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 Bad translation quality (Score 2) 169

I am disappointed by the bad quality of the translation to German, both in therms of grammar and words that have dual meaning. This is somewhat usable but not really something I would enjoy using. Also, the German lady spoke very slowly and overly accurate in pronunciation, probably because otherwise the software would fail. Move on, not much to see here...

Why NASA's New Video Game Misses the Point 205

longacre writes "Erik Sofge trudges through NASA's latest free video game, which he finds tedious, uninspiring and misguided. Quoting: 'Moonbase Alpha is a demo, of sorts, for NASA's more ambitious upcoming game, Astronaut: Moon, Mars & Beyond, which will feature more destinations, and hopefully less welding. The European Space Agency is developing a similar game, set on the Jovian Moon, Europa. But Moonbase Alpha proves that as a recruiting campaign, or even as an educational tool, the astronaut simulation game is a lost cause. Unless NASA plans to veer into science fiction and populate its virtual moons, asteroids and planets with hostile species, it's hard to imagine why anyone would want to suffer through another minute of pretending to weld power cables back into place, while thousands of miles away, the most advanced explorers ever built are hurtling toward asteroids and dwarf planets and into the heart of the sun. Even if it was possible to build an astronaut game that's both exciting and realistic, why bother? It will be more than a decade before humans even attempt another trip outside of Earth's orbit. If NASA wants to inspire the next generation of astronauts and engineers, its games should focus on the real winners of the space race — the robots.'"

Comment Re:Piling on (Score 1) 172

Ehhh... some cliff hanger there.

What it should say is that I have come to the conclusion that I for myself will never apply for patents on my own, but as an employee of a major company I need to play by their rules... and that means that I need to apply for patents for their sake.

Comment Re:Just bite the bullet and use ProE or Solidworks (Score 1) 413

The same question about "fully featured and easy to use" CAD programs were asked when the OScar project started:

I answered as you did above. People did not want to hear it. I suspect, they never figured out the difference between CAD, CAM, CFD, FEM versus 3D animation modelling packages (Blender, Maya), 2D vector drawing programs (Inkscape) and MS Paint (to be a bit drastic).

The type of high-visibility OS hardware projects seem to attract only day-dreaming non-engineers, which is what repells real engineers even further (because you have to deal with such people at work already, why having them around during your spare time, too?)...

Comment Re:Use the best tools, regardless of license (Score 1) 413


Otherwise, the OpenLuna project will attract the same kind of day-dreaming non-engineers as the OSCar-project did:

And it will produce the same results: none.

PS: Actually, I read more or less EXACTLY the same question in the OSCar forum, and the answers were scaring. People were recommending Blender, Inkscape, and the like. They uttered phrases like "using CAD instead of CFD". Jeezus...

Comment Re:Its a population crunch (Score 2, Insightful) 452

Usual response is some blather about alternative energy (easily shown to be inadequate, especially given other environmental constraints)...
Then show it

...conservation (law of diminishing returns)...
Explain it changes (kills economy, and besides, won't happen without major force)
Prove it

What you do is rhetorics, not a scientific discussion.

I think the guy has just got lost in his own model, which tries to liken such a complex thing as the human civbilisation with a simple physical system, employing a constant relationship between global energy use and the civilisation's accumulated economic productivity. This is just naive...

But talking about physical modelling: Is it not intuitively correct to assume that no system can grown limitless, that there must be an upper bound for everything? Then why does our economy need to grow all the time? Why can't we just be content with a very high output? Does it need to increase all the time? And worse, does the growth need to increase all the time? This is like driving a car very fast not being enough, but we need to accelerate all the time right into infinity. This is not possible according to physics, but according to economics it is not only possible but demanded. Silly... which is exactly why Economics is not a science and because there is no Nobel Prize for economics.

Comment Re:A bad summary makes bad responses (Score 1) 237

Misquote? Read for yourself:

section "Pirate My Book?":
My reaction to seeing other Apress books getting the free, electronic version treatment is: I’m good with you pirating my book! Now, of course, I can’t actively participate in pirating my book but, heck, it’s around on plenty of “free e-book” sites and on RapidShare. There are even links on Twitter to torrents like this. I am happy for you to pirate my book, but I’m NOT A LAWYER, and I can’t guarantee what Apress would do about it – so you’d be doing it off your own back! So, uhm, don’t pirate it? ;-) The only condition, of course, if you do is that if you like the book and you think a print copy would be swell to own, please buy one – even if it’s just for someone you know who wants to learn to program! :-)

Slashdot Top Deals

Pound for pound, the amoeba is the most vicious animal on earth.