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


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Matches my observations (Score 4, Funny) 192

Over the last couple of months, when I cut through one of the local parks on its bike trail, it's looked like the Night of the Living Dead: A bunch of zombies obliviously wandering around, staring down into their phones and cluelessly blocking the path.

Lately, the zombie outbreak seems to have abated somewhat, and the bike path isn't so much of an obstacle course.

Comment Re:ALT+LEFT (Score 4, Insightful) 141

Because 'backspace to go back' is default behavior in a lot of programs, not just web browsers. Try it in File Explorer, for example.

Just like F1 being a nearly universal shortcut for 'help', F2 for 'rename', F3 or CTRL+F for 'search', and so on. I shouldn't have to relearn shortcuts for common behaviors in every program I want to use.

I thought that Alt+Left and Alt+Right *are* the standard shortcuts for going backward and forward in program histories. It's worked that way in every web browser I can remember using back to the 1990s, and it works that way in Windows Explorer. The backspace key doesn't even have an obvious corresponding "forward" key.

I wasn't aware that backspace was used to go back in history in any program. I always expect it to erase one character, or do nothing.

Comment Re:No internal structure? (Score 1) 190

By the time either a blimp or this thing deflates enough to make the engines flop around, there isn't going to be nearly enough lift of lift of any kind to keep it in the air.

But let's ignore that: You want to do this to a rigid airship.

Look at their history. Excluding the ones that burst into flames, many if not most of the major airships ever built ended up lost due to failure of their internal structures. They got shredded like pretzels with the slightest adverse aerodynamic forces. (Even the Hindenburg disaster probably initially involved the snapping of an internal bracing wire due to overzealous steering.)

If I had to ride in one of these white elephants, I'd still go with the inflatable version.

Comment Re:That has to be the stupidest statement ever (Score 3, Insightful) 254

It's about as hot as it's been since humans arrived right now, and it's going to get much hotter. Not in evolutionary timescales, but within a couple of generations.

Evolution would probably work in the long run, but don't forget that sometimes evolution works by wiping out almost every member of a given species leaving only a tiny handful of "fit" survivors. That hardly seems like a better choice than just switching our primary energy sources ASAP.

Comment Re:Waste (Score 3, Insightful) 254

Many of the advanced battery technologies will have toxic chemicals. With huge production volumes, there's going to be a lot of poisonous waste materials. I suspect the environmental damage of new batteries is going to make the claimed damage of carbon seem like happy-fun-day.

No, the current buildup of CO2 in the atmosphere is a slow-motion apocalypse because it leverages the sun's vast energy output to push the entire planet away from the conditions that humans evolved to live within. No amount of run-of-the-mill poisonous chemicals could touch it. (Not that these chemicals would be released into the environment anyway. Utility storage batteries are very easy to track and regulate.)

Comment Re:Useless... (Score 4, Insightful) 195

You convert CO2 in CO. Then you oxidize it to get CO2 back.
No CO2 sequestration at all!
So, how would this be better than photovoltaic cells?

It's better because every time there's a story on photvoltaic cells, a bunch of self-appointed geniuses yell: "I'm the first person to realize that the sun doesn't shine all day! It won't do any good without energy storage!!1!"

Well, here's a solar technology with built-in energy storage.

Comment Re:And you shouldn't be.... (Score 1) 254

The "bad guys" will still find that classic abandoned warehouse across the train tracks and plot their evil in the veil of darkness. Perhaps we should require spotlights and mandatory cameras over every square inch of the planet too?

The problem has never been all that hard for the authorities: They have always known that to snag all the bad guys, they only have to monitor the small subset of warehouses that are built on a slanted "Dutch angle".

Comment Re:That was one of the details wardriving and late (Score 1) 85

I'm sure that a makeshift homebrew directional antenna could sniff these signals out in a suburban or office park area just fine.

Even in your high-rise case, the signal could be narrowed down to a small subset of all devices. Processing the sum of a few signals to pick out "words" shouldn't be too hard, either.

Not to mention, I said three times the distance to frigging PLUTO. Presumably, attackers could get within 100m of most targets. I don't think you realize how much easier that is.

Slashdot Top Deals

You need tender loving care once a week - so that I can slap you into shape. - Ellyn Mustard