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


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Excellent. Now how about High Fructose Corn Syr (Score 1) 851

<quote><p>I'm not a fan of banning them either. However, given the rate of obesity and type 2 diabetes in this country with strong evidence they are caused by our increased consumption of various kinds of sugar ("real" sugar and HFCS), I would be very much in favor of a relatively high tax on them.</p></quote>

There are taxes on sugar. It is 5x higher in the US than the rest of the world (if you are in the US)
That 5x bump in cost is one of the reasons HCFS exists in so many products. Sugar is so dammed high (already).

Deciding that you'd "very much in favor of a relatively high tax" on something you don't like is a pinheaded means of solving the problem. How about the FDA limit sugar / HCFS in products.

Tax the shit out of it and people will stop buying and dying of X (insert tobacco) related causes - ...wait we already tried that...

Comment Re:I admire their spunk, but... (Score 1) 275

Gold is in the same Ohm magnitude as is Ag and Cu. Au is in third place, Ag first and Cu is second. Point being Au is a great metallic conductor. It is nearly always alloyed with other metals. Sometimes the Au alloy is a better conductor of electrons, other times less of one than is pure gold.

The softness helps, but the primary 'help' is that Au is *highly resistant to oxidization* [aka corrosion], which is a key improvement over Cu or Ag. So your point of it being soft is hardly the primary reason for the desirability of Au alloy electrical contacts.

Comment Global cooling (Score 1) 378

Kind of obvious that white reflects more solar energy than do dark colors. So the point of the story is a several year old point, less ice/snow the faster the poles warm in the sun.

Imagine the stories if the opposite were happening, global cooling. The panic.

Comment Was as bad as the reviews made it seem (Score 1) 178

It would not run the IBM office suite of programs and was artificially limited on RAM. 'Running most PC applications' is not good enough.

The original "chiclet" style had tall, hard plastic keys which made touch-typing virtually impossible and a better keyboard was offered, but not for free.

The design limited the expansion, memory and speed of the system. For instance, with no DMA capability, the keyboard is disabled when accessing the floppy drive. Even worse, the serial port will drop data when the floppy drive is in use.

The ads with Charlie Chaplin and the M*A*S*H characters where wholly laughable. IBM was clearly out of touch.

Comment Re:When you have a bad driver ... (Score 1) 961

"The problem is that if you're driving an unsafe vehicle on public roads, you're not just putting your own life at risk, but that of other drivers (and pedestrians) as well. You might be willing to take the risk of not having Electronic Stability Control and anti-lock braking, but why should the other people on the roads have to put up with the unnecessarily increased risk that you'll crash into them?"

You sir are an idiot. An idiot who drives roads with many vehicles which apparently tend to bunch up your pink panties, but you are not clever enough to realize the truth.

Sometimes ABS stops you faster than without. The key word is sometimes.

Not knowing how to drive, like ABS makes people, is unto itself unsafe. Gadgets like ABS makes a good driver less good. Less able to avoid scary crashes in to your minivan or you stumbling into the nearest crosswalk.

Seriously you are an idiot. There are affordable economical automobiles, which do not have stability control, which do not have ABS, and <GASP> have manual transmissions.

Comment Re:Actually the problem with leaking hydrogen... (Score 1) 297

You cannot be serious.

Ever heard of heat of formation? Usually it is manifests itself as fire. Check the heat of formation for H and O atoms. It is not a small number.

Since you seem to have skipped or failed HS chemistry I will share this. At room temperatures Hydrogen and Oxygen molecules do not spontaneously form water.

Ever consider condensation from the water vapor in the atmosphere? Like what is inside HDD? It happens.

"The problem with leaking hydrogen inside a computer case when it mixes with oxygen and forms water vapor. Condensation inside a computer would not be pleasant"

Comment Re:What the helium actually does (Score 1) 297

Wow. Lots of non-techies reading /., but not reading about how things work.

FYI, standard spinning hard drives fail at altitude. Meaning mountain climbing in places like the Himalayas are a great place to fail a spinning HDD due to lack of what? Atmospheric air pressure!

"If less air resistance is the reasoning for using helium, why not have the drive internals run inside a vacuum? Wouldn't that be less expensive than helium as well?"

Since basically since year one of the hard drive, people learned drives needed an air gap between the head and the platter.

Comment Re:Don't Be Short-Sighted (Score 1) 59

<quote><p>The shuttle was neat in a lot of ways but, as the GP said, it was a boondoggle. A re-usable space plane that has to be essentially rebuilt every time isn't worth it. Lots of big dumb rockets would have been a much better investment in space technology.</p>

<quote><p>By the way, without the Shuttle Program, the Hubble Telescope would have died long ago.</p></quote>

<p>Without the Shuttle Program, the Hubble Telescope could have been delivered by a big conventional rocket and the repairs could have been based from a disposable living pod of some kind. With the money saved by not trying to make a shuttle workable and just going with plain rockets, maybe we could have been able to afford three Hubble telescopes.</p></quote>


Comment Re:Don't Be Short-Sighted (Score 1) 59


<quote><p>The Shuttle Program, like all of the manned space programs before it, delivered an immense amount of technology development that has advanced our knowledge of materials sciences and engineering in general beyond any level before it.</p></quote>

<p>Sure it did. Can you name an example?</p>

<quote><p>By the way, without the Shuttle Program, the Hubble Telescope would have died long ago.</p></quote>

<p>And they would have been able to afford to launch <b>several</b> replacements for the Hubble in that time. Same goes for the International Space Station, involving the Shuttle drove up the cost a lot.

When I look at what didn't happen because they had an expensive Space Shuttle instead of a space program, I have to say "good riddance" to it.</p></quote>

Thank you!

Comment Re:Don't Be Short-Sighted (Score 2) 59

Frosty Piss says: "By the way, without the Shuttle Program, the Hubble Telescope would have died long ago."

The Hubble telescope sat on the ground for years due to the Shuttle (ahem) explosion. It cost 6 million a month while it while it sat at NASA. Hardly a boost to the concept the shuttle helped the Hubble. It was wholly possible the Hubble telescope was on the first failed shuttle mission. AKA, the Shuttle could have destroyed the beloved Hubble telescope that destroyed a Shuttle in 1986.

1986 was the scheduled year for the Hubble deployment (the Challenger disaster year). It cost 6 million dollars per month for the Hubble to sit on the ground. It cost more than 200 million dollars for the Hubble to sit at NASA from 1986 till 1990. The Shuttle was a boondoggle.

The Hubble, by the way, was wholly designed to be toted to space by the Shuttle. IOW, it would not exist without the Shuttle. Another aside is Sean O'Keefe nixed the final repair of the Hubble telescope, because of what? Another Shuttle was lost. It was almost not repaired for the 5th time. Thank the director following Sean O'Keefe for it. Thank the second Shuttle disaster to what? An unreliable and dangerous delivery system best know as the Space Shuttle. The same reason for the first Shuttle disaster. The Shuttle was a boondoggle.

Science fiction? Clearly you have not done your reading. The Shuttle was to have done far more than it ever delivered. The Shuttle fuel cost to launch was literally astronomical due to its sheer empty mass. It was supposed to deliver, repair, and return satellites to space. How many satellites did it bring to Earth and return? Zero. AKA, the Shuttle was a boondoggle. It was not on budget and it did not deliver what it promised, not even close on either case.

Slashdot Top Deals

Your computer account is overdrawn. Please see Big Brother.