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


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

Comment Re:Since they determined autopilot wasn't to blame (Score 1) 187

Your opinion does not agree with the conclusions of the HTSA report.
It looked at driver engegement and how it was affected by driver assisting features. Conclusion is that indeed some periode of inattentiveness exist but rarely bigger than 5 sec. So the 7 seconds in which the driver did not react to the truck crossing his path is very exceptional.
Secondly they looked at the amount of accidents and collisions of Tesla's before and after the Autopilot was introduced. They fell by 40 percent.

In my opinion a good attentive driver, even with automatic systems engaged, will still keep his attention where it belongs: on the road.

Comment Theory seems pretty simple. (Score 1) 289

Bad indeed. If true.
I mean: it would be a really stupid error to make on a flagship product. My hunch is (but I have no proof) that it's something different entirely.
The theory of the article says that simply applying some pressure on the body would already create the explosion. If that were the case I think many more phones would have exploded. And weren't there cases where the explosion took place without anyone touching the phone?

My little pet theory: the dendrites inside the ultra thin cells of the new type of battery were growing bigger than foreseen. In my mind Samsung engineers were aware of this potential problem that is strongly dependend on how you use your battery. I think (just my fatanasy) that they changed the software for charging the phone to keep the problem under control. They succeeded ... in the lab... and outside the lab...for the most part...

Comment Re:Theory without any empirical data to back it up (Score 1) 289

I must say that I'm sceptical too.
Especially when they conclude that 'the smalles pressure' would cause the explosion to occur.
1. I'm not an expert on what kind of testing is done on a phone during development but I consider it extremely unlikely that no scenario involving a high level of pressure on the body to be part of it.
2. I didn't study the reports on these explosions but a seem to remember that at least one of them happened when the device was simply lying on a table or something with nobody touching it??

My personaly theory (based on just my lively fantasy only): remeber that article on those batteries with a window in it. Through the window they could study the creation of 'dendrites'. A kind of chemical plant like structures that 'grow' on the walls of the battery cell as the result of charging and uncharging of the battery. When they touch the other side of the battery cell they create tiny wires that induces a small 'short circuit' thus reducing the capacity of the battery.
I think they created a new type of battery with layers that were closer than before. They applied special software to control the charging and uncharging cycles in such a way that they could control the growth of this dendrites sufficiently... in lab conditions. But in the real world people used their phone in a way that they did not take into account. Too many dendrites touching==> short circuit.

Comment Re:Rule the waves? Insightful? (Score 1) 432

I'm sorry but this seems not very 'insightful' to me.
When whas a US aircraft carrier last attacked by a missile?

So the US marine could do without all this expensive Phalanx nonsense, right?
When was the last time they fired a nuclear missile? So they should eliminate those too etc...

Comment Re:Counterproductive reasoning (Score 1) 130

FTA: "The United States officially ratified the Paris climate agreement in September. Of the top 10 global emitters of greenhouse gases according to the 2015 Paris conference, only the U.S., China and India have submitted their ratification documents. Among the top global emitters of greenhouse gases, the 28 countries of the European Union — which is counted as one entity for the purposes of the treaty — and Russia have yet to officially agree to the plan."

So they have not officially ratified the treaty yet but have pledged to do so from the start..

The difference is important because that means that the 28 countries of the EU are currently not counted in the 55% rule. So as soon as the EU paperwork is in (and I can't imagine the EU leaders going to the conference on oktober 7th without having officially ratified) the 55% rule will have been reached and the treaty will come into effect.

Comment Re:Morality vs Entitlement (Score 1) 579

As for your apparent displeasure regarding the concentration of global profits, that can't be helped. It's not illegal, it's not improper, and there's nobody who can do a damn thing about it.

Well, that's where you and Apple got it wrong. It is illegal in the EU according the highest EU court. And yes, they can do something about it. And they will.

Slashdot Top Deals

You scratch my tape, and I'll scratch yours.