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


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:Easy target for enemies... (Score 1) 80

I don't know what the tidal stresses would be in the fjords. I don't know how much they empty and fill and at what rate. That though is easy to calculate.

I was more thinking along the lines of anchors dropped by ships though. Depending on how far off the bottom they are you could conceivably get a large torsional force applied by the chain.

That said this was only to think what the difference was between an immersed tube tunnel being on the bottom vs suspended.

Comment Re:How does this work? (Score 1) 170

That would be a huge assumption. The DJI Phantoms and Inspires might work like that, and while they are very popular, they don't make up anything like a majority of drones out there.

While the DJI products are great there is nothing preventing you from building a more capable drone from scratch for less money. It won't have the nice white case of the DJIs, but it will be faster, lighter and have a longer flight time if you scratch build.

If you scratch build then you aren't going to be running DJI software and the flight control software you would be running won't have any of the geofencing installed.

Comment Re:Universal anti collision system (Score 1) 170

And most drones don't have the ability to report those numbers you want. My drones could tell you which way they were facing relative to north, and a rough altitude. They could not tell you what direction they were flying in (they don't have to fly forwards), their speed, or their position.

Size wise mine are all tiny. Under 500g with battery. But there is absolutely nothing stopping me from using the exact save systems on a 50kg drone if I wanted.

Comment Simply can't work (Score 1) 170

This system simply cannot work. How are you meant to geofence something that has no autonomous control systems and no gps? None of my quads have GPS, autopilot, pathing or anything else that could be used to control them.

That doesn't stop my quads having an aerodynamic ceiling of 3000+ meters or being able to do in excess of 100kph.

I'm not going to fly over a wild fire. I'd be too upset if one of my quads fell into it. But if someone built a quad like mine there isn't anything anyone could do to stop it flying in that direction short of shooting it down. It's not even that I would have to stand close. If I wanted directional antennas will allow me to get well in excess of 5km streaming video from the quad and the control range would be further.

Comment Re:Unforseen? (Score 1) 108

Really? I see massive possibilities and the only limiting factor is the form factor of the device at the moment. If you could imbed the AR into a set of normal looking glasses it becomes huge.

Ignore for a second the privacy issues and the creep factor and just think on whether these things would be useful or not. Names of people floating over their heads, bread crumb navigation dots, interactive points for information when visiting places, being able to pin reminder points.

Comment Re:The old struggling to fight off the new (Score 1) 260

You come up with "worse than useless" when the regulations make an inherently more dangerous structure have outcomes that are almost identical to the wider population?

Seriously, think that through. Prior to regulations high rise fires killed LOADS of people. There are lists of hotel fires that killed more than 10 people because these are deemed to be historically significant and yet there is only 1 in the last 30 years! And it was a deliberate arson for which the perp is serving multiple life sentences.

I'm not arguing that high rises are as safe fire wise as a standard suburban home, they aren't. But regulation of high rises has resulting in there being only nominal difference in their safety. If that isn't an example of regulation doing what it was meant to I don't know what is.

And I didn't bother looking for airbnb specific fires. Because there is no reason to. Given airbnb doesn't require any additional regulation then best case scenario is that it will have a fire rate the same as the wider building population. You can argue factors each way for higher or lower risk. But the sample size is too small and their duration of operation is too small to have a meaningful comparison.

Comment Re:The old struggling to fight off the new (Score 1) 260

No I don't need to prove that the risk is higher. You need to prove that the risk is the same or lower. You are the one advocating for the change not me.

People have always always always picked the cheapest option. They pick the cheapest option even though it is demonstrably less in their favour. What's more is people will choose an option that is significantly more expensive even if it only appears cheaper at the first glance.

Regulations came in to existence to address a problem. That regulation may have gone to far but that doesn't change the fact that there was a problem and so regulation came into being.

Currently you have a regulated industry which, on face value, the airbnb service needs to compete with. But they aren't competing on a level playing field so the regulated part of the market will collapse. This will inevitably lead to a race to the bottom, in terms of quality and in price. This happens every time in every industry. Without the regulated industry to set a level of service we will move back to the original situation which caused the creation of the regulations in the first place.

Comment Re:The old struggling to fight off the new (Score 2) 260

Impossible to compare AirBNB stats as the information is completely unavailable.

However there were 1.24 million building fires in the US in 2013. Which claimed the lives of 3240 people. Of those fires 7700 were in high rise buildings. Those high rise fires contributed 27 deaths. That gives you a fatality chance per fire of .35% in a high rise and .26% in all fires. So this is a relatively low difference. This low difference comes about because high rise and high density buildings have stricter fire codes even though a single fire in a high rise is a much riskier event.

This is further helped by the fact that 50% of low rise hotels that suffered a fire event between 2007 & 2011 had full wet pipe sprinkler systems. This compares to just 17% of low rise apartments, the sort of thing airbnb will do the most of.

So at the moment airbnb is still a relatively small player in a per stay measurement, however as it increases it is likely to see more people staying in buildings with lower standards of fire prevention. This inevitably will lead to an increase in fire deaths.

Comment Re:The old struggling to fight off the new (Score 1) 260

You know people die from food poisoning right? It's not just a case of getting the shits and puking. This is why you have a food safety board and health inspectors that check restaurants. But I suppose a review after the funeral is ok, right?

Direct from CDC..... CDC estimates that each year roughly 1 in 6 Americans (or 48 million people) get sick, 128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die of foodborne diseases.

Comment Re:The old struggling to fight off the new (Score 1) 260

There may be a greater potential for death, because you have more people concentrated, but your regulation and fire requirements work to prevent that. For example it doesn't matter how short the sprint is if the only exit is on fire. Lots of people put bars on their home windows that cannot be opened from the inside. This is the sort of thing that wouldn't be allowed in public accommodation.

I'm not in the US so I'm commenting on my own local regulations. But if you are a B&B for example, you are required to have a smoke detector in every room where someone sleeps, in all stair wells, and keep a fire extinguisher & fire blanket in all kitchen spaces. These are not requirements on private dwellings.

And as for rare or infrequent fatalities we clearly have very very different definitions of rare.... https://www.usfa.fema.gov/data... Gives 2013 total fires at 1,240,000, fatalities at 3240 and injuries at 15,925.


Slashdot Top Deals

Where there's a will, there's a relative.