't use a quasi-neutral plasma and the plasma density drops by orders of magnitude, meaning your fusion rate drops so low that even little losses in the system will kill the concept. Don't use a maxwellian plasma and you have to find a way to hold the plasma away from thermalization without wasting more energy than the fusion yield, which is impossible by simply applying energy to part or all of the plasma - it's only even theoretically possible if you accelerate only the highest energy ions, creating a plasma only slightly skewed from a thermal distribution, and even if you have such a means, it's not easy. And so forth. You can remove constraints on fusion but then you get hit by others.

Unlike many here, I don't see it as an impossible problem simply because it hasn't been made economical yet despite decades of work. Because in those decades of work there's been orders of magnitude improvement, and I don't see those improvements just suddenly ceasing across every line of research. But no question, this is a Difficult Problem(TM).

Comment: I can also do it with a single cable. (Score 1) 78

by Lumpy (#49828829) Attached to: 100kb of Unusual Code Protecting Nuclear, ATC and United Nations Systems

We used to use unidirectional ethernet cables. Basically the TX wires clipped out on the receiving end to the less secure network. You do need ethernet cards you can set to accept a link without having a full handshake going.

But it allowed us to set up the SCADA network to take the data stream we needed to get to the collection and reporting pc and UDP broadcast it. then the PC that can only receive set up to listen for and receive it, works great and is 100% hacker proof as hackers have yet to write code that can cause copper to grow back in a CAT-5e cable.

Now if we could keep the N00b SCADA programmers from bringing in their crap-tastic home laptops for programming changes and becoming the largest infection vector.

Comment: Re:Ejectrode? (Score 1) 222

by drinkypoo (#49827797) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Your Most Unusual Hardware Hack?

Now I have one of those flippy-key things like the VW and MB owners have, and saved about $35,000 on the car.

That's on my list of things to do for my Audi. Apparently the system has support for fobs, and I have instructions for coding them, but I don't actually have any fobs. So I have to go through the same process. It's an old car though, so it wasn't expensive either... just leaky.

The mechanics I've talked to say pretty much all the 4.2 liter Audis they've seen have been leaky... story of my life with bored-out versions. The 7.3 Ford is the same way.

Comment: Re:Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes (Score 1) 224

by drinkypoo (#49827443) Attached to: Microsoft To Support SSH In Windows and Contribute To OpenSSH

This doesn't compete with PuTTY, probably: odds are it will be a console-mode ssh binary just like what cygwin users have already but without a dependency on cygwin, and a server just like what cygwin users have already but with NT auth (incl. AD) rather than /etc/passwd authentication which maps to local SIDs. PuTTY does have a command-line client, but nobody is paying for that. They're paying (if they pay at all) for the interface.

Comment: Re:Cygwin (Score 1) 224

by drinkypoo (#49827433) Attached to: Microsoft To Support SSH In Windows and Contribute To OpenSSH

No. Cygwin runs everything under one process.


windows$ ps -aef
cyg_serv 2588 1 ? May 29 /usr/bin/cygrunsrv
cyg_serv 2672 2588 ? May 29 /usr/sbin/sshd
cyg_serv 7016 2672 ? 18:46:49 /usr/sbin/sshd
  user 8108 7016 pty0 18:46:52 /usr/bin/bash
  user 6536 8108 pty0 18:46:58 /usr/bin/ps
debian$ ps -aef | egrep '(sshd|bash)'
root 13792 1 0 Apr24 ? 00:00:06 /usr/sbin/sshd
root 19995 13792 0 18:48 ? 00:00:00 sshd: user [priv]
user 19997 19995 0 18:48 ? 00:00:00 sshd: user@pts/0
user 19998 19997 0 18:48 pts/0 00:00:00 -bash
user 20131 19998 0 18:50 pts/0 00:00:00 egrep (sshd|bash)

So uh, what's the difference? Looks like all cygwin is missing is proper authentication. AFAIK it maps UIDs to SIDs, but yes, is missing AD support.

Comment: Re:excellent (Score 1) 224

by drinkypoo (#49827385) Attached to: Microsoft To Support SSH In Windows and Contribute To OpenSSH

now you can use Windows computers the way they were meant to be used, as dummy linux clients

I've been doing that for so long I've actually given Chameleon money (for Xoftware.) No, wait. Except the last time I actually wanted to do it was years ago, because it's been years since I had any Unix-specific machines. Now it's just PC Unix. I just threw away my last Unix machines, a POWER1 and an Indy R4400SC@200MHz. It wasn't worth dusting them off.

Comment: Re:Odd thoughts: (Score 0, Flamebait) 224

by drinkypoo (#49827355) Attached to: Microsoft To Support SSH In Windows and Contribute To OpenSSH

Well, when you're typing out Unix commands on an teletype that's 80 characters wide, creating short options first made a lot of sense.

When you're typing, period, creating short options first makes a lot of sense. Powershell is a shell which is apparently not designed to be used by typing. Too bad it has a typing interface.

Comment: Re:Quality of thought from nuclear playboys (Score 1) 153

by drinkypoo (#49827327) Attached to: Cool Tool: The Nuclear Fuel Cycle Cost Calculator

The reason the US has a nuclear waste issue is that the government won't allow reprocessing.

Yeah, France still has a nuclear waste issue, and they do reprocess.

If you are unwilling to learn about nuclear physics and understand the issues,

No need to apprehend nuclear physics to understand that humans are fallible and corruptible.

Make headway at work. Continue to let things deteriorate at home.