Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Submission + - New Samsung S7 edges catching fire (

goombah99 writes: Reports are starting to trickle in about more Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge phones spontaneously catching fire. There have been two such reports within the last week, several within the last few months. This includes a new one obtained in replacement for an S7 Note.

Submission + - New York Times Buys The Wirecutter For $30 Million (

An anonymous reader writes: The New York Times is buying The Wirecutter, a five-year-old online consumer guide. The Times will pay more than $30 million, including retention bonuses and other payouts, for the startup, according to people familiar with the transaction. Brian Lam, a former editor at Gawker Media’s Gizmodo, founded The Wirecutter in 2011, and has self-funded the company’s growth. The Wirecutter provides recommendations for electronics and other gadgets that are both obsessively researched and simply presented. The Wirecutter also owns The Sweethome, which takes the same approach for home appliances and other gear.

Comment Re:how about 4A (Score 1) 422

Exactly. Unless you have my name on your warrant and have a reasonable suspicion backing that warrant, you can do a cursory safety check and then go fuck yourself. I'm not doing anything wrong and I live in a country where I don't have to prove that. And for what it's worth, every police officer I've counted as a friend hates this kind of fascist crap.

Comment Re:6.8 Billion (Score 1) 343

With vastly more decentralized installations, you have far greater risks around electrocutions, falls (primarily for wind and rooftop solar, e.g. falling off the roof), and let's not forget those poor bastards trapped atop a partially assembled wind turbine that caught fire. One of them jumped to his death and the other burned alive. It isn't a huge number of deaths, but nuclear just produces so much power and has so few deaths associated with it throughout its history that the comparison is hugely favorable.

Comment Who uses DYN for their DNS? (Score 1) 56

What I don't understand is how this is affecting things. Most people and small bussinesses just use the DNS that their service provider offers. I.e. comcast. Another tranche of people change it to something like googles Large bussinesses may implement their own DNS

So how is it DYN matters? Who uses it?

Comment Re:Cheap? (Score 1) 343

Government policy. Seriously, that's the reason. In fact, we've built one (EBR-II in Idaho) and it worked great for 30 years. Then we shut it down.

France reprocesses its high-level waste without any issue. As a result, they have vastly less waste to store and what's left to store is mostly low-energy garbage that doesn't present a significant threat.

Comment Re: Budget and Timelines (Score 1) 343

Any reactor with a negative void coefficient is safe, barring a major compromise from the outside (such as an earthquake and tsunami). And Fukushima's problem wasn't that the reactor was old or unsafe, it's that a known design flaw published by the manufacturer decades ago wasn't corrected at that particular plant per manufacturer guidelines. They simply decided it wasn't worth the cost and their regulatory agency allowed them to run with it.

And even with all that - a decades old design with a decades old known flaw left uncorrected, an earthquake, a tsunami, incompetence bordering on negligence on the part of the operator and the regulator - how many deaths as a result? There's a reason why nuclear ranks far better in safety for human life than all other types of electrical power generation (yes, including wind and solar).

Comment Re:6.8 Billion (Score 5, Informative) 343

Someone on Reddit already ran these numbers. For the money spent on this nuclear plant after it was stopped/restarted/held up by red tape/hit by NIMBY BS/etc, you could build enough solar to power 274,000 homes; a fraction of what the nuclear option provided. You also have to consider how much area that much solar or wind would cover and the impacts to the local environment and wildlife. Finally, there's the death toll. Both solar and wind power - per kWH generated - cause more human deaths than nuclear power. And I don't believe any of this considers actual power generation vs nameplate generation. That solar plant is going to generate roughly 30% of what it's slated peak output suggests due to weather, night time, etc. In the US, we run our nuclear power plants at about ~93% with the remaining time lost to maintenance, refueling, etc.

In other words, your "renewables" cost several times as much even with all the red tape thrown in nuclear's path, they generate far less power, they kill more humans, have a much greater environmental impact, and basically just fucking suck in every comparison. When we're talking about solar, the panel construction requires all kinds of horrifically toxic stuff to be put together. Both wind and solar require huge amounts of batteries; also a toxic mess. Reprocessing nuclear fuel cuts the waste down to almost nothing. A family of four that has their entire lives powered from birth to death by nuclear will be responsible for nuclear waste that fits in a Coke can. And once you're reusing the high-energy waste products, almost everything that's left is so low-energy it poses no significant risk.

Slashdot Top Deals

"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire