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


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

Comment VCs didn't get rich sharing money (Score 0) 43

They don't get rich by sharing their returns with non-investors.

He likely has either been diluted or owns a class of shares which will be diluted.

They didn't give out those shares because they actually wanted to make someone rich, but as a promotional effort. Once the promotion was accomplished they immediately had plenty of reason to begin cutting the guy out of the deal.

It's weird that the original (fusion) article switches between saying they are options and they are shares.

Comment Re:the CO2 improvements are minor at best (Score 1) 64

> False. This fix does not substantially affect mileage.

What fix? This is not a fix. It doesn't actually bring the car into compliance. If gas cars were allowed to exceed emissions then they also would be more efficient.

> Gassers make just as much particulate, but it's of the most hazardous type, which means their particulate emissions are actually worse than diesel.

That's only true of direct injected gas engines. This is why I said "depending on the car you compare to". Either way, gas cars, even DI ones, are within the legal limits. These Diesels are not, even after the fix.

> Gasoline also has to be refined more than diesel

This isn't true anymore. Diesel is a highly refined product now also. Clean emissions requires clean and homogeneous input fuel and that means more processing.

> Gasoline engines are shit for the environment.

As are Diesels.

> You know that battery electrolyte isn't recycled, right? It's just disposed of and then replaced.

When? Look at the study on 15 year old Priuses, they virtually all have their original batteries. The battery isn't highly recyclable (yet), but the savings on fuel more than makes up for it. You're barking up the wrong tree here. Hybrids are a net win, even with the material of the battery accounted for.

> But I live in the boonies, so I would still have to do most of my driving on liquid fuel. And they are also quite expensive, to boot.

Not everyone is you. And in the US (which this article is about) Diesels aren't cheap either. Oh yeah, and they've been cheating too. They're not going to get cheaper when they add the equipment needed to conform to emissions regulations.

> My prior car was a 300SD, which was a bit better on mileage and which ran on a more environmentally-friendly fuel.

That car is a rolling smog bank and you are trying to talk about how your input fuel was renewable? Seriously, have you looked at the emissions standards it was required to conform? They were a joke in the US and a double joke in Europe. It's far filthier than its contemporary gas cars and really bad compares to any modern car of any sort.

Comment the CO2 improvements are minor at best (Score 1) 64

Diesel engines emit 15-20% more CO2 per unit volume (liter/gallon) of fuel burned because the fuel contains more energy/carbon.

And once the companies stop cheating, the fuel economy of the Diesel just isn't all that much better than a turbo gas engine.

Why put up with extra NOx and particulates (depending on the car you compare to) to save such a small amount of CO2? Just get a gas hybrid and do better all around. Or a plug-in hybrid like the Volt where you can do most of your driving burning no liquid fuel at all?

Comment reports are it's no fix (Score 1) 64

That the cars will still emit 200% of legally mandated NOx levels.


Only the newest vehicles with the urea injection (2015 and newer) will make it to the legal levels.

So if you bought a "clean Diesel" based upon VW's bogus claims, remember what they did to you next time you're out buying.

Comment It's not just facts (Score 1) 150

It is an expression of them.

You cannot prevent distribution of the facts. That's why I said he should make his own representation of the facts and distribute that.

But you don't have a clear cut right to redistribute someone else's copyrighted expression of the information.

I've seen his videos, he only shows a small section of the schematic. He should just redraw that section himself and use that in his video. It's easy.

Comment it can't be for distributing copyrighted materials (Score 2, Insightful) 150

This guy has a massive pariah complex, and great job feeding it, slashdot.

It appears the guy is using Apple-copyrighted schematics. If he wants his youtube videos to stay up it's really simple to just not put them in the video. Just draw your own representation of the part of the circuit you are working on and put that up.

Comment Re:Great news for a fossil fuel free Sweden... (Score 1) 106

No, not every advanced nation has an electric grid for its trains except the US.

Sure, there are many electric trains, even freight trains. But many countries still move friend with diesel-electric locomotives. That includes every country in North and South America, India, China, Australia and many many more.

It is disappointing the US doesn't have more electrified passenger rail.

Comment there are hybrid locomotives (Score 1) 106

The problem is where to put the energy. The amount of energy recovered from a large train is just too large to store. So hybrid locomotives are used for switching, where the amount of energy is smaller.

Trains don't need additional power to climb grades, they just slow down. To go the same speed would requires not just more energy (fuel or electricity input) but more powerful electric motors to turn that energy into torque. And they just don't have those bigger motors. If they did, they'd just bring along a bigger generator and then again still have no need for the electrical input. Because in a freight train a lot of the ability to put down power relates to the weight of the locomotive, as more weight means more friction on the rails. So if you're going to make the locomotive heavier, why not just do it with more fuel, more prime mover and more generator?

Passenger trains usually hail the same cars every day. So those cars can have the motors in them and the locomotive (if present) just converts fuel to electricity. In that case, you have enough grip and power already, so removing the prime mover and generator can make it a lot more efficient. But since freight trains just drag different collections of cars each day, it has to do all the work.

Comment It doesn't matter that it's burned in (Score 1) 124

The key is burned into the processor, but you can employ the key in the processor to decrypt it. Just as the boot code decrypts the kernel cache, you can use the hardware to decrypt it for your own nefarious ends.

It just means you have to do the decryption on the device.

So the original writer was correct in that this encryption didn't stop all observers, just casual ones. Anyone who could get a significant jailbreak on a device could decrypt the kernel caches.

Comment yes, that's correct (Score 1) 238

It allows them to sell their car for $7500 more without suffering the reduction in sales that would come with the customer paying $7500 more.

That's a subsidy to Tesla.

What did you think it is? The point of the program is to increase EV adoption by making the cars cheaper to acquire. How could you not see that as a subsidy benefiting Tesla (or any EV seller)?

Slashdot Top Deals

"If anything can go wrong, it will." -- Edsel Murphy