Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom - A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at 88% off. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re: "Of course it can," says government (Score 1) 81

The comment I was responding to was regarding HAARP. And that's "except" FYI. :-) ECC is actually more reliable, for its problem domain, than a triple voting system. The probability that you would arrive at a valid ECC code for bad data due to multiple bit flips is much lower than than the probability of two out of three systems voting wrong. So, it is at least theoretically possible to design a computer system with data integrity throughout that exceeds that of a voting system.

Comment Re:"Of course it can," says government (Score 1) 81

Faraday cages are really good for RF, and I was writing about HAARP. The X rays that you get from a radiologist don't have the same energy level as cosmic rays. The best we can do about energetic cosmic rays is to make our equipment less susceptible, because you can never have enough shielding.

Comment ECC (Score 5, Insightful) 81

This is why ECC is used to protect memory and data busses. At least on the good stuff :-) . One of the issues is die shrink. As the minimum detail slze of the IC process gets smaller, the potential for radiation to flip a bit gets higher.

Silicon-on-sapphire is the main way to implement silicon-on-insulator, which is more protective of radiation bit flips and less likely to latch-up. But since these have historically been required only for space satellites, they have been horribly expensive. Imagine running an entire IC fabrication just to make a few chips. As there are more applications for rad-hard chips, the price could fall.

Comment Re:Facts don't agree with you (Score 1) 50

If you had bothered to read my whole post you would have seen I mentioned specifically Robot wars.

And you are not hearing what *I* was saying, which is that Robot Wars got decent (I'll admit they were not great) rating EVEN ThOUGH IT WAS BASICALLY JUST RC CARS.

That's inherently more boring than having real AI compete against each other, at much higher speeds and with the dramatically more interesting destruction that comes as a result of speed...

Besides, it's not like spectators cannot be killed!

Comment Re:Missing theory (Score 1) 49

A view Russian probes got lost while flying over HAARP, I think Phobos Grunt was the most recent one. The theory is that their electronics was grilled by these high-power transmitters. This one actually makes sense though.

This was obfuscation on the part of the Russians. According to the failure report issued by Roscosmos there were other reasons, including use of non-space-qualified components that were susceptible to radiation damage, and insufficient ground testing.

Comment "Differing Hardware" (Score 1) 50

Robot wars used differing hardware.

Pretty much it was the same few designs. So all of the fun was watching to see which approach ended up working.

The same is true of racing AI, especially to see different approaches in passing or speed management will be interesting. The thing that would kill it is if the AI's are not aggressive enough to be interesting.

Comment Not at all (Score 1) 146

Ahhh, how I love the smell of Virtue Signalling in the morning!

I hate virtue signaling as well. This is not an example of that; it is merely to point out that if you may to recycle some of the worst items you increase the odds they will be handled correctly, if you cheap out you may end up with the thing you are trying to keep out of the environment actually end up somewhere really bad.

Comment All it does is improve the odds (Score 4, Interesting) 146

Why does you paying them make them more honest?

I don't, nor did I say so. Please read my post again.

How much fuel do you burn driving there and back?

As much as I would taking the monitor to any other place that would have taken them. I try to do electronics in a batch. But honestly you are missing the point entirely by saying anything about fuel use, which is a totally different vector than recycling. I don't care how much fuel I burn for anything (except of course for the cost of it which is real).

Like most recycling, this seems to be more about "feeling good" rather than actually helping the environment.

No it's exactly unlike feeling good. I take it to a place I think offers the greatest percentage of the monitor no ending up in a river somewhere which is good for no-one.

Except for all the resources that went into building the warehouse.

Irrelevant comment; see my comment re: fuel. Resources do not matter as much as residual pollution does.

Do you know how much CO2 is generated to make concrete?

Again, not relevant since CO2 is not pollution and the argument against CO2 is a totally different one than against real pollution. Nature loves and uses CO2 (do you even know how plants live???)

Slashdot Top Deals

This is a good time to punt work.

Working...