Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


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

Comment Re:Nah (Score 1) 125

Porsche 918 Spyder is 0-60 in 2.3s. Elon has a ways to go still.

On the other hand, an electric motor can easily produce its maximum torque at stall.

An electric car, with adequately sized motors, controllers, and batteries (or other power sources) should be able to drive the tires to the traction limit from a standing start to the speed where the available power will no longer sustain that level of acceleration - well over 60 MPH. This means the acceleration is limited solely by the coefficient of friction of the tire/road contact surface - a critical parameter that can be tightly tracked, during acceleration, by drive electronics akin to non-skid brake controllers.

So an electric car should be able to get the best possible standing-start rating out of any given tire technology - and be literally unbeatable in such a contest.

IMHO the only reason (pre-Tesla) electric cars had a reputation for being underpowered creampuffs rather than unbeatable sprint sports cars, is that the automobile manufacturers thought the purchasers would all be eco-freaks, more interested in mileage and ideology than performance, and designed lower-manufacturing-cost, underpowered, cars for this market.

Comment Grey Goo Limit (Score 1) 148

I recall a joke scenario from a couple years ago:

Earth is in the throws of a Nanotech Grey Goo scenario. The microscopic self-replicating robots have converted about half the planet to more of themselves. And then they stop. The few surviving humans, observing from space, are puzzled.

Zoom in. Thought balloon from the mass of Grey Goo: "Damn! We shouldn't have stuck with IPV6. We've run out of addresses!"

Comment Re:Stealth (Score 1) 117

... airframes still can't match pilots. An aircraft on a mission may need to execute some spectacular maneuvers, and the pilot can often survive quite well, especially with active flight suits. However, the airframe is still damaged by the maneuver, and might not be usable again.

Which just means that they didn't throw extra weight and strength (a constant cost) into insuring that the meat-sack-carrying vehicle would take no damage in ANY extreme, momentary, corner case that the meat-sack COULD survive.

Remove the meat-sack-guidance-computer, its support systems, emergency ejection systems, and that big space in the middle for it, and the design potential is drastically altered.

So there's no conflict between your point and the predecessor's claim.

Comment There are plenty of job ADS. (Score 5, Insightful) 329

There are plenty of jobs for [this, that, and the other thing]

There are plenty of job ADS.

This is because, in order to hire an H1-B, the employer must first advertise the job to US persons.

But there are whole classes given on how to gimmick the hiring process so that anyone who applies, other than the desired H1-B, can be plausibly turned down as unqualified. The US applicants waste their time, and the H1-Bs get the positions.

Give us a call when there are plenty of HIRES of US citizens for these, or any, positions.

Comment If queueing could be fair this would be no issue. (Score 2) 193

Last time we had unlimited data plans, there were people who would tether hundreds of gigabytes a month ...

If, when the network became congested, the available bandwidth were fairly divided among the competing users, such usage would not be an issue. Everyone asking for less than their share would get all their data through at line rate, everyone asking for more would evenly divide the remainder. At times when the pipes were too clogged to handle it all, the "data hogs" would get the same data rate as everyone else trying to use the "Information Superhighway". They wouldn't degrade the other users' experience any more than any other user's traffic did. (It's just like the way a driver who likes to cruise flat-out at night doesn't end up going any faster than the rest of the traffic at rush hour.)

I used to wonder why it wasn't done that way. Then I get a job designing router chips, including the special-purpose coprocessors to handle bandwidth division.

It turns out that actually making fair division happen in real time requires enormous amounts of sideways communication between the states of the (otherwise independent) throttling mechanisms for each user, flow, etc. It's much easier to preset the limits and only adjust them occasionally. But that means the "data hogs" either get throttled or, when rush hour comes and they're still trying to pump lots of data, they clog the pipes. So the ISPs identify customers who use a lot of data in off hours and turn down their limits, to keep them from degrading things for everybody else. It's not good. It's not fair to those who are just trying to use the service that was advertised, or those who carefully do their data-hogging on off hours only. But it's about the best ISPs can do with the available tools.

