Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



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

Comment Re:Con? (Score 2) 377

They cheated if they broke the rules. Without knowing in details what the rules were, we can't say whether they cheated.

However we do know that a judge who knew in detail what the rules were required them to return the money. This being a civil case, we don't know if what they did was criminally illegal.

Comment Con? (Score 1) 377

Con:
Persuade (someone) to do or believe something by lying to them.
A confidence trick ... is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence, used in the classical sense of trust.

I don't see where he lied, so I think the word is misapplied. The second definition comes a little bit closer, but casinos are very much aware that gamblers are adversaries, not allies.

Comment Making America great again (Score 5, Insightful) 128

What do people mean when they say "make America great again"? My understanding is that they want a USA which is making new innovative industries, employing lots of people in the USA with high paying jobs, and making profit in the process (the more the better.) Elon Musk is the poster child for doing all of those things - yet many people crying "Make America great again" are trying to tear him down. The kindest explanation is that they are so blinded by ideology that they can't think straight.

Comment Re:Let a Private Company Do It (Score 1) 392

You got his point totally backwards. He wasn't saying that private industry should be the ones to do this type of project, he's saying that BECAUSE private industry has shown no interest, it must not be possible to do it profitably, meaning it is likely to be a money sink.

I am pretty sure that lots of private companies would love to be in the road building and maintenance business, I'll bet it's easy to make a buck there given the steady use those get, the proven tech, the low capital outlay.

Comment One bit doesn't make sense (Score 2) 101

"This would give SpaceX three landing pads and the ability to bring back all three Falcon Heavy boosters to land while also retaining the option to land one or two on drone ships in the Atlantic Ocean."

I can imagine scenarios where you'd want to land zero, one or three boosters on drone ships. I can't imagine any scenario where it makes sense to land two boosters on drone ships. One way would be to have the center booster and one side booster landing at sea - but if one side booster can return to landing site, so can the other (and landing on land is both cheaper and safer if you can do it.) The other way is to land both side boosters at sea but return the center booster to land - but the center booster is always going to be much harder to return to land, as it burns longer and so is higher velocity and further down range when it has finished boosting.

Comment Re:Let's not hallucinate (Score 2) 91

Why, yes I do. Simply put, all the low hanging fruit x86 processor development has been picked already. The only remaining advancements are incredibly expensive to make, both in time and money, and as a result even Intel can't appreciably speed up x86 processors anymore.

Now that Intel is mostly standing still, AMD has a chance to catch up. It can benefit from all of the research work, process developments, etc, that have occurred, and implement its own version of the same advancements that Intel made over the past 7 years or so, much more cheaply than Intel did. AMD's limited budget may just be enough.

I actually don'tt think that Ryzen will be as fast as Intel's best. But I expect it to come within 25%, and for a reduced cost. My prediction is that x86 won't get much faster as AMD becomes more competitive with Intel, but it will become a lot cheaper. Intel's high end consumer chips that cost $350 now will be available for $100 in a couple of years, whereas without AMD's Ryzen providing the competition, they probably would only have come down by $50 or so.

Comment Re:Sounds like a pretty easy job for a type (Score 1) 297

More power to you. I made the mistake of visiting rotten.com once in the late 90's, and somehow morbid curiosity caused me to spend about 2 hours looking at the worst stuff that I could see on there, I couldn't tear myself away because I couldn't believe what I was seeing. And afterwards I went into a sort of depression for several days. I have never gone back and have actively avoided any situation in which I might see something similar. If I had to watch that stuff on a regular basis I would either, like you, somehow disassociate myself from the feelings that I have about such things, or go crazy. I don't think either is a good outcome personally.

However, if such people have to exist, then I am thankful that they do and that they can protect myself and those I care about from these things. So to everyone who has to do it - I owe you a tremendous debt of gratitude, and I hope you are paid very well.

Comment Oversold (Score 3, Interesting) 148

Here's the most relevant bit:

The team was able to compress small flakes of graphene using a combination of heat and pressure. This process produced a strong, stable structure whose form resembles that of some corals and microscopic creatures called diatoms. These shapes, which have an enormous surface area in proportion to their volume, proved to be remarkably strong. “Once we created these 3-D structures, we wanted to see what’s the limit — what’s the strongest possible material we can produce,” says Qin. To do that, they created a variety of 3-D models and then subjected them to various tests. In computational simulations, which mimic the loading conditions in the tensile and compression tests performed in a tensile loading machine, “one of our samples has 5 percent the density of steel, but 10 times the strength,” Qin says.

The video is about testing 3D plastic models. Exactly what they have achieved is unclear to me. Do they have plastic in a configuration 10 times the strength of steel? Did they 3D print in steel, but didn't show it in the video? Did they extrapolate from a plastic model to say that if they'd made it of steel it would be 10 times the strength of steel? Did they use a computer model to say that if they could make the optimal graphine configuration it would be 10 times strength of steel?

Slashdot Top Deals

Polymer physicists are into chains.

Working...