Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re: Without government... (Score 0) 471

But the Netherlands is a pretty regulated country

Not it is not. It is an overly regulated country. On the other hand, "country" is a bit overrated for this little dent in Germany.

Which reminds me of what an old preacher once said: "and as a finishing touch, God took a huge crap and created the Dutch".

Comment Re:The engineers knew what was happening (Score 1) 618

Bonuses? For engineers? Must be a German thing; we don't have anything like that in America these days. Those days ended with the dot-com implosion.

You'r either in the wrong line of work or working for the wrong company. I had my Q1 and Q2 bonuses paid out at 115% and 125% after surpassing company expectations.

Comment Re:The engineers knew what was happening (Score 1) 618

Management may have ordered the crime but the engineers were the ones that carried it out.

How about management did not order anything? How about engineers were trying to keep the engine within EPA standards so they would receive their bonuses? Not a single manager would need to know this if a small group of engineers (two, maybe three) decided to conspire in order to make their bonus targets.

Not all managers are bad, and it only takes a few rogue engineers to insert something like this. If an engineer is skilled enough to cheat on stuff like this, he or she is probably skilled enough to obscure the evidence and hide it from peers or co-workers.

And don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming anyone. All I'm saying is that I read a lot of armchair investigation here, from people who don't know the facts. At this time everything is possible, from a direct order from the CEO, to a rogue engineer.

Comment Re:Uh, okay (Score 1) 142

I believe it was the NYT (but it could have been the WSJ or one of those other big pappers) was sued in Melbourne, Australia for defemation (or libel, I forget and can't be bothered Googling) for making statements about an Australian man. They successfully argued jurisdiction due to having Australian digital subscribers.

That may be fine on the island of prisoners, but that doesn't make any judgment enforcable in the U.S.

I hate jurisdiction shopping, but I do think that the laws of where you live/are incorporated probably should apply as much as the ones where the person committing the act is.

Which in this case both are in the U.S.

Submission + - We're looking for ET all wrong

StartsWithABang writes: When you consider that there are definitely millions of planets in the habitable zones of their stars within our Milky Way galaxy alone, the possibility that there’s intelligent life on at least one of them, right now, is tantalizing. But we’re in our technological infancy, relatively speaking, having only been broadcasting electromagnetic signatures visible by an alien civilization for around 80 years. Unsurprisingly, we’re looking for exactly the types of signals we’re capable of sending, but what if that’s totally wrongheaded? Based on how technology is evolving and what the Universe is capable of, perhaps we should be looking not at electromagnetic radiation, but neutrino or gravitational wave signals from the distant Universe to search for alien civilizations.

Comment Re:Uh, okay (Score 5, Informative) 142

and one of those is Canada, where AM is based, and where this lawsuit is being filed. In America, the truth is an absolute defense against libel. Under Canadian Defamation Law, it is not.

First, no lawsuit is being filed. A lawyer just sent a warning letter.

Second, Canadian Defamation Laws do not apply to a U.S. newspaper. So why should they apply to a U.S. journalist, writing on a website written in and hosted in the U.S. by a U.S. company (Akamai)?

Third, even if the idiot can get a Canadian judgement against the U.S. person, that judgement must first go through the U.S. court system in order to be enforceable.

So, all in all, the guy can scream whatever he wants, but all he is achieving is invoking the Streisand Effect.

Submission + - "The Alternative" Puts the Brakes on Bullets Fired From Police Sidearms (gizmag.com)

Zothecula writes: Aiming for a leg or shooting a weapon from a criminal's hands may be an option for cops in the movies, but real police officers are trained to shoot for the center of mass, not necessarily to kill, but to stop – although the end result can often be one and the same. "The Alternative" is designed to give officers a less lethal option in the form of a clip-on "air bag" for semiautomatic pistols that reduces the velocity of a standard round to make it less lethal.

Comment Re:Cry me a river (Score 1) 192

Actually, I cannot conceive of any situation in which I'd want drones to fly over my property, whether loitering or whizzing.

Well, it doesn't really matter what you want. It has been established by the courts that you don't control the airspace above 83 feet of altitude. Here is a reference for that: https://supreme.justia.com/cas...

Furthermore, this AB and other State's laws, are preempted by the federal law mandating the FAA to control all airspace from 83ft and higher. Here is a reference for that: http://www.americanbar.org/con...

So, as long as the UAV operator has been certified by the FAA, it looks like you will have to tolerate unmanned (or manned, for that matter) aircraft hovering over your property at and above altitudes of 83ft AGL.

Comment Re:They just don't want to get sued (Score 1) 264

most Arabs are already prevented from entering the US

Fixed that for you. Not all Arabs are Muslims, as not all Muslims are Arabs. At the same time, all they need to do is undergo a little bit of additional screening and get a redress number. It's not that bad.

For what it's worth, I voluntarily accepted additional pre-screening and am now a member of Global Entry and TSA Pre, and it only makes my life easier. It saves a lot of time when entering the US, or passing airport security. It saves the CBP and TSA a lot of time, knowing that I'm a low threat to security. And the information I had to give up was no more or less than what I already provide on a international flight to the U.S. anyway. Oh, except the fingerprints, but they government already had them (which is also true for most Arabs, as they at least once applied for a U.S. visa).

In fact, if the U.S. embassy would just add a little option to the visa application that said:

[ ] Send all information to the TSA and CBP for expedited services.

A lot of problems would have been solved. DHS handles visas anyway, and CBP and TSA are both subdivisions.

Comment Re:Rocketry pierces both these levels all the time (Score 1) 142

No you don't. It would take you an hour or more to read them all for many flights, maybe more.

Perhaps you need to learn how to select NOTAMs.

This is a list of the current NOTAMs for a simple flight from Dallas to Austin. There is zero chance that you read all that before such a flight.

I do, and you can easily skip 80% of those based on the first few characters. There were only a few relevant ones in your long list, mostly crane obstacles.

For my VFR flight, I don't care about lights being U/S, SID/STAR issues etc, so I skip reading the entire NOTAM as soon as I see the subject. But that does not mean I don't check the NOTAM for relevance to my flight. I know a guy who flew right into a presidential TFR, and shit like that won't happen to me if I can avoid it.

Saliva causes cancer, but only if swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time. -- George Carlin