Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



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

Comment Re:Since they determined autopilot wasn't to blame (Score 4, Insightful) 174

Typical logic-fail, overly-conservative, sheep-herd, think-of-the-children thinking.

In the absence of cars, no one would die in a car crash. However cars provide a massive overall benefit so we accept the risks.

In the absence of autopilot, (theoretically, pending more stats) many people would die in accidents that the 'autopilot' is quick enough to avoid and/or limit the severity of. 'Autopilot' (potentially) provides overall benefit even if it introduces some less severe risks that would not otherwise be present. Additionally, expecting this to be perfect is ridiculous anyway. Human drivers are extremely fallible. It doesn't take much to improve in the crash-and-death sense, not to mention traffic flow situations (compare humans merging 5 lanes to 1 for an accident/construction vs. AI)

Furthermore, the risk here is drivers mis-using a technology to begin with. You can mis-use almost anything. You do so at your own peril despite the eleven-teen billion warnings everywhere.

Comment Re:So Oracle discriminated (Score 4, Insightful) 306

I worked at sun for about 5 years and was let go when oracle bought sun.

I worked at the menlo park main campus. I am older than 50 and I'm white. during my 5 years there, I got good reviews and was the main guy for one of the products (software) that ships on sun servers.

all you have to do is walk around the outside of any major silicon valley campus and you'll see the same thing over and over. yes, its mostly indian and we all know this, even though the media does not want to outright say it.

and I'm 90% certain that I was let go because all the rest of my group was indian and I was making a good salary there.

it happens to me at almost every place I'm at, these days. the inevitable firing when the numbers from the company go downward and they need a quick 'profit boost' by letting go of the senior and well-paid engineers. this rarely happens to the indians, though.

Comment Re:Infrastructure vs Independence (Score 1) 466

How big a panel? How big a battery? How many hours of sunshine? How many hours of charging?

You're too imaginative. Imagination will take you on an endless path to failure, far more often than success.

In practical terms, in most of the world, for most of the cars, on most of the trips, it doesn't work.

Sure, in a desert, on a hill, at the equator, for one car, with a week of sunshine and a day of charging. But that's not where we are. On a mountain, at the arctic circle, in the rain, with an hour of sunshine, and an hour of charging, not a chance.

It needs to be worth getting from here to there. I'm telling you that your there, imaginative as it may be, is not worth the expense of the transition.

Comment That's not a loop-hole (Score 1) 91

That a business can use google's services for free, isn't a loop-hole. That's google's business model.

That google offers free hosting for your business's private web-site isn't a loop-hole. Again, that's google's business model.

That google doesn't ID or take down private-yet-infringing content isn't a loop-hole. Again, that's google's business model.

Looks like we've found the loop-hole after-all: google is allowed to provide free hosting of illegal content. I guess that's in-line with most pimps -- pay the girl.

Comment Re:Infrastructure vs Independence (Score 1) 466

Infrastructure, buliding it, maintaining it, ensuring it. Electricity's great, like most things, once everything before and after it is perfect. It SUCKS until then.

You can't have a transmission cable running along someone's property, without years of legal. You can't have someone maintain that cable without territories and depots and service contracts and safety legislations.

Forget about the existing everything in a city. Start with the 500 miles between cities. There's already a road. That's a given only because without that road, we don't need any fuel to drive it. So we have a road, 500 miles long, between two cities.

A gas station is very easy. It's easy because it's in one place. It gets serviced occasionally (re-filled, let's say weekly). That's it.

A charging station is psychotic. You need to tear apart bridges and sewers and overpasses and crossings and railways to install that cable. You now need 500 miles of LEGISLATION!

Comment Re:Infrastructure vs Independence (Score 1) 466

Ah, let's put power generations on mountains and base it on weather. Great idea. I love getting stuck because the fuel is based on something that never restricted me.

The point is that independence is about reducing dependencies, not having different dependencies.

Norway is small. Tiny. Compact. Welcome to non-representative.

Do you have any idea just how many solar panels you would need in order to power the rockies? Think about it! So many peaks, so many mountains, so much weather to resist. These are hard installations, over very long distances from cities. With difficult machinery too. And very harsh climates. You want that bolted panel to stay? Great. What about the huge battery to hold the power? And what about all of the lines to move the power from the light side to the dark side of the mountain?

Or, you could have a big tank. A big heavy box. Installed once. Virtually zero maintenance. Underground, so weather doesn't matter. Then a truck brings fuel, and dumps it in.

See, you're missing the big point. My car can get there. That's the reason my car gets there. If my car can get there, then a truck can also get there. As long as "there" can fit a big fuel tank, and a small pump, then we're done.

Any other solution that you can possibly describe, will need more than my car needs. That makes it unreliable to my car. Plain and simple.

Comment Re:Infrastructure vs Independence (Score 1) 466

Plugging my car into my friend's house? Really? So I can't park on the street. And I can't part around the corner. And I can't meet him at a restaurant. And we can't hop into the car and head to the casino because it's not charged enough yet.

I'm not renting someone else's shitty car. I want my own dirt, thank you very much. I want my own finances too. My own car costs nothing to keep using. Renting feeds someone else's family instead of my own.

Comment Re:Infrastructure vs Independence (Score 1) 466

You suck at brain-work.
You've forgotten about all of the people who live on the east side of the mountain, but used to live on the west side of the mountain.

You've, instead, re-stated my point. The reason that the mountains aren't full of people is exactly because there was fuel to let them continue on to the other side.

Comment Re:Infrastructure vs Independence (Score 2) 466

That's actually the real point. Transmitting electricity is horribly inefficient, compared to transporting portable fuel. The energy required to send a car 500 kilometers is approximately 50 litres of gasolene. Transporting 50 litres of gasolene to a fuel station by truck costs no more than the truck expense, and the truck's fuel expense, and the road wear and tear. And the larger the truck, the less it costs per litre.

But for the electricity, not only is there transmission loss, but there's also repeaters, lines, equipment along the way, the maintenance of that equipment, accessing that equipment, oh it's horrible. Maintaining infrastructure is a horrible horrible game when you're outside of a major city's orbit.

Think of a mountain range, with 10'000 miles of road. No cities at all. You can build wires, and repeaters, and blast mountains, and fix ice storms, or you can just drive the fuel to the stations.

Electricity is only useful within city limits -- like just about all infrastructure systems.

Slashdot Top Deals

A rock store eventually closed down; they were taking too much for granite.

Working...