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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:I call BS (Score 1) 559

Most people arrested for DUI are significantly over the limit.

Citation, please?

And beside that there is no real magic number for THC.

Maybe we should consider coming up with one?

borderline cases for THC intoxication don't seem to be particularly dangerous, and it tends to induce behaviors that counteract the intoxication.

I could make the same argument for alcohol. I used to go out to the bars and drink and drive home when I lived in Florida. Never had a problem because I recognized that I was a bit drunk and concentrated on my driving.

It works great, unless there's something else to distract you. Like another person in the car.

Comment Re:metric (Score 2) 241

Right. Because of the use of the metric system. If they'd used real (i.e., US) measurements, it would have been fine. You start sticking in weird furrin' measurements and you have problems.

The problem with the metric system is that it makes the math easy. And anytime the math is easy, you're going to make mistakes. When the math is hard, you double and triple check it to make sure you haven't made some silly mistake.

(Yes, I'm being facetious.)

Comment Re:One more data point... (Score 1) 77

About the only issue, as I understand it, is size. From what I understand of the experiments done here on Earth, the "wheel" has to be fairly large in order to fool the brain into thinking it has gravity. Otherwise, you end up with people getting motion sickness. So the idea of, saying, putting in a spinning bed where an astronaut would sleep for eight hours and get a nice dose of gravity would probably just make them sick.

So, as I understand it, the theory is sound. But it would be a "feat of engineering" to build something that big. On the other hand, the President-Elect like yuge construction projects, so... :^D

Comment Re:Amount of gravity needed? (Score 1) 77

[...] maybe there's a biological or chemical solution rather than a physics solution.

I dunno. I'm beginning to think that it might be worthwhile to start doing more investigation into the physics solutions.

Currently, astronauts spend a couple of hours a day exercising. They also take various supplements to help mitigate bone loss and things like that. As we discover more things in zero-G that mess up our bodies, I'm beginning to feel like rather than trying to figure out how to solve all these "little" problems, maybe we should devote resources to solving the bigger problem (how to get gravity) which will fix all of the "little" problems.

Comment Re:Too Little and Far Too Late To Save Timmy (Score 1) 134

People like to bash Sculley (and Cook along with him). But, honestly, Sculley did a good job of running Apple. While it's not entirely a fair comparison, I'd point out that up until around 2008 or so, Apple's largest market-share was during Sculley's tenure. Products like QuickTime and Hypercard were released during his tenure. Apple machines weren't as distinctive, I'll admit, but the designs weren't horrible.

That said, one of the smart things that Sculley did was bring Jean-Louis Gassée over from Europe. Sculley, like Cook, was not a product guy as much as he might try to be (Remember the "Knowledge Navigator?") At the moment, I don't really see anybody at Apple in a similar capacity. Jony Ive is too heavily into style over substance, IMHO, and he's the closest Apple has to a "product person."

Comment Re:Until... (Score 1) 428

As I understand it, hail storms also damage more conventional roofs. And if the materials are cheaper, it would cost less to fix your roof with these than it would to fix it with more conventional materials.

Furthermore, if it's just the glass that's broken but what's underneath it survives, then it's possibly repairable.

Comment Re:Does Not Have to be Government (Score 1) 165

You miss the point. I suppose I got a bit wordy.

Why do you buy UL-certified electric devices? Because if you use them and one of them causes your house to burn down, your fire insurance will cover you. If you use a non-UL-certified electric device and it causes your house to burn down, your fire insurance won't pay.

Thus, I have an incentive to buy UL-certified devices. Uncle Sam does not need to get involved. This is, arguably, a good thing.

Many people are saying that IoT devices need something akin to UL labs. The problem is that UL labs get their power from insurance companies. You don't have to buy UL-certified devices, but there's a pretty big downside to not doing so. So what is the equivalent downside to not using ICANN-certified (for example) IoT devices? At the moment, there isn't one.

Slashdot Top Deals

The means-and-ends moralists, or non-doers, always end up on their ends without any means. -- Saul Alinsky

Working...