Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Better transistors? (Score 1) 306

5 GHz is a pretty high speed, and physics come in play. At that speed, a signal can travel less than 6 cm within a single clock pulse (almost 6 cm based on vacuum). At die sizes of around 10x20 mm, the signal takes a significant part of a pulse to reach its destination after which the transistors still have to make the switch.

This is even more of an issue for the communication between the CPU and the memory, which is often located further away. Distance becomes an issue, even at light speed, at those short intervals.

Comment Re:How much would it help? (Score 1) 262

Well, with my puny cantilever brakes and cheap brake pads I can't move my rear wheel when applying full force. My power output should be towards 300 W (average 220W I've seen, and I'm quite sure I'm above average, though far from the 500W these athletes can do). It takes less distance to stop than to accelerate even using just the rear brake, and the front brake has more stopping power. So my brakes are certainly stronger than me, and I'm certainly stronger than whatever motor they can build into those bikes.

Now I know I am mixing up torque and power, but more available power generally translates into higher available torque, so the two are somewhat linked.

Comment Re:Supply chains (Score 1) 268

At least as serious a risk: genuine devices mis-identified as counterfeits.

Furthermore, this checking code is extra code, and may have bugs that affects the normal working of the software. It may have security issues. There may be so many things wrong with it. More code means more places for bugs to hide, more possible security issues, more work for the software maintainers, etc. All that for code that's not much if anything useful!

Comment Re:Simple solution, 100% effective (Score 1) 262

Or do it like doping tests: random through the field, and the winners. Same for the bikes. Have the winner hand in their bike for inspection after the race, and do random checks before or after the race of the others.

TFA mentions the organisation has equipment to test for this, without going into detail on how. I'm curious how they test these bikes, what this equipment looks for really.

Comment Re:Simple solution, 100% effective (Score 1) 262

I doubt you could build a motor and power supply into a bike such that it couldn't be found.

That part I agree, but it's not about being unable to be found. It's about getting away with it, and that means making sure it's not visible or at the very least not obvious from the outside. That is a much simpler problem to solve and I can imagine it can be done. No, it's not cheap, but money isn't a big issue in a cycling. There's a lot of it, especially for the winner, so the potential payout is huge.

Comment Re:How much would it help? (Score 1) 262

Those motors allegedly do about 100 watts. The amount of energy a normal bicycle brake can handle to slow you down is easily 1000 W - my bike can stop in a fraction of the distance it takes me to accelerate - and these pro bikers have for sure much better brakes than my city bike.

That she couldn't stop is not likely caused by such a puny motor. It's more likely good old brake failure, or a surface that was more slippery than she anticipated.

Comment Re:Hopefully because spam filters don't work (Score 2) 244

If you want to end spam, you need to acknowledge that spam is an economic problem and spammers send out spam because they make money doing it.

So how are you going to do this? You do get modded "insightful" for this but in true business fashion you don't give any real solutions. Not even any hints to real solutions.Not even a solid and workable definition of what is spam, and what is not. Often spam is defined as "unsolicited' but what is "unsolicited" really? I put my e-mail address on my web site, asking people to contact me. Anyone can find the address and start sending e-mails on any topic - are these solicited or unsolicited? If you say it's solicited when about the web site, then when are they off topic?

Next, how are you going to distinguish a "spammer" making money off the e-mail messages from all the rest making money off of e-mail? So many legitimate news letters being sent around that result in making money. I have received many e-mails from people I didn't know yet asking me about my business, and whom I ended up doing business with - having found my contact in many different ways, e.g. from my listing at alibaba, which is also a common source of suspected scam e-mails.

Obviously a whitelist approach doesn't work.

Having people pay for sending/receiving e-mail doesn't work: who are you going to pay to? How are you going to pay? How to exchange payment information?

Maybe you can come up with working solutions to this. Solutions that only stop spammers (oh, and a clear definition of "spammer" would be good), but that leaves all other e-mail correspondence unaffected.

Comment Re:The elephants in the room (Score 1) 244

Actually Hotmail/Outlook etc have a pretty bad false positive rate. For my clients, I have far more complaints abut personal email from my server being redirected to the Junk folder from Hotmail users than from any other provider

I've had the same problem, it seems they're very rigorous on SPF records. I had nothing set for my domains, and that's apparently bad for Hotmail specifically. After sending a bunch or mails to Hotmail I actually got some bounces, where in the headers I noticed SPF checks failing (for reason of no records present). Recently I changed this, and I'm getting more replies to e-mail to Hotmail already.

Now it's very very hard to do any true statistics here, it does seem to be (part of) the issue of my e-mails not arriving, or being junked.

Comment Re:Total Bullshit (Score 1) 143

Interestingly, here it's Greenpeace's bias that gives it more credibility to me.

Greenpeace isn't stupid, on the contrary. They're pretty smart in progressing their cause and when it comes to publicity. They have to, the organisation lives and dies with publicity and the resulting donations. They're not a mouthpiece of the Chinese government, and in general I don't think they're very supportive of the Chinese government considering its less than stellar environmental record. Yet they choose to publish this data (in favour of the Chinese government) rather than this OCO2 data (which is not in favour of the Chinese government - and which, by the way, is a name I've never heard of before).

Comment Re:WRONG (Score 1) 143

Economic data is generally considered suspect - the lower level the government, the more suspect. Generally no province will report lower growth numbers than the national average. No city lower than the province. No county lower than the city. However many economists will look at power production data, rail transport data, and sea port data. Those numbers are considered sufficiently reliable, and indeed do seem to give a very accurate picture of the overall economy. They do at least correlate quite well with other information, including anecdotal evidence and the PMI (purchase manager's index).

General economic growth figures, especially that coming from the lower government, falls into the "the chocolate ratio has been increased to 25 grammes a person a week" category.

Slashdot Top Deals

The 11 is for people with the pride of a 10 and the pocketbook of an 8. -- R.B. Greenberg [referring to PDPs?]