Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
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:Do we really need more people? (Score 1) 130

In most wealthy countries, kids are a liability because you have to feed, clothe, and shelter them without them delivering any kind of return on investment. In poor countries they tend to be an asset because they end up being extra farm hands, laborers, etc.

The value of child labor is quite modest, they work at slave labor rates. The primary reason to have kids is to have them support you economically and otherwise when you're elderly and they are young adults because being old and childless is harsh in many poorly developed societies. High risk of child death leads to "insurance", 95% of the women have an extra child because 5% of them will die. Losing a child is of course always a tragedy, but in the western world you'll still get to live at a decent nursing home and have most your needs taken care of so you don't need a fallback plan.

From what I understand, the population boom in Africa is not really necessary anymore. But it takes quite some time from you stop needing it until people realize it. Not to mention a lot of cultural momentum, if it's normal to have five kids many women will have five kids. And as you get wealth the pyramid starts turning, instead of having five kids to support you maybe it's you who want to divide your wealth on two kids and not six poor kids. It's a lot of psychology involved, not just economics.

Comment Re:It would be... (Score 1) 231

Intentionally blocking the way is obstructing traffic. Going slowly on a local road in the rightmost lane is not.

If you have the ability to stop any place and get out of the way, as cyclists do, then yes, yes it is. It absolutely is obstructing the natural flow of traffic needlessly.

Farming equipment is allowed on any such road and that stuff usually travels at roughly similar speeds as bicycles.

Farming equipment is not allowed to disrupt the normal flow of traffic either. And they design the roads accordingly. They put massive shoulders on roads with any significant traffic which must also carry farm traffic, to enable it to get out of the way. Roads with less traffic simply get dashed lines (assuming they're not one-lane roads, like the one I live on) so that you can pass tractors, so that they don't disrupt traffic flow either.

This really is not complicated. We have laws against disrupting the flow of traffic because disrupting the flow of traffic causes every kind of problem. It reduces throughput while increasing the risk of collision. And that's why cyclists who can't find the side of the road do. They want to cry about debris at the roadside, but guess what? I don't get to drive into someone else's lane to dodge debris in my lane. Buy appropriate tires and tubes, and run slime, like an adult.

There are not so many roads with actual minimum speed limit posted and only highways specifically restrict bicycles and farming equipment from them.

A posted minimum speed limit is not necessary to disrupt the normal flow of traffic, and be cited on that basis, so that's irrelevant, like most of your reasoning. And it doesn't matter where you are, you're not allowed to hold up traffic. And there are numerous places where you can ride a bicycle on a highway, it's freeways you're not allowed to ride on.

You are literally wrong about everything you said in your comment.

Comment Re:And this is one reason why ... (Score 1) 257

Well, we can fly expensive pieces of sensitive equipment to Mars and deposit them in an orbit (usually) on the surface (sometimes) in working order.

I knew you were a moron when I saw you talking about flying to Mars. Flying is done in an atmosphere.

Yet we can's stick a probe into something that's just a few thousand kilometers away.

Fuck, you don't even have the level of education you can get from watching Futurama , do you?

Comment Re:And this is one reason why ... (Score 1) 257

We can fly to Mars, but we can't install planet-sized plumbing?

You're trolling, right? Nobody is even proposing to fly to Mars any time soon. You aim yourself at mars and you coast for a long-ass time. Maybe by the time we have the tech to accelerate at 1G halfway to Mars and decelerate at 1G the other half the way to Mars, we'll have the tech to run a fiberoptic link through the mantle. But... probably not.

Comment Re:Beta testing self-driving vehicles... (Score 1) 50

Well, eventually they will figure it out how to make self driving cars safer than more than 99% of human drivers. When that happens, I'm not sure, but it will happen. Now, if you introduce them too early, a very risky and unsafe version of self driving cars that is maybe safer than 20% of the human driver population, but less safe than 80%, then anybody of those 80% using a self driving car would mean a safety risk.

Except that's not really how it happens, you don't need to be a race car driver to be a good street driver. A good street driver is merely consistent, appropriate speed, paying attention, obeying the traffic rules. It's not a skill level, it's a fail rate. You do things right for a year or five years or twenty years and then for some reason you fuck up. As in failed to yield, ran a red light, didn't see the pedestrian, fell asleep at the wheel, didn't check their blind spot, lost control of the car fail. I can guarantee you that all the SDC test vehicles are better than 100% of humans at not rear-ending anyone.

If it's not coming officially it's coming unofficially with all sorts of assistants where technically you drive yourself. And people will ignore it, but we'll dismiss them as Darwin awards.

Comment Re:Unimpressive performance. (Score 2) 141

Scan through a big folder of 20MP+ photos, what happens to your application cache? Quite possibly evicted.

Intel is probably smart enough to use a hybrid MFU technique rather than MRU. They might set aside a portion or percentage for MRU to speed up ongoing operations, but I don't think they're dumb enough to run the whole cache on that basis.

Comment Re:Er - I'm awake and notice this (Score 2) 239

The easiest way to see price discrimination is to go to the rich side of town and go to the grocery store. Observe the price of milk, hamburger, cheese and gasoline. Now to to the poor side of town, repeat.

OK, I'll bite. The poor side of town has a Grocery Outlet and a local market called a Bruno's. The expensive side of town (such as it is) has a Safeway. Guess what? The prices are better on the cheap side of town. What were you trying to prove again? (Also, our Safeway is fucking disgusting. About half the time you walk in there, you can smell the fish counter... ACROSS THE STORE. And sometimes it's gackworthy. I wouldn't even go in there if my landlord's bank weren't in there.)

