Slashdot Mirror


CERN Wants a New Particle Collider Three Times Larger Than the LHC

Daniel_Stuckey writes "Not content with the 27-kilometer-round Large Hadron Collider, researchers at CERN have their sights set on a new beast of a particle collider that could have a circumference of 80 to 100 kilometers. The nuclear research organization announced that it was hatching plans for an ambitious successor to the LHC with an international study called the Future Circular Colliders program, which will kick off with a meeting next week. The idea is to consider different hadron collider designs similar to the existing LHC but more powerful — much more powerful. CERN wrote it was looking for a collider 'capable of reaching unprecedented energies in the region of 100 TeV.' The existing LHC will reach a maximum of around 14 TeV."

238 comments

  1. Sounds great by PCM2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    But before they use that collider they'll want to get it out of Beta first.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
    1. Re:Sounds great by dysmal · · Score: 0

      They'll hand out mod points like candy next week during slashcott

    2. Re:Sounds great by roman_mir · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The idea is to consider different hadron collider designs similar to the existing LHC but more powerful â" much more powerful.

      - The new LHC is actually designed with the ability to turn Beta into a black hole.

    3. Re:Sounds great by bunratty · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I'm not using beta and I got 15 mod points yesterday. I'm using them sparingly, generally not modding down the complaints. It'll all blow over soon enough.

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    4. Re: Sounds great by iamhassi · · Score: 1, Informative

      Same. Usually every week or two I'd get mod points but it's been many months. Thought maybe it had to do with getting +5 comments but I've had comments get +5 recently and still no mod points

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    5. Re:Sounds great by Cylix · · Score: 3, Informative

      We can use the blackholes generated by the super sized collider to wipe out beta once and for all.

      --
      "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    6. Re:Sounds great by BrentWM · · Score: 2

      CERN is bored with the old sub-atomic particles and wants a redesign that attracts new particles from more profitable demographics.

    7. Re:Sounds great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, like when the 10 or so fewer people on average come to the site, they'll be PLENTY of mod points for the rest of us...

    8. Re:Sounds great by girlintraining · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We can use the blackholes generated by the super sized collider to wipe out beta once and for all.

      No need. It's already approaching implosion... site traffic has been cut by a third.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    9. Re: Sounds great by jones_supa · · Score: 1, Interesting

      My account is broken in a similar way. During the last couple of years I have received mod points very rarely, and for the past months I have received none.

    10. Re:Sounds great by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I had mod points yesterday. Not using Beta.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    11. Re:Sounds great by Qzukk · · Score: 0

      I had mod points yesterday

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    12. Re:Sounds great by Tynin · · Score: 1

      Just had 15 the other day.

    13. Re:Sounds great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      *15* mod points? Who's but have you been kissung?

    14. Re:Sounds great by bunratty · · Score: 1

      Yo mamma's

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    15. Re:Sounds great by CTU · · Score: 1

      I am getting mod points and none beta user

    16. Re: Sounds great by ttucker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I always thought they were more of a pain in the ass than anything, like doing work for free.

    17. Re:Sounds great by isorox · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I used to get them all the time, and without anything changing, I have not seen them for ages.

      I lost them 12 years ago, after modding in The first Slashdot troll post investigation. That was back in the days you got 5 points to mod with, and posts said how many times they'd been moded, rather than just an aggregate score.

      The blacklist was removed several years later, probably about 3 years ago.

      Since then it's been fairly regular, last about a week ago. I don't use beta as it's crap.

    18. Re:Sounds great by isorox · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We can use the blackholes generated by the super sized collider to wipe out beta once and for all.

      No need. It's already approaching implosion... site traffic has been cut by a third.

      Really? Slashdot users have alexa malware?

    19. Re:Sounds great by aevan · · Score: 1

      Yes. Have had them twice this year, the most recent set only expired earlier today.

    20. Re:Sounds great by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    21. Re:Sounds great by almitydave · · Score: 1

      I just got 15 today, and I'm not using beta.

      --
      my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
      I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
    22. Re:Sounds great by mooingyak · · Score: 1

      Using classic, had mod points yesterday. Used em all up.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    23. Re:Sounds great by Anubis350 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      You can still see how many times it's been modded, just click on the score and it'll give you the breakdown

      --
      "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
    24. Re: Sounds great by Solozerk · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Same here - used to get them very rarely but lately I seem to get about 10 a week. Weird indeed.
      And before the conspiracy theory kicks in: I've been up modding anti-beta posts like crazy, don't use beta, and I still just got five more of them.

    25. Re:Sounds great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps slashdot should set something up that auto deletes all posts that have the word beta in them....

    26. Re:Sounds great by Mitchell314 · · Score: 2

      I used up all mine yesterday. With help from the LHC's generated wormholes, I got them from tomorrow.

      --
      I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
    27. Re: Sounds great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck B374

    28. Re:Sounds great by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I haven't been able to figure out why anyone thinks Alexa numbers mean anything for Slashdot.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    29. Re:Sounds great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The data on that page contradict what youre saying.

      But more interestingly, according to Alexa 36% of slashdot's users are in India compared to 27% in the US. This stat should ring some bells and raise some red flags. Also, the global rank has gone up in the last 3 months. Also, the rank is calculated based on people who have the Alexa toolbar/crapware installed. Looking at Google trends would give a better estimate of statistics than Alexa.

    30. Re:Sounds great by isorox · · Score: 1

      You can still see how many times it's been modded, just click on the score and it'll give you the breakdown

      That just tells you the percentage, same figures if you get 2 mods or 200.

    31. Re: Sounds great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      0xD34DB374

    32. Re:Sounds great by SuperTechnoNerd · · Score: 1

      Watch out for excessive beta particles.

    33. Re:Sounds great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently the Indians do.

    34. Re:Sounds great by Xest · · Score: 1

      and the 1% of Slashdot users who somehow arrived here after searching for directx12.

    35. Re:Sounds great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can use the blackholes generated by the super sized collider to wipe out beta once and for all.

      No need. It's already approaching implosion... site traffic has been cut by a third.

      Really? Slashdot users have alexa malware?

      Their demographic chart shows nearly everyone visiting from School. Maybe the better answer is that schools have alexa malware.

    36. Re:Sounds great by crypticedge · · Score: 1

      It seems to me to be tied to comments. If I comment 1-5x a day, I always have them. If I don't comment for a week or two I won't. If I comment excessively, I never get them.

  2. Netcraft has confirmed: slashdot beta is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    source: http://pastebin.com/eyQ9mSnn
            It is now official. Netcraft has confirmed: slashdot beta is dying

                    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered slashdot beta community when IDC confirmed that slashdot beta market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that slashdot beta has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. slashdot beta is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

                    You don't need to be the Amazing Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict slashdot beta's future. The hand writing is on the wall: slashdot beta faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for slashdot beta because slashdot beta is dying. Things are looking very bad for slashdot beta. As many of us are already aware, slashdot beta continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

                    Dice.com is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time Dice.com developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: Dice.com is dying.

