Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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:because we learned nothing from Fukushima (Score 1) 596

Dude, I guess your Kool-Aid says to trust in nothing. Fortunately, we no longer require flagmen to walk in front of automobiles to ward off pedestrians and horses. This, in spite of 10's of thousands killed in automobiles every year in the USA alone. Why? the risk/reward ratio favors it. Again, it is as illogical to automatically reject technological advances as it is to blindly trust it. And as for TMI, the whole thing was an ACCIDENT, caused by chance occurrences. It just so happened that this accident revealed a number of weaknesses in the physical plant and operating procedures that now made fission power plants MUCH safer. Internal combustion engines are "inherently unsafe", using your same criteria. It's so typical to see people eschew simple logic in order to push their personal agenda, and then try to marginalize people with better sense that disagree with them.

Comment Re:Wait for Top Gear (Score 1) 426

The big ugly guy on Top Gear burned through two sets of tires in minutes, drifting a fancy Mercedes around a race track. Does that tell you ANYTHING about the quality of the car (other than it's fast and powerful)? At top speed, a Bugatti Veryron will run out of gas in just a few minutes. Does that mean that the car is deficient in some way? The fact that you CAN burn through the battery charge of a Tesla on a race track is not in and of itself a negative. Anyone spending $100,000 plus for a car already knows that an EV is not (yet) a full replacement for a gas or diesel vehicle. A two-seater makes a poor vehicle choice for a soccer mom. This does not make two-seaters defective.

Comment Still dangerous (Score 1) 335

Whether you are "re-charging" your car with gasoline or electricity, the procedure of transferring all of that energy is dangerous. With liquid fuel, there are the obvious flammability issues - nobody would ever consider putting a fueling station inside their home. And while electric charging is much safer, it is not perfectly safe. There are potential fire and explosion hazards from electrical malfunctions, incorrect or damaged batteries, cabling and connectors, interference from foreign objects, including rain, snow and other chemicals, and in-home hazards from wiring inadequacies and overloads. I for one would not sleep as soundly knowing that there is such a highly powered energy transfer going on in the garage attached to my house every night. Adding supersonic flywheels or redundant battery packs just increases that risk. Right now, electric vehicles are rare, and so are EV battery "events". The potential of these mishaps occurring will always be part of the risk of owning one.

Comment Re:First one to light up gets smoked! (Score 1) 279

Really? There are transmitters for up to four tower frequencies. There's WiFi. There's Bluetooth. Radios, PCs, microprocessors and the like all emit RF from internal clocks and crystals, PLL frequency synthesizers, local oscillators, etc. They don't need to "transmit" in order to detect them. Years ago when they were cracking down on police radar detectors, the police were equipped with sniffers that picked up the RFI from the local oscillators in your typical RADAR detector, and that doesn't have a transmitter at all. So all the bad guys need to do is come up with a cell phone sniffer to set off their booby traps? Bad idea.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Our vision is to speed up time, eventually eliminating it." -- Alex Schure