Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
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:And I'm not laughing (Score 1) 147

Could you refer to any non-military mass-shootings in the 1920's, or even any mass shootings prior to the 2000's outside of war zones and colonies? I'm not talking about gangsters moving down a few people. That happens all the time. I'm talking about civilians/terrorists murdering 50+ civilians with guns.

You know, educated people are not necessarily more clever or inventive than uneducated people.

If terrorism happened because of this lack of opportunity that you describe we would be facing a massive wave of Roma terrorism here in Europe. Terrorism is always, without exception, caused by fanatical political or religious beliefs. It usually boils down to the idea that your homeland is under occupation by an illegitimate force, government or people and the idea that you will be a martyr if you die fighting it.

Comment Re:And I'm not laughing (Score 1) 147

They are already using drones in Syria with explosives. So your theory is garbage.

That is bad bad news then, since it probably means they'll do the same in Europe and the US within the next few years.

The fact remains that terrorists tool a long time to realise that they could simple use guns. This terrorist attack seems to have been the first in history where upwards of 100 people were trapped in an enclosed space and gunned down by terrorists:

Comment Re:And I'm not laughing (Score 0) 147

Terrorists are actually fairly slow at coming up with novel ideas. It literally took terrorists something like 100 years from the advent of automatic firearms to come up with and popularise the idea that you can simple grab a gun and spray bullets at a crowd in an enclosed space.

Let's not help these people by posting clever ideas online.

Comment Re:No Gut no Glory (Score 1) 67

I doubt the tanks will be the root cause of any future payload losses now that they have identified them as a vulnerability. They probably have a vastly better understanding of the envelope of that system now.

SpaceX has basically said that the voids are fine as long as the oxygen does not freeze. If that is true then the "nitroglycerine" in your analogy would be the incredibly low temperatures combined with the fast loading times that they were using. (They were obviously loading helium that was cold enough to freeze oxygen... Yeah. Seriously.)

Now that SpaceX has the most economical launcher on the market I think their strategy is going to change from "launch often - fail quickly", to something like "test often - fail quickly on the testbench". Now that they have a rocket that can do work and make money, a rocket that was funded partly with tax money to carry people for NASA, their focus will naturally shift towards making it more reliable.

Comment Re:Reads Like An Ad (Score 2) 431

Given what? "Renewables" do not provide base load.

The "battery advances" are exciting for cars, but not for letting a 3 GW wind farm act like a 1 GW base-load power plant. That would take a million PowerWalls. literally.

Yeah and that's not eve the big problem. The big problem is getting a solar farm on high (or low) latitudes to deliver power in late winter. Forget about batteries. We're going to need something like a huge underground lake filled with diesel. One of those for each solar farm.

Intermittent power sources really call for a global electric grid with near-zero power loss. Anything short of that will probably never be good enough to completely replace fossil and nuclear power at high latitudes.

It's 2016. Where is my affordable room temperature superconducting wire?

Comment Re:Yes. It will never happen. (Score 1) 260


Since I need to add more to satisfy the /. posting god, my point is that
1) paper is portable and readable in all circumstances. I don't need to fire up a reader, connect to wifi, turn on laptop, whatever: here's your piece of paper, read it.
2) paper is durable and fixed-format: if I put a paper in a file and come back 10 or even 100 years later, barring catastrophe, it'll still be there. The vagaries of non-cloud storage, and (for the cloud) the evolution of estorage and edoc formats means that even if I HAVE the file, i might not be able to read/open it. Shit, I have enough trouble opening now 25 year old docs from my college days plunking on a MacSE.
3) it's harder to edit paper: simply put, edocs are easier to fake, generally.

There are a host of things that paper isn't: searchable, stored effortlessly taking no space, easily (instantly) sent to someone else not present, backed up in case of loss, there are probably a ton of others. But the fact is that for what paper does, and what's important in a business/legal context, it's pretty irreplaceable.

1) This is really only an issue if you're out of range of WiFi and Cellular. Who turns off their computer anyway?
2) That's great for documents that are relevant a year after they were printed, but most documents probably become irrelevant within days of being printed.
3) That's a minus for most documents and use cases.

I think the main reason why paper is still widely used is that UI:s aren't good enough, software and hardware.

The one thing I still need paper for on a daily basis is for scribbling out throwaway notes, diagrams, drawings, etc. Maybe an iPad Pro or a Surface 4 pro could do the job hardware wise, but I doubt that the software is good enough yet.

Comment Re:One party rule (Score 1) 2837

The problem is those groups of people are no longer a small "minority" anymore. We are pretty close to parity...

And what comes after parity, do you think? I doubt Trump will be able to throw out black and brown people nearly fast enough to counteract their higher birth rates compared to white people.

The racial identity political paradigm is not going to be fun at all for white people once they are in the minority.

Comment Re:Batteries (Score 1) 98

No it won't. I'll never own a Samsung product again, phone or otherwise.

I bought a Pixel and I'm not looking back.

Yeah, the good thing about Android is that you have plenty of phones to chose from if a manufacturer messes up.

I for one find Samsung's efforts acceptable for now. I expect they'll keep me and other Samsung customers updated until they've figured out what went wrong with the Note 7.

I don't think I will ever again buy a Samsung phone in the first 6 months or so after release. (I bought the S6 a few months after it came out. I did not buy the Note 7.)

Slashdot Top Deals

Real wealth can only increase. -- R. Buckminster Fuller