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 Protection (Score 1) 130

As I recall the inflatable module has a multilayer lining to protect from radiation and micro meteors and other stuff. I don't recall fuel tanks having the same concerns. Also the inflatable module used for comparison is a prototype and full size inflatable modules will be substantially larger.

All in all I don't see how a second stage tank will compete.

Comment Re:The problem with democracy (Score 1) 259

I hope you realise I was only setting forth the position of the Leave parties as it was understood, not my personal opinion. However there are problems with your statement.

The rebate itself has to be renegotiated periodically and is only likely to decline/ disappear given the opposition to it from other EU members. Its probably not unfair to say that by 2020 we could be spending £350 million and not getting a rebate on that.

As for access to the single market, that is a two way street, and can be negotiated. As an example, I'm not sure where the US negotiations are but I doubt that TTIP involves the US paying the EU for access to the single market.

Comment Re:The problem with democracy (Score 3, Interesting) 259

By the tail end of the campaign everyone was pretty clear about the fact we would not be pumping £350 million into the NHS. What the Brexit guys were saying was that we'd not be sending £350 million a week over the Channel and letting the EU bureacrats decide how it got spent. As I understand it we have a net deficit of about £100-150 million between what goes out and what comes back in terms of EU grants etc. They were saying this excess money could be largely spent on the NHS and a few other projects.

The most important thing is that they were saying that the UK Government would be free to decide how the entire £350 million/ week would be spent. Some of this money (science, agriculture, regional aid) would be spent in the same way, but the UK Government would probably have different priorities than the EU and target this money differently.

However the thing that really won for Leave was Immigration control, not the economy. Many people were willing vote Leave and take a hit on the economy if it meant regaining control over who came in the country and who could be kicked out.

As for me personally, I abstained, believing the EU was good for me personally, but probably not so good for the many lower paid in the country.

Comment Re:There is a lot of truth to this (Score 1) 360

I think you're missing the point here. For one thing, this will mean that India will have a pool of developers, who whilst their skills are not A+, will be better than the available pool of skills in America, where there is essentially a small core of good developers and then nothing. Also if you have a pool of B quality developers, its not the hardest thing in the world to select the best and brightest of them for further up-skilling.

The Indian guys lean on their white counterparts for help, because their white counterparts are normally the onshore part of the offshore company, or because they're still learning. It won't stay that way.

India does perfectly competent hi-tech, including rockets, satellites, aircraft, phones etc. If the US is complaisant about it, soon they'll be in competition for the remaining high tech jobs and industries with India, and India will have a larger pool of people who can be "upgraded" educationally.

Comment Re: You made it, Syrians! (Score 1) 1592

This might not be a bad idea, as Northern Ireland also voted to stay in the EU. It might not be the worst idea in the world to arrange things so England and Wales are effectively going their own way as a separate state leaving Scotland/Northern Ireland as the UK as far as the EU are concerned. That way, they would never have "left" the EU and won't have to reapply.

Comment Pick any one (Score 1) 222

Content Management Systems are meant to provide a general solution to allow people to rapidly produce a website. They are obviously not going to perfectly address your specific needs, which only a custom website will truly do. The point is that a CMS will save developers time and thus money and effort and produce a "good enough" solution.

To that end, you can pick virtually any CMS you want to, subject to it providing the features you need. What most people are influenced heavily by are whether they can find someone with the appropriate experience to do the work, and whether they can ensure ongoing support.

Slashdot Top Deals

An inclined plane is a slope up. -- Willard Espy, "An Almanac of Words at Play"