Submission Summary: 0 pending, 9 declined, 5 accepted (14 total, 35.71% accepted)
Submission + - Budda Boom
countertrolling writes: Baidu/Bing
Submission + - TSA Mandates GA 'Self-Pat-Down' Program 1
countertrolling writes: In a compromise measure that attempts to balance calls for increased security in GA operations against the individual liberties of GA pilots, Pistole announced that new self-administered pat-down program would be mandatory in the very near future. Acceptance has been (at best) mixed within the GA community. While most pilots knew that enhanced steps were going to be forthcoming from TSA, as a 'necessary counter' to security threats, most complain that the new procedures go too far.
*GA =General Aviation
*GA =General Aviation
Submission + - Dude, where's my mouse?
countertrolling writes: ...researchers at MIT have found a method to let users click and scroll exactly the same way they would with a computer mouse, without the device actually being there.
Cup your palm, move it around on a table and a cursor on the screen hovers. Tap on the table like you would click a real mouse, and the computer responds. It’s one step beyond cordless. It’s an invisible mouse.
The project, called “Mouseless,” uses an infrared laser beam and camera to track the movements of the palm and fingers and translate them into computer commands...
A working prototype of the Mouseless system costs approximately $20 to build, says Pranav Mistry, who is leading the project.
Cup your palm, move it around on a table and a cursor on the screen hovers. Tap on the table like you would click a real mouse, and the computer responds. It’s one step beyond cordless. It’s an invisible mouse.
The project, called “Mouseless,” uses an infrared laser beam and camera to track the movements of the palm and fingers and translate them into computer commands...
A working prototype of the Mouseless system costs approximately $20 to build, says Pranav Mistry, who is leading the project.
Submission + - Judge Rejects Approval of Biotech Sugar Beets
countertrolling writes: "A federal judge has ruled that the government failed to adequately assess the environmental impacts of genetically engineered sugar beets before approving the crop for cultivation in the United States. The decision could lead to a ban on the planting of the beets, which have been widely adopted by farmers.
Beets supply about half the nation's sugar, with the rest coming from sugar cane. About 10,000 farmers grow about 1.1 million acres of sugar beets, Mr. Markwart said. That makes it a small crop compared to staples like soybeans and corn.
The Agriculture Department did conduct an environmental assessment before approving the genetically engineered beets in 2005 for widespread planting. But the department concluded there would be no significant impact, so a fuller environmental impact statement was not needed.
But Judge White said that the pollen from the genetically engineered crops might spread to non-engineered beets. He said that the "potential elimination of farmer's choice to grow non-genetically engineered crops, or a consumer's choice to eat non-genetically engineered food" constituted a significant effect on the environment that necessitated an environmental impact statement.
In March, Judge White had asked the federal government if the Obama administration would take a different stance in the case than the Bush administration had. The new administration said there would be no change.
There's still hope, isn't there? That we can at least get this stuff labeled properly?"
Beets supply about half the nation's sugar, with the rest coming from sugar cane. About 10,000 farmers grow about 1.1 million acres of sugar beets, Mr. Markwart said. That makes it a small crop compared to staples like soybeans and corn.
The Agriculture Department did conduct an environmental assessment before approving the genetically engineered beets in 2005 for widespread planting. But the department concluded there would be no significant impact, so a fuller environmental impact statement was not needed.
But Judge White said that the pollen from the genetically engineered crops might spread to non-engineered beets. He said that the "potential elimination of farmer's choice to grow non-genetically engineered crops, or a consumer's choice to eat non-genetically engineered food" constituted a significant effect on the environment that necessitated an environmental impact statement.
In March, Judge White had asked the federal government if the Obama administration would take a different stance in the case than the Bush administration had. The new administration said there would be no change.
There's still hope, isn't there? That we can at least get this stuff labeled properly?"
Slashdot Top Deals
We can defeat gravity. The problem is the paperwork involved.
