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


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

Comment Re:Great idea! Articles could be categorized and d (Score 2) 176

NNTP was pretty decentralized, one of the challenges with it in the later days of NNTP was the relative ease of newgroup injection and crapflooding.

IIRC, NNTP server software on the hardware of the early 2000s scaled poorly and the traffic volumes were growing fast so you started to see ISPs get much more control oriented when it came to retention periods and which newgroup messages they would honor and from whom.

Comment Re:Am I reading this right? (Score 1) 66

The weird thing, if it is the COPVs, is... there was so much attention focused on them after CRS-7. It'd be weird if this was the cause. And extremely frustrating, too, as they're not manufactured in-house. SpaceX surely tests the tanks, so they too would bear some responsibility for it getting past their test procedures, if this is the cause. Personally (as I mentioned elsewhere in the comments), having a composite vessel sitting in liquid oxygen always strikes me as a dangerous situation to begin with.... if we were good at maintaining LOX-composite compatibility, we'd be making the stages themselves out of composites rather than aluminum.

Of course, the COPVs aren't the only part of the "helium pressurization system". Still concerning that whatever it was slipped past them.

Comment Re:Huh. (Score 3, Interesting) 66

The helium isn't used for cooling; it's a pressurant. It's lower mass to make a small COPV and have that store your pressurant in it than to have the whole LOX tank be strong enough to withstand the pressure.

It's always bothered me, the concept of having a COPV sitting around in LOX, though. Ignoring the thermal cycling, LOX and epoxy aren't exactly fast friends. We don't make LOX tanks out of composites because composites tend to become impact sensitive in LOX (there've been some attempts, but it's still an active reseach field, not a "solved problem"). Not sure there's that much difference between making your whole tank out of composites vs. having a composite tank inside of one. I don't know what SpaceX does, if anything, to try to protect them, but the general concept has always concerned me.

Comment Re:The new left is so violently opposed to dissent (Score 1) 528

It's the way the left has been since the 1920s. Usually it was confined to doctrinal infighting among Leninists, Trotskyites, and other socialist factions. Usually once one faction had established dominance they simply became authoritarians, rejecting any punishing all dissent.

One of the best party amusements has always been exposing conflicting elements among leftists. Years ago when AIDS was peaking, you'd find a leftist, usually a vegan, who favored animal rights, and then an AIDS activist and then introduce the topic of animal testing of AIDS drugs. If you got lucky, the animal rights advocate was straight and the AIDS advocate was not and you sat back and watched the fur fly, so to speak. I've seen vegans screamed at, accused of supporting anti-gay genocide, and pacifist gays accused of being bloodthirsty monsters who back the pharmaceutical-industrial complex.

Comment Re:then can create a single wifi network? (Score 1) 46

I'm struggling to understand what "one large wifi network" actually is.

In enterprise gear this roughly translates into broadcasting the same SSID and some back channel communication of interference, channel selection, etc, to avoid stepping on each AP too much in addition to some of the newer "roaming" extensions that speed up the process of moving between radios.

You usually can fake this by just using the same SSID on multiple standalone APs and if their channel selection process is any good you generally end up with mostly the same thing.

Comment Re:Smarter Aliens (Score 1) 275

To put it another way: the total mass of the universe is about 180000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 kilograms, which is the mass equivalent of 16200000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 joules. There is no shortage of "resources" in the universe. Even the rarest of "resources" is available in unthinkable abundance to any entity that has a range broader than a single planet. Not like it's particularly easy to actually exhaust resources on a given planet; you just move from the easiest ones to the much more abundant, but harder to access ones (while simultaneously your technology advances with time, making resources in general more accessible; prices are based on the competition between these two factors, but in the long term generally follow a downward trend)

Comment Re:Anti-Hillary is not Pro-Trump (Score 1) 795

I used to think like this. However, I realized Executive Orders have a lot of affect.

So do articles of impeachment.

My point isn't that Donald Trump could be a low-quality President, but that the promoted level of doom and gloom and disaster is greatly overstated and fails to consider the balance of powers among the branches of government at a minimum and further fails to consider other potential problems associated with policy implementation.

Trump may throw a tantrum wanting some policy or other, but that doesn't make it so on the spot. There's a whole apparatus of bureaucracy that has to implement it, and truly loony ideas won't get implemented or at least not before they can be challenged in court.

I think the "disaster" argument also fails to consider Trump as even rational at all, as if he were really an irrational and unstable person. I also don't buy that, either. He may have a big mouth, but you don't get to where he is in life right now (fabulously wealthy, still in control of his company, and on the Republican ticket for President) if you are actually incapable of making rational decisions. Nor does it consider the persuasive ability of career people -- diplomats, advisers, military people, etc, who would counsel him against truly dangerous actions.

None of this is meant to advocate for him -- he's obviously a boorish loudmouth, but the notion that he can single-handedly "destroy America" is a bill of goods promoted by his opponents as a scare tactic because positive selling of Hillary is so difficult given her lack of likability and dissembling on so many issued.

Comment Re:Anti-Hillary is not Pro-Trump (Score 4, Insightful) 795

The one big idea Democrats have really succeeded with (at least among Democrats) is the "Trump will ruin the country" meme.

Assuming he were to get elected, he has no party structure behind him which means near zero leverage with Congressional Republicans. Congressional Republicans will (rightly, I'd wager) see him as a one-term phenomenon and begin immediately jockeying/campaigning for the 2020 Presidency.

With no Congressional support, he's a straw man. Anything controversial he would do with any executive power would likely be challenged and held up in endless court battles.

How could Trump be worse for the country than Bush II? Bush II had near complete party support, a team of long-term political insiders in his administration and significant control of Congress.

Slashdot Top Deals

I never cheated an honest man, only rascals. They wanted something for nothing. I gave them nothing for something. -- Joseph "Yellow Kid" Weil