                    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

                    Slashdot beta leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of slashdot beta. How many users of Dice.com are there? Let's see. The number of Dice.com versus slashdot beta posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 Dice.com users. Slashdot beta on Usenet are about half of the volume of Dice.com posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of Dice.com. A recent article put Dice.com at about 80 percent of the slashdot beta market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 Dice.com users. This is consistent with the number of Dice.com Usenet posts.

                    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, Dice.com went out of business and was taken over by Reddit who sell another troubled OS. Now Dice.com is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

                    All major surveys show that slashdot beta has steadily declined in market share. slashdot beta is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If slashdot beta is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. slashdot beta continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, slashdot beta is dead.

  3. Hopefully they beta test it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    so all of the old LHC users can complain about the new LHC

    1. Re:Hopefully they beta test it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If CERN does a Dice, the new LHC will be shaped like a square because then they can attach huge billboards to the sides to increase revenue. There is no benefit in smashing atoms, but chE4p v1Agr4 gives ROI!

  4. LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by eexaa · · Score: 5, Funny

    OK, let's build bigger one!

    1. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by dysmal · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It may not destroy the universe but maybe THAT will destroy Beta!

    2. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UNVIERSE

      Slashbeta is HELL ON EARTH

    3. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by ttucker · · Score: 2

      Eventually we will be able to use the old one as a subway around the entire planet.

    4. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by glavenoid · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, yes it did destroy the universe, but only after creating a new tiny universe which, incidentally, contained a tiny LHC to scale which was also creating a tinier universe which contained yet another tinier LHC and so on...

      Matter of fact, I think our universe is one of those tiny ones somewhere on the line and our perception of time just hasn't caught up yet.

      --
      I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable /. beta rollout fallout.
    5. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Eventually we will be able to use the old one as a subway around the entire planet.

      Why not just go for that now.. What are we wasting all this time shooting for 100 TeV, what about a relativistic bending 1 Million TeV . Heck, why not just put one in solar orbit where size would be less of a problem and you could avoid all the vacuum chambers, pumps and the cost of digging the tunnel.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    6. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by TangoMargarine · · Score: 2
      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    7. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by ttucker · · Score: 1

      Once it needs to be longer than the circumference of the earth, we will have a super bad ass space station.

    8. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Heck, why not just put one in solar orbit where size would be less of a problem and you could avoid all the vacuum chambers, pumps and the cost of digging the tunnel.

      Because that would mean with our current almost non-existent infrastructure that all of it would have to be put up from Earth at several thousand dollars per kg. For example, the LHC has a staff of somewhere between hundreds to over a thousand (I can't find numbers for it, but CERN itself, has just under four thousand employees, full time and part time).

      Just looking at the mass of space stations per crew member, I get that the ISS has 75 metric tons per crew member of mass and Mir had about 44 metric tons per crew member. Even if we could get that down to 10 metric tons per crew member, just the living quarters by themselves would be around 10,000 metric tons or tens of billions of dollars just in launch costs.

    9. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Informative

      I can't find the source right now, but the LHC is built on top of an older smaller collider, which is also built on top of an even older, smaller one... Each increase in size is defined by a specific math formula that states the increase in size is exponential. I'm not sure how many more upgrades they could still do and remain on earth but I believe it was 2 BEFORE the LHC. So this next upgrade is likely the largest that can be built on earth, the next upgrade after that would be around the orbit of the moon or so, and then after that the entire solar system. I believe I saw this on a Ted Talk prior to the LHC coming on-line.

    10. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Langalf · · Score: 1

      Meh, it's turtles all the way down.

    11. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      3x larger, the Future Circular Colliders program.

      AKA FuCC

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    12. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      I can't help but wonder if there isn't a better (read efficient/economical) way to achieve the same thing without these sprawling accelerator loops. Even something as stupid as firing the particles around the loop a few times. I'm sure it would be technically hard, but is it harder than obtaining these increasingly larger colliders?

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    13. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once it needs to be longer than the circumference of the earth, we will have a super bad ass space station.

      They'd better not call it a collider though....

    14. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      Full marks for coming up with a workable idea, but I'm afraid you've been beaten to the punch: they already send the particles around the loop a few times.

    15. Re: LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by eexaa · · Score: 0

      Looks like anything that's not about beta is offtopic today. All 3 posts.

    16. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by joe_frisch · · Score: 1

      A lot of work is being done on this, and the machines you see ARE the result of a lot of progress. A 14 TeV machine built 50 years ago would have been very much bigger than the LHC.

      BTW - the machines are cicular because they DO send the particles around many times - typically accelerator over quite a long time, then store the beams for hours while they collide.

      Of course if you want to give us more R&D money we would be very happy to work on better accelerator designs. There are some concepts out there: Laser Accelerators, Muon Colliders, etc but they aren't ready for use in a full scale machine yet

    17. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      I don't claim to hold qualifications such that I may tell the community how to build them nor the full details of how they work. I just get the impression that obtaining larger colliders is going to be beyond the limits of government will. Invention might be easier than persuasion.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    18. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welfare for eggheads.

    19. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by afidel · · Score: 1

      would be around 10,000 metric tons or tens of billions of dollars just in launch costs.
      Or a rounding error in the US and Chinese annual defense budget, it's not that we can't do ambitious things, it's that we choose not to.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    20. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somone's inside the event horizon.

    21. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by aliquis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How to make a better beta:

      1) Add unicode support to Slashdot.

    22. Re: LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 2

      IIRC, getting particles to speed isn't the hard part or the reason accelerators are so big. The reason is because they need the diameter to be big enough that they can keep the particles confined in a magnetic field without the particles smashing into the walls.

      Too tight and the field strength needed to contain the particles simply becomes unreasonable.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    23. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The LHC is built in the LEP tunnel -- LEP, being an electron collider as opposed to a proton one, required much weaker magnets.

      Also, fuck beta.

    24. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Mathinker · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link. The page source is hilarious, looks like the "great lazer eyed bunny" is a much bigger threat!

    25. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by vandamme · · Score: 1

      Well, they will save on vacuum pumping costs if they build it in space.

    26. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Or a rounding error in the US and Chinese annual defense budget, it's not that we can't do ambitious things, it's that we choose not to.

      The thing is, that defense budget does serve an important role. And you do have to consider the relative importance of things else my next meal should get just as much funding as your national defense budget.

      Dumping a "rounding error" of a budget for an important task into living quarters for a rather unimportant, status signaling project doesn't strike me as an improvement.

    27. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The LHC was built in the same place as the LEP which was the previous collider. The tunnels were reused so the LEP had to be removed to make place for the LHC (I remember there were discussions about the possibility of keeping both but it didn't work out). The LHC and the LEP are thus of the same size.

      The difference in energy between the LHC and the LEP comes from accelerating different particles. LEP stands for Large Electron Positron collider (since it used electrons and anti-electrons) and LHC stands for Large Hadron Collider since it is using hadrons (protons or even nuclei in the ALICE experiment). More massive particles means more energy.

      Yes, there were accelerators before the LEP but they were tiny in comparison.

    28. Re:LHC didn't destroy the Unvierse? by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      I can't wait to look at Unicode goatse.

