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


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

Comment Kind of obvious... (Score 2) 48

Here in Sweden a typical Makerbot would set you back 18K Sek (that's roughly 2000$) and for what? A slow, primitive - made out of wood 3D printer that looks like it was made by a bunch of tech kids at a high school.

It also takes TONS of fiddling around, and the patience of a saint to even produce something useful with it. If you want something better like the Ultimaker 2 or 3, you pay around 4000-5000$ in Sweden, and most people aren't ready to fork out that kind of money. However, you can always gamble on cheap Chinese clones of the older makerbots, often made in plastic instead of wood or just coated wood for that matter, but the same enthusiast process involved, it is NOT just print and you're ready, it takes TONS of work. Lots of preparation, and you need to clean and prep. your 3D work before you hit the print button so to speak.

I'm a 3D modeler, I've been working with 3D for over 20 years. I've YET to see a useful home-model that isn't just "look - I - printed - a - stock - model - ma!" tech demo. You'll actually be better off with a good CNC machine if you want to make prototypes on the cheap.

But they're fun tho...if you have the time AND the money to burn on the countless rolls of ABS plastic you're gonna need.

Comment Re:Curing Greed. (Score 1) 439

You've probably heard that it takes money to make money. It's true.The more money you have the more you can make. Loop forever.

More concretely. Lets say you and I both start businesses making widgets. People like widgets. But I have more money than you, so I can get a 10% discount on widget parts by ordering in larger quantities. So I can sell my widgets for less than you can. So I sell my widgets and make money and you get stuck with a stock of widgets.

It could be a number of factors. Perhaps I can afford to sell at a loss long enough to drive your business under (AKA dumping). Perhaps I own my factory building outright and you have to pay rent for yours. Every month, I see ROI on my property and you flush rent down the toilet. Your landlord might make more money on your business than you do.

This will always be true (as Marx suggests) unless government specifically intervenes and makes it a regulated market.

Submission + - Virginia spent over half a million on cell surveillance that mostly doesn't work (muckrock.com)

v3rgEz writes: In 2014, the Virginia State Police spent $585,265 on a specially modified Suburban outfitted with the latest and greatest in cell phone surveillance: The DRT 1183C, affectionately known as the DRTbox. But according to logs uncovered by public records website MuckRock, the pricey ride was only used 12 times — and only worked 7 of those times. Read the full DRTbox documents at MuckRock.

Comment Re:Curing Greed. (Score 1) 439

Perhaps we should heed Smith's admonition to hand out corporate charters extremely sparingly. He understood that markets need hundreds of competitors selling to buyers who were more or less on an equal economic footing. Also the part where he said that markets require regulation to remain functional.

That doesn't sound much like the thing we pass off as Capitalism today.

Comment Re:Curing Greed. (Score 1) 439

No. No good has ever come from greed. Enlightened self interest can do great things, but it is greed that removes the enlightened part.

It is technology that raised the peasants of old to a modern standard of living and it is greed that is trying to horde all of the advances for the enjoyment of the rich alone.

Enlightened self interest leads a CEO to build a company that provides decent employment to thousands. Greed leads the corporate raider to make unsustainable cuts, cash in on the stock options, and deploy the golden parachute before his cuts take the company down in flames.

Comment Re:Hey look the flow rate is a little high. (Score 1) 178

Exactly. If you are part of a group making financial transactions, that group needs to decide on a canonical time source. And yes, it's relation to the rest of the world is irrelevant to the transactions.

In any event, all time sources are wrong to some degree. If you're using NTP over the internet, you will perhaps keep the error below a tenth of a second. A directly attached GPS clock will keep it closer but the error will remain non-zero.

Comment Re:What, is Google new or something? (Score 1) 178

That's actually fairly close to the do-nothing approach used by default. When you run ntpd, it periodically checks th time and used adjtime, adjtimex or some equivalent to slew the clock as needed to get back in step. It does nothing special with the leap second flag since the system clock has no way to handle it anyway. After the leap second, the NTP client notices that the system clock is 1 second fast and so slews it back one second.

The clock slew is done by slowing the clock just a bit so it continues to provide monotonic time (it will never provide timestamps out of order) and comes into sync over the next few minutes.

Comment Re:Retarded (Score 1) 178

The defacto non-solution does much the same thing to the system clock after the leap second in order to correct for suddenly being 1 second fast but maintain monotonic time. That is, adjtime (or adjtimex) gets called to slew the clock.

In many cases, the defacto non-handling is the right thing to do. Although it compresses events very slightly, it maintains causality in the system logs and such.

Comment Re:Hey look the flow rate is a little high. (Score 1) 178

Handling your own timekeeping doesn't necessarily mean having your own atomic clock. In this context, it means deciding on who has the canonical clock and syncing with it.

Google is explicitly saying they are not serving UTC, so if your trading partners are on UTC, you're an idiot if you sync to Google.

Submission + - Matt Taibbi: 'Washington Post' 'Blacklist' Story Is Shameful and Disgusting (rollingstone.com)

MyFirstNameIsPaul writes: From the article:

Most high school papers wouldn't touch sources like these. But in November 2016, both the president-elect of the United States and the Washington Post are equally at ease with this sort of sourcing.

Even worse, the Post apparently never contacted any of the outlets on the "list" before they ran their story. Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism says she was never contacted. Chris Hedges of Truthdig, who was part of a group that won the Pulitzer Prize for The New York Times once upon a time, said the same. "We were named," he tells me. "I was not contacted."

Hedges says the Post piece was an "updated form of Red-Baiting."

"This attack signals an open war on the independent press," he says. "Those who do not spew the official line will be increasingly demonized in corporate echo chambers such as the Post or CNN as useful idiots or fifth columnists."

Slashdot Top Deals

I've looked at the listing, and it's right! -- Joel Halpern