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


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re: Huh. (Score 1) 79

That a sniper who's certain to be caught.

Given that virtually every single fragment of the rocket is going to be recovered and examined, most especially in the area where the explosion originated. Evidence of a bullet strike is going to be very very obvious.

The sniper gets caught (the aforementioned money troubles would be a good start in pinning him or her down) and would be offered the choice of ten years or sixty years in jail. The sniper would immediately sing the names of "the people with a motive". A good reason why the paid-sniper scenario is unlikely.

Comment Re: Bullshit (Score 3, Insightful) 147

The downside of blackmail is that you may make a lot of money from one mug. But if word gets out your business is essentially destroyed instantly. But you might not even get any money as your victim might go to the cops (in some states, blackmail is a felony) or might just refuse to pay and go online to tell the world about your extortion attempt.

High-priced prostitution has a big incentive to be discrete - they want existing customers to be repeat customers. They want new customers to feel safe and confident about what they're doing.

Now I'm not saying that's how it actually works in practice. I'm just wary of saying blackmail is the automatic outcome. Because discretion might ultimately be the most profitable policy for the prostitution providers. Most especially the expensive ones.

Comment It's been tried before (Score 4, Informative) 298

See; the XC120 Packplane - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F.... Though the fact it didn't work in 1950, doesn't mean it can't work now. I keep an open mind.

However, the idea of sticking the pod on a railway waggon is a complete non-starter - I'm sure a pod that meets railway crash-resistance standards would be stupidly heavy for aviation use.

Comment Re:Don't Panic (Score 1) 535

Britain will likely try to join EFTA - European Free Trade Association, currently Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and Liechtenstein - TL;DR it's the EU Lite.

This, together with the EU, make up the European Single Market. Free movement of goods, services and people will continue. Though a lot is going to be completely up in the air - reciprocal deals for health care for example.

Comment Sure It's reinventing the flight recorder, but.... (Score 1) 343

Flight recorders sit in the aircraft's tail - where they're ost likely to survive - and are built to be incredibly tough, to survive pretty much any accident.

But surely this is a hangover from the earlier era when data recording was done by things that were big, bulky and expensive. Therefore aircraft designers had no choice to put all their eggs in one (very very tough) basket.

Now data storage devices are tiny, why not have a system that disperses hundreds, each with a copy of the flight data, in the event of an accident? Sure they won't be individually as survivable, but who cares? It's the principle of the baby turtles making their way down the beach - a few are bound to make it.

Comment One inaccuracy (Score 4, Informative) 74

One thing he got wrong, the tank crewman at 7:14 isn't the driver, its somebody starting the engine. Engines of the period had crank-starts. I don't know why British WW1 tanks had the crank handles on the inside, but I'd guess it was because the engines constantly broke down and had to be restarted, and you'd get shot if you had to go outside to do that.

In this picture https://upload.wikimedia.org/w... - you can just about see the crank handle, on the left of the window.

This is what the actual driving position of one of the things looks like.


Comment Re:Honor and glory? (Score 2) 129

>It's well known that corners were cut when building the titanic - particularly with the rivets which metallurgical analysis confirmed were cheaply made and weak due to large amounts of iron slag in the composition of the metal. The crew was operating at night in a stretch of water that was well known to contain icebergs and had claimed a recorded 20 ships already. Essentially they were operating blind. Lookouts failed to spot it, either due to environmental conditions, pure laziness, or overconfidence in the ship design - we may never really know.

The Titanic's sister ship, the Olympic differed in detail, but was essentially a clone. The Olympic served on the North Atlantic run for two decades and was only retired in 1935. She gained the nickname "Old Reliable". - Picture of the two together

This suggests that whatever people now say about the design, construction, or the metallurgy of the iron, by the standards of the time, the fundamental design of Titanic was sound and the construction was perfectly fine. She was sunk by a crap-load of bad luck and four compartments being breached - a set of circumstances the designers hadn't envisaged.

BTW - "A set of circumstances the designers hadn't envisaged" seems to me what often happens when an airliner crashes. So we really shouldn't be feeling too superior about this.

Comment Re:I'm conflicted by this (Score 1) 766

As you're a big fan of "process", you can always buy stock in the companies involved and get their policy reversed at a shareholder's meeting, assuming you can get enough other shareholders to agree with your position. That's the **process** that exists. As it is, these companies (likely with a view to maximizing shareholder value) are taking the stand that the PR win is worth whatever's the financial loss of taking elsewhere investment that might have optimally gone to NC. Disagree at a shareholders' meeting if you feel so inclined.

Slashdot Top Deals

For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong. -- H. L. Mencken