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


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 25% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY25". ×

Comment Re:If you're American (Score 1) 197

Contrast that with the 70s, 80s and 90s where apart from an oil scare and a dip when manufacturing moved overseas things were mostly on the up and up.

You've got some serious selection bias going on. 70's - massive racial unrest over injustice, much worse than today, 80's drugs and gang related crime - much worse than it is today, 90's - just the beginning of the downward trend of the bad things that we're seeing even less of now. Since the 80's the average percentage of the household budget spent on food has gone from 17% to 11%. In the 50's it was 30% and in 1900 it was 45%.

Comment Re:not just carbon, but middle east peace (Score 1) 346

Build a thousand SMRs and get oil down to $21 a barrel. The Sultans and power that be in the middle east will go broke. They will be back to throwing rocks at each other. Stop letting them out, make them deal with their own population explosion. The world would be so much more peaceful.

Not really. Lots of reactors would drive coal out of business, maybe. Oil is used for transportation and manufacturing things like plastic and asphalt. Less than 1% of the US power grid is supplied by oil. Even if we developed electric vehicles and switched over the sweet crude from the middle east would still be valuable for making plastics and other uses.

Comment Re:zealots ^2 (Score 1) 244

I have never heard of protesters forming into opposing mobs and attacking eachother being a common problem. I think what you are thinking of is sporting events.

True, this is Europe. From my experience, European protests are usually broken up into three marches. One of the marches is left wing and one is for the right wing so they can both have their say and not deal with each other. The third one is for those that just want to engage in street fights with the police.

Comment Re: No one ever lost their job for choosing Micros (Score 1) 358

Only at incompetent companies.

If the CIO is making a decision on the OS to use, then get the hell out of that place now.

Well, companies have to make money, and that means doing their job and doing it better than the other guy. It's not that some top level management says, "We will use Windows 10!" but that in order to fulfill the business requirements and get a decent ROI, they will have to run certain software. That software will have to perform certain functions and will have dependencies, especially if coming from a vendor since most software is not written in house. Out of that, they're going to have to go with the most common denominator of an OS (sometime least common denominator) which will most likely eventually be Win10 because any other choice would cost more money that it would save.

But don't worry, I suspect that enterprise will be able to get out of a lot of the things we don't like about Win10 such as the spyware. There are simply too many legalities that MS would be susceptible to if there wasn't from things like SEC rules and HIPAA laws. Of course, the solution for such will be as it is with even many simple things that should be a check box for home users, "Go set up a group policy in your Active Domain".

Comment Re:Did the moon form after the earth? (Score 1) 96

How do they know the earth was first fully formed and only then collided with something large causing the moon to form? I can imagine it was a bit of a jumble at the time but this claim seems a bit arbitrary. Why the need for a collision with something large? Was it something larger than the moon?

It comes basically from the various theories on the formation of the moon. It could have been created in place, spun off of the earth, captured while it passed by, the result of a collision with another object, etc. So there were lots of different theories, and then there was the actual evidence dealing with the chemical make up of the moon, the orbital mechanics, the conservation of angular momentum, etc. Some theories were better than others and explaining the various facts. Some were much worse than the others at explaining the observed facts. In the late 90's, computer simulation of an object hitting the photo-earth and then forming into the current earth and moon because possible and showed that it was possible. That theory then jumped to the head of the line as it at least came in with a C grade (this was in the college physics presentation I attended in the early 90's on the topic) in the various criteria where other theories all still had D and F grades in some of them. It showed that the collision could have resulted in the proto-earth capturing the other objects iron core to explain our large core and the moon's lack of similar amount, the general chemical composition of both, etc etc. So far it seems the theory continues to get stronger. From last I heard, current theory is that two "moons" formed in orbit, and a smaller one eventually collided with the larger and formed the far mountainous side in a fairly non-energetic collision. that was to explain some of the differences between the near and far sides of the moon as well as asymmetric features of the moon. I haven't read this article, but it sounds like this might be an alternate theory to explain similar things. Eventually the theories will continue to get refined till we have a fairly good idea of how it all happened.

Comment Re:Jar Jar Binks (Score 1) 424

... but Christensen was awful; wooden most of the time, delivering his lines like a Speak-and-Spell, and then finding the magic way to be wooden AND over-emotive in other scenes. It's little wonder he's done so little work since the Prequels. He's just unbearable.