  5. Irony by Spottywot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's ironic for me is that the articles over the last couple of days have been a lot more interesting to me than in recent weeks, while I fully support the FUCK BETA protest, it's a real shame that we're missing out on some interesting discussion.

    --
    In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
    1. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Which should be a further message to Dice that the community so dislikes the new layout that it is willing to forego such interesting discussions (discussions which are the very core of Slashdot BTW).

    2. Re:Irony by trip23 · · Score: 2

      What's ironic for me is that the articles over the last couple of days have been a lot more interesting to me than in recent weeks, while I fully support the FUCK BETA protest, it's a real shame that we're missing out on some interesting discussion.

      That's the price you have to pay for revolting against the overlords. I, for one, do not welcome our new beta.

    3. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It almost make you think they are trying to stonewall the Beta protest with a flood of decent/recent articles.
      The real irony being that it proves it is actually possible to get decent/recent articles on slashdot. That they did not feel it necessary to do so, makes it likely they knew the real value of this site is in the comments. Which makes the existence of Beta just only more puzzling.

    4. Re:Irony by AlfaMike · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree, but that is the point of a protest. Sacrifices must be made. You can't take Dice out of their comfort zone without taking the community outside of it as well.

    5. Re:Irony by PingXao · · Score: 1

      There has been a distinct trend in the last few days towards much more interesting articles. Less Bieber, more Mars. That type of thing. I thought I was imagining it.

    6. Re:Irony by Teun · · Score: 1

      Weird, exactly what I was thinking earlier today...

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    7. Re:Irony by Spottywot · · Score: 1

      I agree completely, hopefully it works and we can all carry on as normal, unfortunately I think Dice have spent too much money on this to let it go. We will be sold out to the advertisers like every other free site on the web. The monetization of everything eventually fucks everything. There will be no safe harbour anywhere for long until either the nature of humanity changes, or the nature of the economy does. I know which one of those is more likely, but even that is a long hard road that no-one wants to take the first steps down at the moment.

      --
      In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
    8. Re:Irony by excelsior_gr · · Score: 1

      That's the whole point. With Beta there can be no discussion.

  6. Non-obligatory Simpsons/Obligatory Futurama Quotes by deathcloset · · Score: 1

    (Hans Moleman is inside a phone booth at the bird sanctuary with birds attacking him.)

    Hans Moleman: (into the phone) Hello, I need the largest seed bell you have. (pause) No, that's too big.

    My point is that some things can be too big: but not a supercollider.

    Humorbot 5.0: So I said, "Super-collider? I just met her!" [audience laughs] And then they built the super collider.

    Also insert here some observation about theoretical maximum energies, public misunderstandings and political obstacles.

  7. Planned? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I read this a while ago and was under the assumption that this was the plan all along http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider#Proposed_upgrade?

    1. Re:Planned? by f()rK()_Bomb · · Score: 1

      Thats the upgrade. This is the successor.

      --
      "The space elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing." - Arthur C. Clarke ~1980
  8. cern does what researchers want ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a novel idea! I have the odd feeling that principle could be applied to the Beta disaster somehow, but I do not quite have a full grasp on it.
    I will research the idea and let you know, but I have a feeling this can be revolutionary !

  9. The Slashcott by sticks_us · · Score: 2, Informative

    So where will everybody be next week?

    Hacker news
    Lobste.rs
    Reddit ...?

    Also, has someone volunteered to put up a slashcott update site (maybe with statistics on how well/poorly the site is doing during the blockade?)

    Just curious.

    --
    "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." -- Donald Knuth
    1. Re:The Slashcott by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, has someone volunteered to put up a slashcott update site (maybe with statistics on how well/poorly the site is doing during the blockade?)

      Sounds like you just did.

    2. Re:The Slashcott by sticks_us · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Might be fun.

      Maybe these guys got it covered though:

      http://www.altslashdot.org/wik...

      --
      "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." -- Donald Knuth
    3. Re:The Slashcott by AlfaMike · · Score: 2

      I enjoy browsing Reddit but I think it would be a terrible place for a community like Slashdot. The comment sections deteriorate WAY faster as soon as a sub-reddit gets mildly popular.

    4. Re:The Slashcott by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      Also, has someone volunteered to put up a slashcott update site (maybe with statistics on how well/poorly the site is doing during the blockade?)

      Yup. falling like a rock.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    5. Re:The Slashcott by sliceoflife · · Score: 1

      Would be interesting to see what can be dome in a week there...

    6. Re:The Slashcott by Zedrick · · Score: 1

      http://www.c64.sk/

      No section for discussions, but at least news for nerds.

    7. Re:The Slashcott by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll be right here posting beta hate flood cuz a boycott is a dumb as fuck idea.

    8. Re:The Slashcott by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      After getting a couple of thousand karma points at HN over the course of a year (manly due to a couple of very popular story submissions) I quit going there because their administration is even more opaque than slashdot.

      They have this policy of "hell-banning" posters so that they think their posts are going through, but they are the only people who can actually see their own posts. If you set an obscure flag in your preferences you can see their story submissions (and comments), they are marked "[dead]" immediately upon posting rather than by any human process of moderation. I got curious when I noticed five or six people who had been making high quality story submissions for months that were basically invisible to everyone else.

      The admins at HN don't notify people when they get hell-banned, they don't tell them what they did wrong so they can avoid it in the future. No warning, nothing. The admins don't even give the people who have been hell-banned a chance to make amends. If they do happen to figure out that they've been hell-banned on their own, there is no process for appeals, nor any other form of remediation.

      It's completely arbitrary, capricious and well, Kafkaesque. Kind of like getting on the TSA's no fly list. Nobody will tell you anything and if you figure it out there is nothing you can do about it. I guess the TSA is worse because you can't really change your identity, but you can create a new account at HN. But you still won't know what you did to get hell-banned, you may well do it again. That shit's going to get old after a while.

      Once I realized just how cruelly (presumably unintentionally) HN was run, I didn't feel like I could continue to contribute to their success so I took my toys and went home. I really wasn't up to a campaign of trying to fix things, just wasn't worth the effort.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    9. Re:The Slashcott by cultiv8 · · Score: 1

      slashcott.com
      I'm sure the maintainer on Github will gladly incorporate any Pull Requests.

      --
      sysadmins and parents of newborns get the same amount of sleep.
    10. Re:The Slashcott by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty interested. Knowing the people around here it could either be a fully reverse-engineered slashdot clone with proper unicode support and account migration (post a secret code in a comment to prove you're sliceoflife). Or it could be a 3 version old phpBB knockoff running on a shared host with .25mbit bandwidth allocation that runs for 3 hours before you get an account suspended error page.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    11. Re:The Slashcott by vandamme · · Score: 1

      I'm going to play with my grandkids instead of reading /. Better all around.

      And they just got a new beta version. He wears diapers, so he has something in common with slashdot's which is also full of shit.

  10. Soooo close to endgame. by Anachragnome · · Score: 1

    US5722418
    +
    US5644363
    +
    GoogleGlass
    +
    Acceptance
    =
    ????

    If history is any sort of an indicator, any rights we sell today, our children must buy back with blood tomorrow

  11. Beta? No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean Texas.

    That place never works for supercolliders of any kind.