I was starting to look into practical ways to "do it right". But the network equipment company downsized me before I'd gotten rolling on it. Now I'm fully employed doing other stuff. So somebody else will have to figure this out, and get it designed and deployed in a future equipment generation, or we'll keep having this problem.

Comment Re:Reading is faster (Score 1) 290

"...such as a key member who doesn't do process text well..."

I read that a dozen times wondering if I was one of those members...

Nah. More like I'm one of those people who doesn't final-edit text well before hitting "submit" when the boss appears over my sholuder, while I'm in mid posting during a coffee break, with an emergency that needs immediate handling. B-b

Comment Re:Reading is faster (Score 3, Insightful) 290

you can read faster than you can listen to someone talking

And you can process it even faster, by non-sequentially jumping your attention to the meat of the matter. I'd estimate you can process AT LEAST ten short text or email messages in the time it takes to handle one. That's an entire order of magnitude. For many people and situations it will be far more.

There are a number of other problems, but this alone kills the idea (except, perhaps, for a few special - and small - groups and situations where some other advantage, such as a key member who doesn't do process text well or when voice side-channel information (such as emotional state) are key).

Think about it: A company using voice rather than text messages might need ten times as many people to do the same work. Try that in a competitive market and see how long your company survives.

Comment Re:How does AT&T not go broke? (Score 4, Interesting) 104

they really can't just "quit" copper, because all the old people with Landlines would freak out.

Which is why they have an army of sales people trying to switch everybody to "u-verse". Yes, it's copper for the "last mile". But then it switches to fiber at a curbside box.

Comment Re:DSL shouldn't be considered broadband any more. (Score 1) 104

AT&T tried to migrate their DSL customers to their next generation "U-verse" fiber-to-the-curb technology ...

If you're forced to move to a new service anyhow (incurring the extra expense, outages, hassle, etc. of a move), it's a good time to examine the competitive landscape and see if a change to a different carrier now makes sense.

Comment Re:DSL shouldn't be considered broadband any more. (Score 2) 104

Of course the companies that rely heavily on DSL lost customers to faster connections.

Not just that:
  - AT&T tried to migrate their DSL customers to their next generation "U-verse" fiber-to-the-curb technology - but only with new contract terms of service, "triple-play" bundling, tarbaby can't-go-back contracts, no third-party equipment available, a special locally-powered (i.e. phone out in power failure) long-reach box at my slightly-longer-than-standard distance from the fiber-copper transition box, and almost daily sales contacts. Then:
  - They screwed up the "partial decommissioning" of the legacy DSL lines when they had some of their customers migrated to the new stuff.

For instance: I had a ONE MONTH outage, thanks to their changes - and errors configuring them. They wouldn't even admit they'd moved me to a new DSLAM that didn't support my legacy modem, until I'd bought, not one, but TWO, replacements for the supposedly "broken" one. (The one they recommended wasn't available, and it turned out they "didn't support" the first model I was able to find, despite the prominent AT&T compatibility label claims.) Then it turns out they hamoved me to a box that didn't hook to the backbone. So they moved me again, but this time didn't configure it so packets came to me. Then ...

I STILL only have one of my eight (five usable) fixed I.P. addresses working...

Comment Re:90% of time not 90% of vehicles (Score 1) 989

You can buy a used Chevrolet Leaf for under $10k.

Isn't that for the ones where the battery pack has died and replacing it costs about as much as a new car (i.e. turning the vehicle into a $10k, one-ton, lawn ornament)?

Or have I got that confused with the early models of another brand?

Comment Re:Commute plus Reno-Tahoe weekender. (Score 1) 989

IMHO an electric car that would be capable of a single-charge one-way trip from Silicon Valley to the Reno entertainment facilities and/or Tahoe ski resorts WOULD be a practical single vehicle, ...

With another 15% range you'd also cover LA-Los Vegas, Detroit-Chicago, and a host of other common long-distance trips.

Slashdot Top Deals

Statistics are no substitute for judgement. -- Henry Clay