Yes, but he does an excellent job of sounding just like an awkward teenager that just found out he has knocked up his girlfriend.

Comment Re:NYC taxi system could DESTROY uber (Score 1) 210

In the case of a taxi however, even if they're using a taxi app, there is no guarantee that they're coming to pick you up, because someone else could flag them on the way, they may get a more attractive offer of someone needing a ride to the airport That is nonsense. Legally questionable, and what taxi business would allow that?

Seattle's Orange Cab from my experience.

Comment Re:much more effective to go after the money (Score 1) 275

That would indeed be one way to terminate the organization. ISIS funds itself largely via its oil and gas business. Make these operations impossible for them.

While they do make a lot of money from oil and gas, before they held land, they still made plenty of money through protection. Much the money coming from Saudi Arabia and other countries is not coming from idealogical supporters but from protection rackets extorting money under threat of harm. Economically, they are essentially the mafia who has founded their own country but is still operating in all the surrounding countries.

Comment Re:2095 with Luck (Score 1) 285

The thing that amazes me is those that picked before 2035. Even if the decision was taken today to have someone walking on mars only a short term suicide mission could be achieved by 2035, something I doubt any government would commit 10's of billions of dollars too.

No government is going to go that route, and no private institution will either. The idea of making things cheap and easy by making a Mars trip one way is just a way to trick people into believing it will make it cheap enough to be possible. Once all the problems to getting a person to Mars and on the ground walking around have been dealt with, getting them back isn't quite trivial, but will be easy enough to tack on as to make no difference.

Comment 2095 with Luck (Score 1) 285

I've through about it and even asked in the various interviews here on /. about the subject, and I'm of the opinion that given Apollo level funding and political support, we could be on Mars in 30 years. Ten years to design, build, and test a deep space habitat that will protect from radiation and not leak so much atmosphere that it wouldn't make a three year long journey. Another ten years to test the new version and in service, probably in a long term, year long, trip to the moon. Then a final version that could go to Mars with chance of success. No way we're getting political will for a Mars mission in the next 5 years, so certainly not by 2050. I said between 2080 and 2095 just because I want to be optimistic, but realistically, probably after 2095 when the degree of work it takes for us to get to Mars is in line with what it takes to send a probe now.

Comment Re:Learn to walk before you run... (Score 1) 285

You don't think trying to create an ecology on Mars (even without terraforming, building some kind of self-sustaining "biodome" there) would teach us valuable lessons that could help us here on Earth?

Why does one have to come before the other? Working on both problems in parallel can provide scientific boons shared across both.

I think he's saying that if we can't create one here, then there is no chance in hell of being able to create on there where things will be orders of magnitude harder and no chance for any fixes in a reasonable time. Saying otherwise would be like saying "We can't get a ship into orbit, so we're going to go straight to the moon."

Comment Re:Major Fail Update (Score 1) 181

True, but IT will hope, and hope springs eternal.

Business really. Business just wants what they have and they want it to work till they decide it doesn't. They really don't like external vendors telling them they must upgrade at a cost to their business. However, every time there is a bug fix in vendor software, it is in an upgrade that has new features with new bugs because the vendors are in a feature war with their competition over new customers and it would cost them too much to maintain a stable version as well as a version with new features.

Comment Re:Austin? (Score 1) 464

And that's bad because ...?

Well, as Chicago is cold, Texas is hot. It also gets cold, and then there are the tornados. I do miss the thunderstorms though. The chances of getting into a fight simply due to male macho bullshit posturing are much greater in Texas than most of the rest of the country. If you look weird, are weird, or deviate from the WASP norm in any way, this greatly increases your chances of getting into such a fight. One of the reasons Austin gets many of the people that live there is because it is the tolerant part of Texas. Then, it's one big FLAT landscape*. If you're used to mountains and forests, Texas probably isn't for you. Even the ocean experience may leave you wanting. It is very much a car and truck culture, even in the large cities. Expect to always drive everywhere for everything because nothing is in walking distance and there is no mass transit (as compared with the cities this article is contrasting to). Then there is the general southern conservative racist culture that Texas is known for. There are plenty of good people and you'll find people you like, but you'll also have to put up with everybody else.

*OK, I haven't been to Austin. My transmission blew out on my one trip there for SXSW and I never made it. I spent most my time in Dallas and Houston. And for full disclosure, I left 20 years ago.

All Finagle Laws may be bypassed by learning the simple art of doing without thinking.