  12. Not satisfied until by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    blackhole created. Then maybe new gamma star birth?

    1. Re:Not satisfied until by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they are desperately trying to open up a rift to a parallel universe. One without beta.

    2. Re:Not satisfied until by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heck, I could probably fit an entire parallel universe into the wasted space between the sides of my screen.

  13. And I want a New BICYCLE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And a new pair of roller skates, and a new girl friend, and a new life.

    1. Re:And I want a New BICYCLE! by bobbied · · Score: 1

      And a new pair of roller skates, and a new girl friend, and a new life.

      But I LIKE my life AND my wife...

      10 new wheels might be nice, but can we go with MOTORIZED ones?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:And I want a New BICYCLE! by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      But I LIKE my life AND my wife...

      Sorry . . . Obama just said that if you like your life and wife, you can keep them.

      . . . which means you can't.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  14. Re:Cheese Shop by sliceoflife · · Score: 1

    Very good.

  15. Alternative to being stuck with Beta by computersareevil · · Score: 2, Informative

    Will soon be hosted at AltSlashdot.org or a site linked through that domain.

    It will be for the Nerds, by the Nerds, focusing on the Stuff That Really Matters: The community that makes the comments the best part of Slashdot.

    The name will change to avoid any trademark problems. The new domain will be linked through AltSlashdot.org for as long as practical.

    Some have suggested encouraging Bruce Perens to resurrect Technocrat.net for the third time. With all due respect to Bruce, the problem with that is he has shown he is not a reliable host. He has twice deleted that site without warning and without providing access to the archives. I don't think we want to get burned a third time.

    1. Re:Alternative to being stuck with Beta by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

      The name will change to avoid any trademark problems.

      Just call it "slashcott.org" - satirical and political.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    2. Re:Alternative to being stuck with Beta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The name will change to avoid any trademark problems.

      I suggest that you call it BuckFeta

    3. Re:Alternative to being stuck with Beta by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      With all due respect to Bruce, the problem with that is he has shown he is not a reliable host. He has twice deleted that site without warning and without providing access to the archives. I don't think we want to get burned a third time.

      You've raised the issue, so let's put it out there - why are you going to be more reliable than Bruce?

      And tell me you're not going to write it in Ruby ... or PHP.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    4. Re:Alternative to being stuck with Beta by computersareevil · · Score: 1

      First, it's not my site.

      Second, I've never been burned by the new host. But I have been burned twice by Bruce. Why should I give Bruce a third chance to burn me?

    5. Re:Alternative to being stuck with Beta by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Second, I've never been burned by the new host. But I have been burned twice by Bruce. Why should I give Bruce a third chance to burn me?

      Right, you wouldn't, but with that experience, you'd want to look for a candidate hoster that would have qualities that would decrease the chances of a collapse. For better or worse, Slashdot has never collapsed (though they seem to be trying their best lately). So, Slashdot did something right that Bruce did wrong (he did eventually hire that one guy ... forget his name now, but it wasn't enough) and if the community is going to move away from Slashdot, it should go to someplace that stands a good chance of surviving - "haven't collapsed yet" isn't quite enough.

      It might be a business, it might be a co-op, but it probably shouldn't be one man's hobby.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  16. Beta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just commenting as an outsider: I've been following all the beta comments on Slashdot the last couple of days and I can tell these are already decreasing in numbers. That's what usually happens. People are upset, voice their concerns for a couple of days and then lose interest. When Google started pushing Google+ on YouTube, everyone was very upset, top videos were being flooded by comments about how much the new comment system and Google+ suck. A week later? Almost nobody cared to comment any more. The same thing will happen with Slashdot's beta. It's already happening. Why? Because in the end, people just don't care enough. Same thing with the next US presidential election. People will keep voting for the Democratic Party or Republican Party. Yes, all the privacy invasions and Guantanamo Bay and whatnot, it's all very sad. But in the end, people don't care enough. What people do care about is their own money and power. Their beers, video games, bread and circuses, and so on. Story after story, less beta comments on Slashdot. I'm not making this up, look through the comment sections of the last 40 or so stories yourself.

    1. Re:Beta by Antipater · · Score: 2

      And yet, the number of on-topic comments hasn't increased, either. It's not that people are getting accustomed to beta, it's that they're leaving.

      We're locked into the current two-party system by the very nature of first-past-the-poll voting. We're more-or-less locked into Youtube by its sheer mass: your average Joe doesn't have the server space or $$ to hold all that video content like Google does.

      We're not locked into slashdot. We have nostalgic feelings for it, but that's all.

      --
      Everything is better with chainsaws.
    2. Re:Beta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah the number of beta comments... but a story about a friggen particle accelerator with 4 on topic comments? If a decent alternative pops up in the next week i think slashdot is pretty much hosed even if they pull the beta site. "appealing to a wider audience" is basically a violation of the community's trust and even if they do pull beta it will be hard to win it back, because we know (or should know) that a "tweaked" beta that will be back because the goal here is to increase monetization by making a more advertiser friendly site.

    3. Re:Beta by isorox · · Score: 1

      And yet, the number of on-topic comments hasn't increased, either. It's not that people are getting accustomed to beta, it's that they're leaving.

      We're locked into the current two-party system by the very nature of first-past-the-poll voting. We're more-or-less locked into Youtube by its sheer mass: your average Joe doesn't have the server space or $$ to hold all that video content like Google does.

      We're not locked into slashdot. We have nostalgic feelings for it, but that's all.

      And low UIDs. Any replacement site will have to allow UID porting

    4. Re:Beta by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      A week later? Almost nobody cared to comment any more.

      I can't tell if you're telling the truth because I can't see the YouTube comments any more ...

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  17. Repeat story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is old news, and was reported on this very site last year: http://science.slashdot.org/story/13/11/13/1451221/physicists-plan-to-build-a-bigger-lhc

    1. Re:Repeat story by bobbied · · Score: 1

      This is old news, and was reported on this very site last year: http://science.slashdot.org/st...

      And my opinion hasn't changed. They are just toying with us and need to cut to the chase. What can we build so you won't be here asking for money again?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:Repeat story by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      What can we build so you won't be here asking for money again?

      Nothing. They will get bigger and bigger until we can't afford them anymore, then time and technology will advance, and maybe the cost comes down some, and we'll be able to afford it and build it. Then repeat.

    3. Re: Repeat story by craklyn · · Score: 1

      The LHC and its major experiments were built with the goal of discovering the Higgs Boson or excluding it, and it has secondary goals to search for new physics such as SUSY. We built the appropriate machine for accomplishing that goal. If we had the LHC in the 1950's, we would have had a few problems: 1) Astronomical cost to build, 2) Insufficient computational power to analyze the results, and 3) No theoretical framework motivating a search for a scalar particle in a certain mass range. In short, it would be building something too expensive that would be unusable and it would be given to people who wouldn't know what to do with it even if they could use it.

  18. Re:Fixed that 4U by bunratty · · Score: 1

    Yeah, all those lousy research scientists are just in it for the big money and don't produce anything useful.

