Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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:Still a dream (Score 1) 148

Of course if it's a flying car, it's probably going to *have* to be street legal, and therefore can't get away with such a puny lightweight fuselage and lack of cargo capacity. Even if it could, then it's really competing against motorcycles, of which there are a plethora that get over 50 MPG easy, and many that get over 100 MPG.

Physics are simply against flight being efficient, particularly if improvements in traffic control on the ground alleviate the start/stop efficiency penalty of largely ground-based vehicles. Of course that too is a pipe dream right now, but it's at least as plausible as a flying car at this point.

Comment Re:Still a dream (Score 1) 148

Also, it is a tremendous technical problem. Flight requires a ton of energy compared to rolling around on the ground. Some benefit from not having to stop and start so much and less weight to move around (a pure aircraft bothering with heavy safety features is pointless, they'll fail on the crash no matter what), but even with that benefit today, a small 2 seater piston driven aircraft will make the most obscene SUV look like a Prius efficiency wise.

Comment Re:Flying car? (Score 1) 148

I would respect them if they said 'it's meant as a recreational vehicle'. If they claimed that it's a viable path to a practicle vehicle, I wouldn't respect that as it's patently obvious that 99.9% of the challenges of this being a practical vehicle would in no way be alleviated by this as a proof of concept. Longevity of a charge, operating at any significant altitude or over non-water surface, etc.

As it stands, it's a jet ski that can stay 'jumped' a long time.

Comment Re:In other news. scrambling eggs creates chickens (Score 1) 288

Of course on the other hand, their own words and the whole point of the study would suggest strongly they *wanted* this sort of interpretation, though they could not in good faith do it themselves.

"suggesting the psychedelic state lies above conscious states such as wakeful "

Use of words like 'above' is a specific word choice, though the rest of the sentence tries to soften it, it feels like they have a particular opinion.

"Future studies should assess the extent to which entropy and complexity based measures of signal diversity capture and confer the fundamental property of “richness” of conscious state"

Again, ostensibly this is saying 'we don't know', but phrasing is biased toward 'there's some extent that should be validated'.

Ultimately, the whole study is pretty pointless on the face of it unless there is some presumed value to the measure. So by virtue of even publishing something and presuming the thing has value, they have some opinion that this is meaningful.

Comment Re:In other news. scrambling eggs creates chickens (Score 1) 288

Time in dreams is a bit of an interesting concept. It's not like your brain actually has to 'play' the whole scenario, just the salient points and instances that you actually pay attention to, and things that conscious you would have *presumed* to happen may not have played out at all when you were first dreaming it, because we fill in the blanks. E.g. if your dream has you on one end of a field, then another, your remembrance may fill in the blanks and presume you traversed the field, even though that may not have been part of the dream at all when initially encountered.

Comment Re:In other news. scrambling eggs creates chickens (Score 1) 288

The issue is that a lot of people are jumping on the characterization of this study of 'increased diversity of signaling' to be a 'better' state of consciousness.

Whatever arguments you might have about psychedelics, this particular study pretty much just says 'signals are more diverse', which in general terms can mean good things or bad things. Quiet signals are generally useless, and overly noisy signals are also useless, so too with 'diversity' of signals in the brain could be presumed to be an equally useless single dimension of measure.

Comment Re: duh (Score 5, Insightful) 288

Actually, this may be a 'higher' state of consciousness, but that does not necessarily denote 'better'.

Think about hearing someone on the other end of a phone whisper, it's useless because you can't make it out.

Then at a 'normal' speaking level, they make sense and things function.

Then if they yell into the phone, there's no denial there is heightened activity, but it's so noisy and clipping and chaotic as to be useless again.

Increased activity and/or diversity does not always equal better (particularly increased diversity of a signal generally leads to problems).

So 'higher' can still be 'crazy'.

Comment Re:M$ wouldn't let devs recompile Win32 apps for A (Score 1) 206

The issue is that it is a boolean situation.

Either a) you have a fully vetted way for a package repository to give you a validated set of updates from a single place

Or b) you just install .apk application from whoever and whenever with little security and no update mechanism (apart from whatever home-grown update mechanism the specific app developer has dreamed up, which is usually none).

If I add a third party apt or yum repository, then I can say 'all packages must be signed by a trusted packager (trusted defined as strictly the only keys that I have accepted)', and further I can add something like chrome's repo and then chrome updates come with the same system update process as everything else, or packagers like rpmfusion can cover a large set of software not quite covered 'first party' but still collected and vetted by *someone*. This is what I feel is missing in the new wave of 'app stores', a total inability to be 'federated' in any significant way.

Comment Re:M$ wouldn't let devs recompile Win32 apps for A (Score 1) 206

The big problem is that with Android, iOS, and Microsoft, there's no framework for the native app distribution to add trusted parties to the list explicitly. So while it may look good to say 'security', it also just happens to dovetail nicely with 'cut of the revenue goes to the platform owner'.

Contrast with yum or apt, which is extensible to allow third party sources.

Comment Re:Brick by design (Score 1) 206

Lot of uncertainty in reporting here. It would be a totally bizarre move to have an edition that by default locks to windows store but allows user to select otherwise unless it's a broad change across the board (since the editions would be equally capable, but different defaults).

Of course it could be like 'Windows 8 with bing', where the edition was free just for having a different default browser setting guaranteed (and only through select re-sellers). Trying to lock out direct sales and third party storefronts like Steam and GoG. If it were to succeed, it seems to invite anti-trust scrutiny again.

Comment Re:Nauseating marketing language. (Score 1) 104

Actually, strictly speaking today's cellphone is not supercomputer class of 12 years ago, in fact not even really 20 years ago, but that's sane since optimizing for the measures of a supercomputer would have no relevance to anything a person does on a mobile device, and rarely even has relevance for a desktop. If we grossly oversimplify, a 20 year old supercomputer class system is about 10 times as powerful as a modern flagship phone.

But no amount of super fast memory technology will overcome that, and true that it's hard to imagine memory module width being the limiting facet of phone thinness (and besides, phones already are veering off into the 'uncomfortable for the human hand' territory, they really don't need more help on that, though there's always room for weight reduction).

On the power usage, any component trimming helps, but the screen is the biggest draw, then the radio, then the cpu/gpu, and ram is right behind that. It is certainly a power draw significantly higher than all but the aforementioned exceptions.

To further pile on:

Remember Samsung’s burning phones? That won’t be an issue with the LI-RAM because the light system could produce almost no heat.

A *RAM* technology is going to change Li-Ion chemistry to not be so volatile???

This is a pretty terrible article, which may be doing the original research a great disservice (hard to tell from the poor understanding and hyperbole).

Comment Now if more benchmarks would take a bow... (Score 1) 88

Across the industry, benchmarks become a double edged sword when the industry embraces it too much and matures.

There are certain benchmarks that drive technology to make choices that can get them 2-3% wins compared to other things on the market, but that translates into real world performance that can be 50% slower in pretty much anything but the particular benchmark.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Would I turn on the gas if my pal Mugsy were in there?" "You might, rabbit, you might!" -- Looney Tunes, Bugs and Thugs (1954, Friz Freleng)