Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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

Comment Re:Yeah... (Score 1) 326

I think you need a combination of: hard work, money, luck, and natural talent, (and maybe other qualities too).

For any ambition, you'll need all three, but if you have a lot of one quality, you can usually substitute it for one of the others to a certain extent (eg money and hard work can be exchanged in both directions).

For example, just hard work won't get you far, without being lucky enough to have opportunities to use that hard work (of course, more hard work, or money, can help create opportunities).

Comment Re:You would think science could help (Score 1) 275

Yes, because everyone know, you have to mow down thousands of acres of trees to build a platform and processing area that is smaller than one acre in size...

Oh that's right, you basically don't destroy any trees to frack. Very empty headed logic, or you just don't understand the science behind drilling.

Comment Re: Not Sure if... (Score 1) 311

How long does it take for your chip+PIN transactions?
Here in the UK, the person behind the counter says "that'll be £X please" and presses a button so the total appears on the reader (elapsed time, maybe half a second).

You put the card in, wait about two seconds for it to be read, type in your PIN and press enter, then wait about another three to five seconds to verify. Then just take your card out and walk off.

Admittedly it's been about 10-15 years since I last had to use the mag stripe, but I remember it taking much longer waiting for the receipt to print out, signing it, passing that back to the person behind the counter etc. etc.

Comment Re:Self-inflicted (Score 3, Insightful) 76

Yes, and those idiot's votes count the same as yours and mind. It is amazing how many people "me too" jump on some bullshit I've already proven to be false a few times before. Hoax is the poisoning of the mind for people too stupid to do their own thinking and prefer their news in a 600x600 image square. Whoever controls these drones, controls the vote, because they are half the population.

Or to paraphrase George Carlin, think about how stupid the average person is, then remember that half the population is dumber than they are.

Comment Re:What's the driver for upgrading? (Score 1) 472

I do rendering on my 2012 12-Core Mac Pro. It would cost me almost three times what I paid for that to get a new 12-Core Mac Pro to replace it. Which, thanks to my software moving to CUDA, would make a new Mac Pro useless to me. Add to this the fact that no modern Mac supports CUDA due to Apple going with AMD GPUs, and that pool of software is growing ever smaller. I'm almost to the point of abandoning Macs altogether and getting a Windows multi-GPU workstation instead. For a hell of a lot less than a new Mac Pro.

Unless every vendor out there suddenly decides to support the trainwreck that is OpenCL, I've long ago purchased my last Mac.

Comment Re:High failure rate (Score 1) 209

They are using consumer drives for data center needs, this is the big reason their failure rate is relatively high. Still, with the redundancy, it is cheaper to run this way. Rumor is that Google ran that way with off the shelf computers. Use dirt cheap commodity products that are good quality, have exceptional redundancy, throw them away as they implode.

Comment Re:Harm (Score 1) 93

Kind of funny, our company is on the cutting edge actually, but in fluorescents, not LEDs, which are terrible for producing what we would consider high output of UVB or UVA. There is a huge difference between 320nm and 399nm, yet both are "UVA". 320nm has a lot more energy, and as you up in frequency (down in nm), it forms a Bell curve and gets exponentially more damaging. It also goes down in penetration, which is why you can get a quick flash burn from UVC (100nm-280nm) that doesn't penetrate more than a few layers of skin, but it is very damaging to those layers. And of course, the real kicker is how much you are getting.

And the reason it has that warning on it is simple: anything with any measurable amount of UVA must have that warning by law. The FDA regulates this (CFR 1040.20 for sunlamps, for example). I'm used to seeing them regularly for inspections. For some reason, general lighting fluorescents are excepted from this warning, even though they do produce a measurable amount of UVA.

Comment Re:Harm (Score 3, Informative) 93

385nm is invisible to almost all humans, being on the long-ish wavelength of UV, and I wouldn't really say it was very damaging. Everyone likes to jump on the bandwagon like they actually know something about UV when in fact they don't. I've worked with it over 25 years, still do. Out of the millions of products sold, I've never had an injury reported. People do get hurt with UV, but that is exceedingly rare and usually because they didn't follow directions or did something really stupid.

Inside fiber, it is pretty harmless. Most plastics block it (excepting OP4 acrylic), the vast majority of paints absorb it and won't reflect it. It has a smaller wavelength, thus more waves per centimeter, ie: more data. I'm not saying their plan is good or bad, but blanket calling UV dangerous and not workable is ignorant.

Comment Re:Alleviate bandwidth concerns (Score 1) 94

Netflix has proven that the main reason people pirate isn't about money, it is about convenience. We want media our way. I haven't pirated anything in forever since getting Netflix. Pirating is easy, but then I have it on one machine, and I don't want to copy everything to every non-networked machine. Netflix is simply easier to use for most people, the variety is quite good, and the price is reasonable. This downloading might be an extra $$ feature, but if it costs 2 bucks more a month (same cost to them, really), people will use it, particularly those on the road who tire of mediocre internet access in the average hotel.

Slashdot Top Deals

When speculation has done its worst, two plus two still equals four. -- S. Johnson