    --
    What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
  19. New Article Summary by iceborer · · Score: 1

    "Not content with the profitability of Slashdot, researchers at DICE have their sights set on a new beast of a website that could have a negative content impact of 80 to 100 percent. The “leading provider of specialized websites” announced that it was hatching plans for an horrendous successor to Slashdot.org with an experimental rollout, which was quickly shit upon by the Slashdot community, resulting in an “apology” this week. The idea is to consider different Slashdot designs that will result of greater monetization of contributed assets— much more money. DICE wrote it was looking for a major redesign in order to create a website more accessible and shareable by a wider audience. "The existing site is fine. Fuck beta."

  20. Re: Fixed that 4U by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As opposed to unpaid tenure? WTF?

  21. So I have to add a subject? by Sepodati · · Score: 2

    People hate change... I don't get it.

    I'm trying beta right now. I can read the articles. Read the comments. Post a comment, obviously... what's the big deal other than hating change?

    Well... maybe I'll see the issue when I click "preview"...

    1. Re:So I have to add a subject? by DRMShill · · Score: 1

      I've been trying to figure that out myself. So far here's what I've seen:

      You can't click on 'parent' to see what that comment was a response to. So if you want to get some content on the conversation you have to keep moving your threshold until it appears.

      There's quite a bit of whitespace to the right.

      It uses javascript I think I read somewhere? I guess that's a problem for some people.

      They seem like issues that shouldn't be too hard to resolve so I don't understand what the vitriol is all about but then again I don't understand why Slashdot wouldn't just fix it.

      Feel free to point out what else is actually wrong. It's kind of hard to get a good summary of what's broke in between all the OMGG!!!!!!! FUCK BETA!!!! AHHHHH

    2. Re:So I have to add a subject? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone on slashdot is autistic to some level and autistic people cannot handle change. Simple really.

  22. SSC resurrected by u19925 · · Score: 2

    Didn't we almost had it? See Superconducting Super Collider This was proposed in 1983 and cancelled in 1992 after spending 2 billion USD.

    1. Re:SSC resurrected by Raxxon · · Score: 1

      I've been waiting for them to do it. SSC was bigger than LHC to start with. My dad worked for a company supplying computers and such for the project before it was canceled. Never got the chance to go out there with him since I was a minor and not legally employable. :| If they do bring it back I know where I'm throwing my resume. ;)

    2. Re:SSC resurrected by tokiko · · Score: 2

      They even specified a circumference between 80 to 100 kilometers. The Superconducting Super Collider was to be 87.1 kilometers!

    3. Re:SSC resurrected by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      The SSC was to be a 40TeV machjine (20 per beam). Regardless, CERN are being a bunch fo fucktards with this proposal as they can't even point to what it will be good for as they a) haven't even hit their own design energies and luminosities and b) have yet to take sufficient data to have a clue what the next (if any) hadron collider should look like.

    4. Re:SSC resurrected by kyrsjo · · Score: 1

      The FCC project is in a really early stage - it's basically a design study to see if it can be done. One reason to build a very large circular electron-positron collider is to properly study the Higgs (which cannot really be done at a proton machine like the LHC), and it *might* be cheaper to build it circular instead of linear (like CLIC and ILC).

      Once you've done with the electron bit, it gets interesting to look at the next energy scale - and for that you need a huge proton machine. And if we anyway build the tunel, why not just rip out the (then) old electron ring and build a proton ring...

      On the "more physics than the Higgs" side: As far as I understand, there has to be something more in order to "hold it together" - the Higgs is on the heavier side of what is expected without "something more", there is this pesky dark-matter problem, the issue of the observed matter/antimatter ratio being way larger than what is predicted by the current theory which is built on the data we have so far, and a few more theoretical arguments.

      Anyway, time to get back to thesis-writing @ CERN, hoping the power holds as they're testing "emergency stop tests" at the BOOSTER ring and power has been flickering a few times... So far the caps in my PSU have been able to eat the glitches...

    5. Re:SSC resurrected by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      The LHC was designed to find and study the Higgs and there is no reason to say it cant "properly study" the Higgs. That is like saying that the Tevatron was unable to properly study the top.

      This effort is way to early and honestly it just looks like an attempt to grab attention and funding from any future linear collider(s).

  23. Is it by Sepodati · · Score: 1

    the nested blocks? I can see that getting annoying at enough levels down...

  24. Dumb name. by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    They're calling it FCC. (Future Circular Colliders). What a stupid choice. I mean its bound to cause some confusion that could have very easily been avoided.
    I realise the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) isn't a global organization but you'd think CERN would have the brains and foresight to avoid reuse of already long established and very well-known acronyms.

    1. Re:Dumb name. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like Federal Communications Commission is the only existing one. What deal does it make if another is added?

      http://www.acronymfinder.com/FCC.html

    2. Re:Dumb name. by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      They're calling it FCC. (Future Circular Colliders). What a stupid choice. I mean its bound to cause some confusion that could have very easily been avoided.
      I realise the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) isn't a global organization but you'd think CERN would have the brains and foresight to avoid reuse of already long established and very well-known acronyms.

      Heard about the new website called whack-period?

    3. Re:Dumb name. by f()rK()_Bomb · · Score: 1

      They're calling it IRA. (Individual Retirement Account). What a stupid choice. I mean its bound to cause some confusion that could have very easily been avoided. I realise the IRA (Irish Republican Army) isn't a global organization but you'd think the American Government would have the brains and foresight to avoid reuse of already long established and very well-known acronyms.

      --
      "The space elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing." - Arthur C. Clarke ~1980
    4. Re:Dumb name. by vandamme · · Score: 1

      Sounds like another MDR project.

      .

      . ...Money down the rathole.

  25. Does it by Sepodati · · Score: 1

    just keep getting smaller and smaller?

    Reminds me of reading a site on the phone where the blocks would eventually get so small that only a single word is shown on each line. okay...that's annoying.

    1. Re:Does it by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      just keep getting smaller and smaller?

      Yep. I took screenshots for another discussion where I was arguing with someone about how it looked great and how I must be looking at some other screen:

      http://imgur.com/YaOtcUk
      http://imgur.com/YvQjTIf

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  26. Re:Fixed that 4U by hubie · · Score: 2

    Yeah, I had thought about becoming a charged particle detector technician because it's a lifestyle of high rollers, fast cars, and fast women. Didn't you know that quantum mechanics eat steak?

  27. New particle collider needs a huge area by MiniMike · · Score: 1

    I think they could put this new super large particle collider in the whitespace left by Beta.

  28. have I got a hole in the ground for you! by somepunk · · Score: 1

    Made to order for a 40 TeV collider! Halfway to 100 TeV, triple the energy of LHC! Save billions in construction!
    http://www.amusingplanet.com/2...

    --
    Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do. (Isaac Asimov)
  29. Sounds like Dr. Evil at work... by acidradio · · Score: 1

    I can only picture that someone who looks like Dr. Evil (from the Austin Powers series) commissioning the construction of this "bigger, better" supercollider :|

    1. Re:Sounds like Dr. Evil at work... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      They originally tasked Dr. Horrible with managing it, but he kept trying to sidetrack the project into building bigger and bigger Freeze Rays.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
  30. The metric system is inferior by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    See. They sized it at 27 kilometers. If the had made it 27 miles instead it would be much more powerfuler.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  31. Re: Fixed that 4U by Trepidity · · Score: 1

    It's like an unpaid internship, but forever!

