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


Forgot your password?
Take advantage of Black Friday with 15% off sitewide with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" on Slashdot Deals (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment Re:time to skip (Score 1) 208

There is a trade off in photography where you either go for image stabilization or a faster lens. Google chose the faster lens which I very much prefer as a photographer.

No, there isn't any tradeoff. Not sure who is feeding you this junk. I have been using OIS lenses since 1997 (Canon ES-970, first consumer camcorder with OIS has f/1.8 lens, faster than Nexus 5x and Nexus 6P). You can have both. When subject is moving, you need fast lens. When subject is steady and you don't have tripod, you need image stabilization. OIS can give you 3-5 stops advantage while new Nexus lenses are only 1/2 stop faster than 2 year old Nexus 5.

Comment Summary (Score 2) 81

==> I hate tech and you should too.

Seriously, this is one of the worst editorial ever. Some real gems:

-- "It is unclear how much pressure these government bodies can impose on companies like Microsoft when they are so dependent on the company’s products."
By this logic, Boeing, GE, .... are not regulated either.

-- "In December, Lei Wu, the top internet minister in China, met with Zuckerberg, Tim Cook, and Jeff Bezos at their corporate offices."
Should Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg tell them not to meet them? What does the author expect here from tech CEOs?

-- "There is a clear desire by many technology companies to create products that consumers can use regardless of the type of platform they have chosen."
Is there a problem here?

-- "These emails showed that attempts to hire an employee away from another company in the collective would be a career-ending move by the person responsible."
Are these illegal activities limited to tech companies only? What about the whole financial industry? Tech or no tech, almost all giants corporations have paid heavy fines. Just yesterday, GM accepted guilt for ignition switch and paid 900 million fine (this is in addition to billions paid for civil lawsuits). ... I can go on an on....

Comment Seems too late for fusion now (Score 1) 399

Fusion has always promised too much and delivered nothing. In the past, when there was no other alternative, fusion received lots of attention, but now it is studied more like a pure science which may or may not have any practical application. India recently accepted proposal from private party to build solar plant which will supply electricity at 7.5 cents/kWH. This is way cheaper than building any fusion plant based on current science (assuming the technology will work flawlessly).

The only place where solar won't work are high latitude places but even Germany has strong solar program. Number of people leaving beyond this latitude is very small and they can easily be served using bio-fuel/wind/hydro.

So considering alternatives today, fusion is stillborn and nuclear is on deathbed, solar is a teenager and hydro is a matured adult. Fossil fuel is a dark side to be defeated.

Comment Re:Hmm... (Score 1) 33

Over its lifetime, Indian citizens have got less per capita aid than citizens of Europe, South America, and Africa continents. Even within Asia, it has received far lesser than an average and definitely way to less than Japan, middle east and east Asia nations. Last 4 year average is about USD 2.5 per person per year. Out of this, about 70% is a loan, which means that grant is only a 75 cents per person per year. If you are a US citizen, your out of pocket cost for grant to India is about nine cents (USA provided about 30 million grant in 2012) a year.

Do you think everything nice happening in India is from 30 million dollar US grant? Indian economy is USD 2 trillion for reference.

Comment Not as easy (Score 4, Insightful) 654

Once people have invested in buying car and already paying for gas, registration and depreciation, they feel like using it. The extra convenience exceeds the marginal cost. So if you make public transport free, the existing car users will continue to use cars, but the sale of new cars will decline. This will take time to show up in ridership statistics. Instead of measuring the ridership of public transport, the city should monitor registration of new cars (old cars registration should not be counted). That trend is a better indicator of long term success.

Another important factor is convenience. How good is the public transport? In my city in USA, public transport is pathetic. It stops at 7 pm on weekdays and no service on Sunday. Long distance (> 10 mile) stop after 9:00 am and do not restart till 4:00 pm. It means that I have to have a car and once I have a car, the marginal cost of operating car is same as the cost of public transport, so obviously I use car.

-- Does public perceive this free public transport continue to be free in future as well?
-- Is it good enough to completely get rid of the car?

If both of the above are 'yes', then it should show up in the new car registration statistics.

Comment Recharge seems to be bottleneck (Score 1) 132

Note that the paper says the capacity 1.8x at the beginning and 1.5x after 200 cycles. The smart phone batteries are rated at least 1000 cycles. Not sure what is the capacity after 1000th cycle. Until there are some numbers showing superior value at 1000th cycle, it will be hard to commercialize.

Comment Re:why not crack down on the rioting protesters? (Score 5, Insightful) 177

When I was small, some private company wanted to start bus service in my city, but government struck down the proposal. The government buses serve non-profitable and profitable areas. They make profit in one area and subsidize another. Private player would only operate in profitable area causing either a loss or winding down operation in non-profitable area.

Case with Uber is similar. Registered taxi services have to carry passengers at pre-determined rate. Sometimes it is not profitable specially if a customer stays in area from which you don't easily get return passengers. This gets compensated when you customer and return as well. With Uber, they will charge more or less based on the analytics and eventually registered taxi drivers would lend up serving less profitable areas and more profitable routes will be undercut by Uber. If Uber is allowed, it should have the exact same requirements: Publish fare, must take customers at this rate irrespective of where you want to go and should take passengers strictly in the order in which requests are incoming. Otherwise, it is giving unfair advantage to Uber over taxi service.

Comment Are you swayed by the article? (Score 2) 110

I read the article and I am not at all convinced against Apple music. After all during free trial, who cares if I miss few artists. It is not that all of sudden all my other way of listening going to disappear. None of the problems mentioned in the article are bottleneck.

I don't use any paid streaming service as of now, but I am considering either Spotify and Apple music. But my decision will not have any bearings to whatever nonsense is there in the article.

Comment more integration (Score 1) 351

Mozilla should also integrate facebook, twitter, gmail, yahoo mail, outlook, pandora, itune..... etc. After all we all users like tight integration, don't we? I am sure this partners can provide minimal client side software under MPLv2.

Seriously, Mozilla should pull this out immediately. It can maintain a site for recommended extensions but should not directly integrate it.

Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.