Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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! ×

Submission + - NASA officially delays SLS first flight to 2019 (

schwit1 writes: Despite spending almost $19 billion and more than thirteen years of development, NASA today admitted that it will have to delay the first test flight of the SLS rocket from late 2018 to sometime in 2019.

“We agree with the GAO that maintaining a November 2018 launch readiness date is not in the best interest of the program, and we are in the process of establishing a new target in 2019,” wrote William Gerstenmaier, chief of NASA’s human spaceflight program. “Caution should be used in referencing the report on the specific technical issues, but the overall conclusions are valid.”

The competition between the big government SLS/Orion program and private commercial space is downright embarrassing to the government. While SLS continues to be delayed, even after more than a decade of work and billions of wasted dollars, SpaceX is gearing up for the first flight of Falcon Heavy this year. And they will be doing it despite the fact that Congress took money from the commercial private space effort, delaying its progress, in order to throw more money at SLS/Orion.

Comment Re:Be ready to pay more for internet (Score 2) 201

I think it could be worse than paying more to keep your Netflix from being throttled. This opens the door to exclusive deals. We could end up with a split internet that requires the purchase of multiple providers to get all services.

The opportunities provided are false because they are wasteful. For example, a market would open up for routers that connect to multiple providers and automatically send traffic to the best one for that traffic type. But that need is not a real one but one that is artificially created by a lack of proper regulation.

Comment Re:Very encouraging result (Score 1) 174

I think the result would be much higher if they simply rephrased the question to "how many... do you use to send a message more than once a week". I answered "no instant messaging" despite having several such apps loaded because I only occasionally look at messages I've received in those apps and almost never actually send one myself.

Comment Re:Seems like using buoyancy would be more efficie (Score 1) 238

I saw that. My initial thoughts were based on pumping the air. It then clicked that they are pumping the water. So, yeh, my bad. Pumping an incompressible liquid is a vastly more favorable problem than the air.

It still falls short of the efficiencies that can be had with mechanical coupling to a modern generator though. And as I've mentioned elsewhere, I think they have more underwater complexity because the pump units / turbines have to be at the same depth as the spheres in their case. I'd envision pulleys at depth and cables mechanically transmitting energy back to motor / generators at the surface.

Comment Re:Seems like using buoyancy would be more efficie (Score 1) 238

I was envisioning a system of anchored pulleys with locking brakes below each sphere with cables going all the way back to a floating motor/generation unit on the surface. Nothing would be under water but spheres, pulleys, and cables. The motor generation unit could have many spheres tied to a single shaft with an ability to control whether the shaft is actually engaged with each sphere's cable individually (or the cable is locked at the bottom pulley when the generator is not engaged). A sphere near the bottom with more buoyancy can supply more force. So with all the sphere's on the bottom, only one at a time might actually apply force until it gets to a certain depth. As the depth rises, more spheres at a time would be used to keep the force the same with all spheres applying force as the maximum depth is approached. Gearing is eliminated, the force pulling the floating motor/generator under is always kept to a fraction of the storage farm's capacity thus not forcing some island sized floating unit, and with a little extra thought, you could manage to harness some of the tide's energy as the floating unit goes up and down with the tide.

Comment Re:Tipping point (Score 1) 540

Valid argument. So, my thought is remove the limit entirely and start a radical new policy of requiring all workers involved in making products imported into America to get comparable pay to that position's average in America. It would both serve to solve our job outsourcing issues and become the humanitarian move of the century.

Comment Isn't this just moving jobs? (Score 1) 186

Unless Amazon is really believing they will increase sales by 50% and that it will all be new sales instead of sales taken from other stores, this is just moving jobs from other companies, like UPS, and putting them at Amazon.

This looks like a likely net job loss for the country due to increased efficiency of shipping and even more pressure on small businesses due to reducing the value of the immediacy of shopping down the street.

If not for walmart, It could also be seen as leveraging their monopoly and unhealthy due to adding to their vertical depth. Is a "duopoly" bad when it damages or destroys thousands of small businesses that spread wealth more effectively?

Comment Re: Model S (Score 1) 179

But not better than other 100K+ cars that can do 0-60 in 2.5. It outperforms cars that cost several times more AND STILL seats 5. Performance will win the long game in the US market. The same will be seen in the trucking industry soon. The low RPM torque of electric motors will be a big boon for heavy vehicles.

Comment Just strategy - Trump up every American build (Score 1) 432

Companies have never stopped building in America. In the past few years, they've had to build and modernize a lot of facilities to get the production back to its current record levels without rehiring the workers lost in the 2009 time frame. Yet the net increase in factory jobs has been negligible. Here's a great chart showing what has happened.

That will continue. Actually, it would be surprising if we don't start seeing the jobs go lower while output goes up.

The difference is that now, all of those projects will be highly publicized and touted as due to Trump so that Trump can reward them with tax breaks they weren't getting before for the same thing.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real wealth can only increase. -- R. Buckminster Fuller