  32. Will the black holes it creates... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    .... suck more than slashdot beta?

  33. To blow up BETA? by will381796 · · Score: 0

    Do they want to try and use the new particle collider to blow up /. BETA?

  34. 200 miles of PRON!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just imagine what going on in those tunnel !!

  35. mod points by Bill+Evans · · Score: 0

    I got 15 points just a couple of days ago, and I've almost finished using them.

    It's a good thing that I didn't need to log on to Beta, because Beta won't even let me log on. I click the "Sign on" button and that whole black left side of the window closes up again.

    What do you call that thingie that's square shaped and consists of four horizontal lines, anyway?

    --
    Oh, this Beta, it is not so good.
  36. Monetization by PingXao · · Score: 4, Interesting

    BETA is clearly about monetization. The kids today - the next generation of consumers - expect a trendy style that slashdot doesn't exhibit. Dice is clearly interested in attracting a larger "audience" and they can't afford to have these new consumers visit the site, decide that it's not hip enough or it looks "old", and move on never to return. That has to be the thinking behind BETA.

    And the reason they want to increase their "audience share" is simple: The more people visit the site the more they can charge for advertising space. It really is that simple. They want to turn slashdot into a profit generator and the community be damned. They will happily throw all of us under the bus if it means they can acquire hordes of retards whose idea of insightful commentary consists of nothing more than "+1", or "Like" or (as we used to loathe in the days of AOHeLl: "Me too!"

    Like broadcast television and several other advertising models, they want to turn US into the PRODUCT that they sell to ADVERTISERS.

    Greedy sleazebags. I eagerly await Boycott Week from Feb 10th through the 17th. My only use of slashdot that week will be using the name on other sites to see how much the traffic drops off. More widespread dissemination of the BOYCOTT week needs to happen this weekend before it's scheduled to start on Monday. The only way to get through to marketeers and corporatist assholes is to hit 'em where it hurts: in their wallet. A boycott has the potential to show them just how low their "brand" can sink when they piss off their loyal userbase.

    1. Re:Monetization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they want to turn US into the PRODUCT that they sell to ADVERTISERS

      That has been the case since /. first had ads. However, they want other, more profitable, people to be the product and for us to leave.

  37. Should be a dual purpose particle accelerator by Trachman · · Score: 4, Funny

    They Should consider building a dual purpose atom accelerator (Lepton Accelerator). One purpose would be research of the particles by colliding them. The secondary purpose would be defense of the earth from meteorites. Once you accelerate a ton of atoms to the speed of light you, then, can direct the accelerated beam towards meteorite and destroy it. This new accelerator can be valuable defense installation. Also easier to justify the funds needed and take them from military budgets. I can see that in 50 years we will be building particle accelerator with the radius of the earth, 6378 kilometers or circumference of 40,000 kilometeres. Based on my approximate calculations, if current technologies are used we could achieve 21 PeV or 20734 TeV in such accelerator.

    1. Re:Should be a dual purpose particle accelerator by azav · · Score: 1

      Sigh. Wish I had mod points left to upvote you.

      --
      - Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
    2. Re:Should be a dual purpose particle accelerator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > can direct the accelerated beam towards meteorite

      That won't be very effective since meteorites, like most matter, are 99.999999999999% empty space. Aiming a electron-sized, or smaller, particle at it means that you'll never be able to hit it all practical purposes.

      > Once you accelerate a ton of atoms to the speed of light you

      Everything you can accelerate to the speed of light has no mass so that doesn't help. The momentum of a massless particle traveling the speed of light is zero.

    3. Re:Should be a dual purpose particle accelerator by Shimbo · · Score: 1

      Everything you can accelerate to the speed of light has no mass so that doesn't help. The momentum of a massless particle traveling the speed of light is zero.

      p = E/c

    4. Re:Should be a dual purpose particle accelerator by joe_frisch · · Score: 1

      Even 10^20 eV cosmic rays don't make it through the earth's atmosphere. Instead they create huge diffuse showers of secondary particles, It seems non-intuitive, but higher energy doesn't help much in getting through solid materials.

      You will get some muons which will go through a lot of matter, but they will not be very directional.

    5. Re:Should be a dual purpose particle accelerator by kyrsjo · · Score: 1

      A lepton machine accelerates leptons, meaning electrons, muons, or taus (and technically speaking, I guess a neutrino-accelerator would also be a lepton machine...). A machine being a lepton machine doesn't say much about for what purpose someone built it.

      Other than that, one doesn't accelerate "tons" of atoms in particle accelerators - try nanograms. Also, good luck trying to point such a high energy particle beam in any reasonable radius - they're pretty stiff. But they're probably not stiff enough not to be redirected by the earths magnetic field and miss the target.

      The pointing problem may have a sort of (but very unrealistic I think) solution, have a look at
      http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/03...
      appendix B "Possible accelerator scheme"

  38. Moonriders by elliot2 · · Score: 1

    The Moonriders will save us.

  39. Gee by azav · · Score: 1

    Damn shame we didn't build one in Texas when we had the chance.

    --
    - Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
  40. What is this, a collider for ants? by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

    It has to be at least .... 3 times as large!

    1. Re:What is this, a collider for ants? by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · · Score: 1

      Even ants don't need this piece of crap - they produce billions of TeV every day! Call me when there's some real power behind it.

  41. Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make it 10-20x as big as planned right now to save money and time.

    1. Re:Solution by joe_frisch · · Score: 1

      wont' help.l they will just want one 3X bigger than THAT next. (I build high energy accelerators, we always want more...)

  42. Re:A compelling reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here's the compelling reason... to ruin it. Other sites have done it, so why not slashdot?
    Yahoo! news: ruined
    Yahoo! mail: ruined
    Google groups: ruined
    iOS: ruined with iOS7
    windows: ruined with 8/8.1
    ms office: ruined by ribbons

  43. Of course they want one. by hey! · · Score: 4, Funny

    Even *I* want a collider 3x as powerful as the most powerful particle accelerator the world has yet seen, and I'm not even a physicist.

    I like to imagine the kilometers of stainless steel gleaming in the harsh mercury vapor illumination; the drifting swirls of escaped cryogenic vapors; the sound of my evil laughter echoing in the vast subterranean chamber. If those things don't inspire you, there must be something inhuman about you.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  44. HOSTS file by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why boycott, when you can just use a HOSTS file?

    1. Re:HOSTS file by gottabeme · · Score: 1

      Wait...you mean...APK was right?!

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
  45. Hello Texas... by niftymitch · · Score: 1

    It seems that the Texas location is fair game again.

    There are not too many places where a 100Km circle can be scribed
    and not slice through hills, mountains, and towns.

    My personal preference for spending billions and billions
    on research would best be an expansion and repurposing
    of the US federal compute center (NSA, FBI, DHS) in Utah
    to be a national and global climate center research center.

    There is a real need to understand the climate changes man made
    or not and understand what needs to happen.

