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


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - 6 month subscription of Pandora One at 46% off. ×

Comment Re:What does "gets their first mean" (Score 1) 239

Send out space drones to plant your flag or establish first physical visits. Yeah, probably not the best system, as I can see a few early squatters, or maybe only one entity, claiming everything worth claiming. We can do better. A USA/NASA/Boeing/Microsoft/Northrop partnership or a Chinese effort in the vein of the Apollo program could do that quickly and lead to a two horse race or complete domination by one side, but I don't think that would be in the best interest of humanity and Earth.

Comment NOT whoever gets there first (Score 1) 239

I say NOT whoever simply gets there first. We don't want to encourage anyone to simply create a fleet of space drones to take cybersquatting to new levels. I can imagine an economic titan ramping up to squat on every near-Earth asteroid worth exploiting, and eliminating competition by going all-in on the new land rush. That could have huge consequences for innovation and competition. I don't have the answer just yet for a claim system conducive to expedited progress, but we should hold out for one that doesn't potentially give all of the inconceivably vast resources to one or a few companies or national governments.

Perhaps a global consortium of some sort would be best, as it could lean on the most technologically capable and forward-thinking partners, with the aim of benefiting all of Earth's inhabitants as we begin branch out beyond our home. Or you can make it a free-for-all and let billionaires get much, much richer as a few already huge corporations (or NASA/the USA or and/or PRC) reap all the rewards and dominate asteroid exploration, mining, and exploitation.

Comment Re:Unlikely (Score 1) 221

They have it all wrong. In 15 years, the pinnacle of commercial airplanes won't be shiny, fast and high tech. They will be more like buses or trains: slow, boring, reliable and affordable.

They're already slow, boring and reliable. Where I disagree is that I don't see them getting a whole lot more affordable in 15 years. Fuel and maintenance costs should continue to drop as more old planes are replaced with current and upcoming models but ticket prices have only gone up. People will continue to pay high prices for air travel unless ground travel suddenly becomes a whole lot quicker and we build highways and railroads over large bodies of water. We all seem to hate airlines, but what are you going to do, go Greyhound? Yeah, right. Air travel will continue to be both expensive and popular for the foreseeable future, especially but not only in America. Not every place has a rail system like Western Europe, nor is as compact.

Comment Re:Concorde didn't fail because of tech (Score 2) 221

It failed because the cost of tickets was unsustainable...

The Concorde failed because a tire exploded, it streaked terrifyingly across the Paris sky trailing hundreds of feet of fire, and crashed in a giant fireball, killing everyone. And then the fleet was instantly and irrevocably grounded. The program had its economic issues over the years, but was still in operation nonetheless - until the disaster.

I think you are misremembering history. Concordes were not instantly and irrevocably grounded after the 2000 Paris accident, as some flew well into 2003. Maintenance costs were rising on the old planes and demand sagged after 9/11. The Paris wreck was a heavy blow but it is not what ultimately ended Concorde service. The flight deck of those things was so antiquated by 2003 and they were so inherently crappy to fly that I'm surprised they made it that long. Incredible machines, and a real marvel in their day, but it is not accurate to say that their one and only fatal accident did them in.

And, for the record, the tire only exploded because it had help from debris another plane had left on the runway, and because other factors caused the Concorde to use more of the runway than normal on takeoff. As demanding as it was (long runway requirement, so unique to fly, incredibly thirsty, limited cargo and seating capacity, old, and expensive to maintain) the plane in question was completely airworthy. Decreased demand and increased costs related to security caused a lot of grief in the airline industry after 9/11, and didn't just kill the Concorde.

Comment The race is on? (Score 0) 221

What race is on? The race for funding for a project that requires new and unproven technology, and a ridiculously huge leap of faith, considering the fastest manned military aircraft in history has never even touched Mach 4? Yeah, um, the race is not on. Not yet, and sure as hell not any time soon. This half-assed summary reads like a bullshit Popular Mechanics blurb about someone's pie in the sky dream.

If fares were a modern equivalent of Concorde fares there would certainly be quite a few interested customers, and not just for the novelty of flying at Mach 8 or reaching any major city quicker than I can drive across Ohio. But beginning work soon on a Mach 8 commercial airliner would require skipping several logical and necessary steps, since there is currently no supersonic airliner in use or in the works and no manned military plane (some of the most advanced machines in the world) exceeds Mach 2 by very much. Achieving Mach 8 is no joke, and I can't see rocket propulsion receiving any consideration for a passenger craft.

Comment But (Score 1) 179

But Cyanogen can't even seem to get bluetooth to work properly on my 3 year-old LG Optimus G. The BT MAC address is always an incorrect value, causing major connection and audio streaming issues. I have been a big fan of CM roms for 5-6 years now, but there are too many bugs they can't seem to rectify these days for me to take them completely seriously. This is especially true if they want to do Android without Google.

Good luck to them, but dancing with the devil (and undisputed king of unresolved bugs) doesn't seem like the way to perfect Android, even if it means taking the lead away from Google. This is disappointing, to say the least.

Comment Ellen Pao is an idiot (Score 1) 892

Ellen Pao is either lying about her motivation by attempting to underpay her workforce, or perhaps she is just an idiot. When she says, "Men negotiate harder than women do and sometimes women get penalized when they do negotiate," she is first being sexist, then undermining her own credibility as a policy setter within the company. First off, it is blatantly and horribly sexist to make a ludicrous blanket comment like that when she claims to be striving for equality. To then admit that her underlings might penalize women for negotiating for themselves is an admission of failure.

That, or she is simply looking for an excuse to refuse to negotiate in good faith, thus making it easier to underpay everyone across the board (and miss out on valuable talent, of course). What a load of crap, which should not be unexpected considering this is Reddit we are discussing, I guess.

Comment Re:Get rid of the point system (Score 1) 169

Get rid of the point system. Have them keep going till someone gives up or gets KO'd. This simultaneously makes the sport more interesting and will cut back on the corruption.

...and the strategy, and the focus on fitness and stamina, and the length of careers, and all amateur boxing, and the health of boxers, and the frequency of fights, and the likelihood of boxing remaining legal and sanctioned. Boxing has never been street fighting, and will never become such.

Comment Re:Hemingway spurns all of you (Score 1) 169

I can't believe so many of you alleged males are dogging on boxing and other contact sports. None of these fighters/athletes are slaves, they CHOOSE the sport and the potential consequences. Go back to saving the internet now.

Bravo. While I agree wholeheartedly, I can't help but find it a bit ironic that you question the manliness of boxing detractors while purposely concealing your own fake online identity.

Comment Re:And I care about this why? (Score 1) 169

Even _interesting_ sports are not highly regarded among geeks, I'm not sure how this article was even considered "stuff that matters."

Maybe gladiators would be worth posting about, but boxing is as Neanderthal as it gets.

You care enough to type about it. And as someone whose DNA is upwards of 3% neanderthal, I am offended.

Long computations which yield zero are probably all for naught.