What I do notice is that gasoline is often cheaper in more affluent neighborhoods. But that's because those people are willing to drive to somewhere else to fuel up. It's not magic.

Comment Re:Progress (Score 2) 171

Slashdot is making progress. I'm glad to see a discussion on electric cars on this forum where no-one is whining "electric cars will never work, you can't go more than 200 miles without needing to refuel... customers don't want electric..." etc,etc,et.

Yes, it is truly sad how many Slashdotters are so vastly behind the times. They should really fuck off back to CNET where they apparently came from

Comment Re:Okay, but... (Score 1) 171

The US should do similar to put an end to all of these competing charging formats and vertical markets. It's not like Tesla will lose out because they stand to profit regardless of which vehicle is charging at their stations.

You are Just Plain Wrong. The Supercharger network is a competitive advantage. Since no one else offers that, and no one else can charge at those points, as long as Tesla has it and nobody else does, it is a significant inducement to buy Tesla instead of something else. Thus, this is the time for Tesla to lobby against such a move. When other makers have similar networks, then Tesla will want to lobby for charge connector standardization, because that will force them to let Tesla customers use any charger. Once it's no longer a competitive advantage, then it becomes a drawback. Right up until then, it's a massive benefit and they would have to be total idiots unqualified to operate any business to change that part of their game plan.

Comment Re:Unimpressive performance. (Score 2) 141

Scroll down to the CrystalDiskMark 4K test, it kills the 960 Pro with 307 MB/s compared to 62 MB/s read performance. Big transfers or deep queues? SSD better. Short burst of performance at low queue depths? Super quick. Write speed is not super impressive but assuming the primary goal is to read from slow storage and cache it's good enough. The downside with this and all hybrid systems is of course that it's not consistent. Scan through a big folder of 20MP+ photos, what happens to your application cache? Quite possibly evicted. I like to have an application drive (SSD) and media drive (HDD) and manage it myself. But for the more average user who wants a single big volume this looks like an okay pairing.

Comment Re:Okay, but... (Score 1) 171

They do. All Tesla Superchargers in Europe have standard Mennekes connectors. They have to, by law.

Everything you said is wrong, so I assume you're trolling. Tesla uses a special connector so it can connect to Type 2, others can't fully connect to the Tesla superconnector, it's not the law and nobody else gets to charge at their superchargers.

Comment Re:Pilots don't work (Score 1) 494

Will a child growing up in a UBI household have a different attitude towards the need to get a job or attend school? Is there even any point in getting an education if you know that the state will provide everything - and that there probably won't be any jobs for you anyway?

Well we have research on welfare clients here in Norway indicates it might be "inheritable", but not massively so. So I think it would be more "as a child in an UBI society..." and as for the latter I assume basic will mean quite basic. Here in Norway you have a basic guarantee (sosialstønad) if you are a legal resident and have no savings or other means to support yourself, for singles it's 5950 NOK + housing which in USD is about $700/month, but since Norway is more expensive it's effectively $500/month. And housing can easily mean a 100 sqft room with shared kitchen and bathroom facilities.

Essentially if you take your basic needs like food, clothes, personal care, a monthly card for public transportation and misc. household articles the budget is nearly spent. You can afford a microwave, cellphone, a TV, a crap PC and that's it. You're not going to any pubs, cafes, restaurants, concerts, cinemas or theaters. You don't have a car. You're not going on any vacations. You exist comfortably, if all you want is a $15/month WoW subscription. Most people want a little more in life...

Comment Re:FSF = not practical (Score 2) 166

When he started there was no such thing as an entire operating system of free software and no hardware you could run it on. This exists today - it didn't then. It's not as readily and easily available as it should be - but it exists. And, as he rightfully pointed out, if he had compromised the ideal of that existing - it would still not exist at all. It only exists because he never settled for less than that.

Well evil tounges would suggest that without Linus we'd still be waiting on GNU/Hurd. GCC forked off and became ECGS. "Linux libc" forked away from glibc and was only later "gnu-ified" again like ECGS. The rest the FSF made seems mostly to be small utilities, for sure having a GNU/free ls, awk, sed, grep etc. is important but hardly the showstopper. His one (admittedly huge) crowning achievement was writing the GPL, but most the projects seemed to refuse his leadership.

And even then the adoption by some of the core players seemed to be more by chance than ideological success, like Linus primarily wanted to see what other developers were doing to learn so he could run it on his box. User freedom was never a big deal for him nor most other Linux kernel core developers, which is why the GPLv3 was met with a "meh". X11 and Wayland doesn't use the GPL. Apache isn't using the GPL. Android isn't using the GPL except the kernel. It is popular? Yes. Is it the only commonly used open source license? Very far from it.

According to Black Duck GPLv3 + LGPLv3 + Affero GPL = ~10% of all projects and GPLv2 + LGPLv2 ~20% so most projects haven't really been following Stallman since 2007. And that's not counting the non-GPL licenses, my impression is that the Apache license has gained a lot of popularity particularly with corporations like Google (Android), Apple (Swift) and Microsoft (ASP.Net). The kernel is the one project that seems to get away with copyleft because you can run any userspace on top. And because it doesn't really crack down on shims and driver blobs.

Slashdot Top Deals

Remember: use logout to logout.

Working...