    We could plant merlot grapes in Norway or in the Sahara so they
    would be ready when the climate changes to favor them. If that
    was not enough reason we could look at fields of corn sugar production
    moving to Brazil.

    Food, fuel, water -- changes natural or not need to be understood.

    Perhaps if we were to grind Gibraltar into chunks that could be trucked
    a short distance so we could close off the entrance to the Mediterranean
    by reducing that thermal mass the Sahara could be made to bloom (or not).

    The reality is that food production is a lot harder than a couple zucchini plants
    that are so easy to coax into abundance.

    Then there is insulation, flood planes, mosquito born maladies.
    Recall that there are still vast areas of Africa that are want to kill
    you with insect born diseases.

    --
    Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
    1. Re:Hello Texas... by kyrsjo · · Score: 1

      It seems that the Texas location is fair game again.

      There are not too many places where a 100Km circle can be scribed
      and not slice through hills, mountains, and towns.

      That's why you build it ~100 m underground.

    2. Re:Hello Texas... by gottabeme · · Score: 1

      We could plant merlot grapes in Norway or in the Sahara so they
      would be ready when the climate changes to favor them.

      Yeah...we could plant grapes in the desert so that, someday, when it's not a desert anymore, the grapes will be ready...

      This is the kind of "thinking" that alarmists do. "We have to plant the grapes NOW so that they'll be ready in time for the climate disaster!"

      Meanwhile, life goes on. The sad part is how much time and money is wasted on ideas like this that could actually be doing some good instead.

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
  46. already one half built in the us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isnt there something like an 80km one half built already in the US? why not buy it and install all the components and save some scratch? plus you can prance around the states talking about kilometers and euro-dance and get yelled at by rednecks. which would be fun.

  47. Fuck beta radiation. by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

    On the topic, though, I thought next generation accelerators would be linear to avoid radiational losses.

    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  48. why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    was this not considered before the LHC?

  49. I've heard that before by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    "Dad, I wanna 100-foot-tall pony!"

  50. How fortuitous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Excellent, we can use this to shift universal timestreams with untold efficiency. The increased range will facilitate a lower divergence threshold, letting us properly jump from this shitty BETA timeline to a utopian alpha.

    Oh wait, you're talking about the /. beta? Whatever, same outcome!

    - John Titor

  51. Build one off-Earth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They really should talk to NASA. At some point we should find a nice 200km asteroid and build one around it safely off-planet. The vacuum's already there and it could be solar powered.

  52. It won't be in the USA by davidwr · · Score: 1

    I doubt the Physics community will trust the US Government to be a critical partner any project that big until the institutional memory of the SSC budget axe goes away. We are just over 20 years into what I expect to be a 40-60 year wait for that to happen.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  53. Oh Yeah, well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...I want one 5x bigger than the LHC. I win!

  54. hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anybody "not scientist" ever had a chance to vote AGAINST ? NOT TO PLAY staking his and his family lives?
    Seems scientists cannot live without making "human mistakes"... If 14 TeV doesn't made up any fireworks - they want to move for 100 TeV...
    Of course that's no problem for them to say "ups ..." if anything went wrong way before...
    So they hope it will stay so forever keeping to play with more and more dangerous toys.. Can they insure anybody around them that nothing would go wrong ?
    That is mad game where all others are forced to participate and which all others are forced to fund. If dices in the hands of those aged infants will turn on wrong numbers - everybody will lose their lives in the name of "science"... - Does anybody "not scientist" ever had a chance to vote AGAINST ? NOT TO PLAY staking his and his family lives?

    1. Re:hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems scientists cannot live without making "human mistakes"... If 14 TeV doesn't made up any fireworks - they want to move for 100 TeV...

      That's because scientists did consider the issue and determined that incoming cosmic rays bombarding Earth's upper atmosphere have higher energy densities than anything the LHC was capable of. Doubtless someone responsible will conduct a risk assessment for this proposal too.

      A good question to ask is: The LHC cost +$20B in order to confirm the existence of Higgs. Was it worth it? What will the cost of this proposal be? What will it confirm or refute, and could that money be better spent elsewhere?

      But arguing against the project on the grounds that the planet will might sucked into a manufactured singularity... that wouldn't even make good fiction.

      Bah. Get off my lawn.

  55. Build it on the moon! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should build it around the moon's equator!
    The moon has a circumference of ~11,000 km, think of the power they could get.
    The moon is in near vacuum. It would not need large vacuum pumps to maintain proper operating pressure, just a sealed pipe to keep outside particles from contaminating experimental results.
    In shadow the moon is near absolute zero, and thus would not need large scale cryogenics to maintain magnetic potency.
    Abundant power, either from solar on the day side, or by large helium3 reserves if fusion technology becomes available.
    The nearest neighbors are ~385,000 km away, just in case something "weird or strange" happens.
    I'm sure there are other advantages as well.

  56. What is this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A particle collider for ants?

  57. Goal? by manu0601 · · Score: 2

    What is their goal? LHC was to find the Higgs boson. Now they have it (though I am not sure it has any consequence), what is the next goal?

    1. Re:Goal? by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      Looks clear to me, build a bigger CERN.

    2. Re:Goal? by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      Um, you means the CERNS has a conatus on its own?

    3. Re:Goal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same as it has always been. To move large quantities of money from other people through the government and into the pockets of supporters.

    4. Re:Goal? by czert · · Score: 3, Informative

      The goal stays the same: validate or disprove predictions of physics at energy levels never before achieved.

    5. Re:Goal? by schn · · Score: 2

      properties of the higgs, whether there is more than 1 higgs, search for supersymmetry / DM, b meson physics to check the quark model.

    6. Re:Goal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's still a bunch of string theories out there, as well as other theories a layperson such as myself have no idea about. Just because we now understand gravity doesn't mean that we're done with physics yet.

      I support their idea for a larger LHC as much as I don't support beta.

    7. Re:Goal? by vandamme · · Score: 1

      What pressing problem of humanity did finding the Higgs Boson solve?

    8. Re:Goal? by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      I guess the standard answer to your question is "improving our knowledge of the Universe", though in this particular case, I am not sure finding the Higgs helped us making any progress

      Well, at least, money spent here went into real economy, and it created activity for many people. Engineering problems that had to be solved while building the LHC, perhaps some of them are now useful in other projects.

      Of course it would have even been better if the project was an ecological investment, helping us to reduce our ecological footprint while retaining the same living standard. But at least this kind of activity is better than working on financial products.

    9. Re: Goal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on, the next LHC costs only as much as a new generation U.S, aircraft carrier w/o jets! That is peanuts within a military budget.

  58. Poor coding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TTSIA

  59. Fuck them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spend the money on condensed matter physics that someday may be useful to humanity. Spending money on particle physics is worst than burning it and should be criminalized.

  60. TIL: The Title Says It All!! by zidium · · Score: 1

    Today I Learned: TTSIA!!

    --
    Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
  61. Hello, the Moon? by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    These geniuses can build CERN, but they can't install it on the moon? I understand, it's the math; right? And CERN types don't really work with the math? CERN types are more big picture folks, right?

  62. B.E.T.A: Beta Extends Target Audience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree that BETA is definitely a money grab, however I don't think that the young people (such as myself) in the target audience of Slashdot, or rather, former target audience typically care if it looks new or trendy. It is a news site for nerds who probably care more about functionality than looks. I also think that people who would look at the old Slashdot interface and move on because it does not look new enough probably would be better off somewhere else anyways. One of the things that makes Slashdot so great is the discussions in the comments, and so having an older looking interface might help filter out the people who are quick to judge, don't take the time to read things and would not be good participants in the discussions.

  63. Just skip to the maximum possible size by superbowl · · Score: 1

    Each generation of these circular accelerators just gets bigger and bigger (yes, for technical reasons like electron energy dissipation as it moves fast in a circle). Physicists should stop doing this incremental size-increase crap and just go for the maximum. The incremental approach would appear to cost more money in the long run.

    1. Re:Just skip to the maximum possible size by gottabeme · · Score: 1

      Each generation of these computers just gets more and more transistors. Engineers should stop doing this incremental size-increase crap and just go for the maximum. The incremental approach would appear to cost more money in the long run.

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
  64. Straight-line acceleration by Kevin+Fishburne · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't the optimal path to increase the speed of matter as rapidly as possible be a straight line? Perhaps it's impractical, but they could conceivably build an accelerator that wrapped the surface of Earth. Go for the gold or go home. :)

    --
    Buy your next Linux PC at eightvirtues.com
    1. Re:Straight-line acceleration by the_other_chewey · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the optimal path to increase the speed of matter as rapidly as possible be a straight line?

      Yes. And it is being given serious thought.

      It's only really sensible for a certain class of particles though, so it complements the LHC (or its successor),
      but doesn't replace it. The main issue is that in a linear collider, one can't "reuse" the accelerating elements
      by sending the particles through more than once. That is very limiting for heavier particles and makes the
      ring more efficient.

      Perhaps it's impractical, but they could conceivably build an accelerator that wrapped the surface of Earth.

      That's wouldn't be a straight line anymore...

    2. Re:Straight-line acceleration by Kevin+Fishburne · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't be straight, but it would be straighter. I was thinking of automobile racing as an analogy. The straighter your racing line the faster you accelerate and the greater your top speed because less energy is wasted on lateral correction. Similar rules should apply to moving particles through a vacuum by electromagnets (or however they move them). I wonder if that would be a compromise between the advantages and disadvantages of linear and ring accelerators. It'd be insanely expensive, though, so I don't think it'll happen soon.

      --
      Buy your next Linux PC at eightvirtues.com
  65. Subject by tsa · · Score: 1

    It's always been like this. Every change in the layout has been met with lots of shouting and "We hate you" etc. Eventually it dies down and nobody cares anymore.

    There are two things about the beta I don't like: the stupid pictures that come with every article, and the enormous amount of white space to the right of the comments. For the rest it's fine with me, just as the old layout is fine with me.

    --

    -- Cheers!

  66. really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so we canceled the one in the us that was suppsed to be this size because of cern and now they want this?

  67. Re:A compelling reason... by Barsteward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    will you fucking twats take your complaints about the beta to the correct forum instead of infecting all the articles with your trivial childish comments

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  68. But, seriously... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't want to share a orbit with 100 Tev experiments, leave alone a biosphere. It would nice if they build halfway between Venus and Mercury. Lots of solar power and that's safe distance, should you get a quantum black hole stable enough to start growing - then it shallow the beast and orbit until it burst into gamma rays. Maybe enough gamma rays to cause some extra cancer on people facing the burst. On Earth, it would shallow the world, game over.

  69. Re:A compelling reason... by flyneye · · Score: 1

    Send them to CERN and launch them like particles, that should remove defects.
    Makes me wonder why CERN doesnt anticipate their future desires and build one TEN times bigger so they can save money and real estate. When they get one thats 3 times bigger theyll only want another bigger one, then a bigger one. CUT TO THE CHASE, build it 10 times bigger so you dont have a country full of super colliders and no where to farm, swim, drive, live, etc.
    Think ahead, Jeez! Probably get a better break on raw materials buying in bigger bulk anyway. Youd think theyd put someone SMART in charge of this to begin with. What, a bunch of physicists, engineers and kitchen help and no-one can CAD up the dream machine? COME ON!

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  70. Re:A compelling reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    NO.

  71. Re:A compelling reason... by Barsteward · · Score: 0

    COWARDLY TWAT

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  72. How do you think research is done by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1

    . . . it is all Web page redesign and Marketing.

  73. Build it in the US by marcgvky · · Score: 0

    It would be nice if we could net back some of our investment in developing this technology. Just saying. Put it somwhere hip and cool, that will attract many smart folks and retain them....

  74. Freeman Dyson on those durn 'sperimentalists by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1
    Dyson commenting on the SSC as well as early generations of "white elephant-big science" remarked that there are more dimensions to an accelerator than peak energy. An important one is luminosity -- the ability to see rare events by having many events.

    The excuse that "they are not going to destroy the Universe" is based on cosmic rays having energies way beyond what a ring circling the planet could achieve, although I guess the luminosity is low and that is why we are not swallowed up by a black hole?

    But Dyson's point is that these mega projects are throwing bucks/Euros after diminishing returns as the interesting stuff is probably still outside your reach. He thought that people should be considering novel concepts rather than just making what we have bigger . . . and more expensive.

  75. Wrong direction! by jennatalia · · Score: 0

    CERN should be developing and making Portal devices real. Much more important to the real world...

  76. radial accelerator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Radial Accelerators are better

    https://github.com/singularian/radialaccelerator

    A meter accelerator could have the power of the entire LHC.

  77. radial accelerator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A radial accelerator is better.

    https://github.com/singularian/radialaccelerator

  78. Re:A compelling reason... by toddestan · · Score: 1

    THANK YOU. It seems that if beta doesn't drive people away, the incessant whining about it the comments of every article will.

  79. Naming conventions by captain_dope_pants · · Score: 1

    They'd better get the name of it right: I presume, previous to the LHC, there have been a Small and a Medium so Xtra Large might be good - plus there's plenty of room for further, bigger colliders.

    But if they leap straight in with "Mega" or "Super Ginormous" - well, they're gonna run out of names for future colliders pretty damn quick.

    "Quite Big" is nicely understated; but in this age of superlative madness, where everything is "Giga", and "Ultra" - even though it's the first iteration of a product - and people who manage to walk across a room without blinding themselves with a spoon are labelled "Heroes"...

    Well, they'll probably call it the "Omega Class, Hyper-lightspeed, Super-massive, Multi-yottabyte Particle Annihilator"

    And then, when they want a bigger one, they'll be fucked - like Beta should be.

    --
    while (true != false) process_more_stupid_code();
  80. Re:A compelling reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FUCK BETA.

  81. Re: A compelling reason... by djdarko · · Score: 1

    You sound like my grandpa. The train to the future just left and you're still at the station. Get used to the fact that change is constant, embrace it, or be left behind. Resistance is futile!

  82. Re:A compelling reason... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    MOD parent up! I don't have mod points today - which is slightly unusual.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"