Why? Technology is 40 years newer. Materials science has changed, automation, manufacturing techniques and a slew of other core technologies important for space flight have changed as much in the last 40 years as computing technology has. They're going to be able to do more with less the same as other up-starts like SpaceX can do -- but they're going to invest national levels of resources into it, with SpaceX levels of innovation and dramatically less of a "defense contractor welfare" bloat that drags down NASA.
And good for them. For the sake of every living thing that's fought entropy for the last three billion years on Earth, it doesn't matter who is working towards getting life off this rock, it just matters that someone is.
You mightn't call being in the top 9% of households incomes "exceptionally affluent", but the other 91% of people probably do.
For a school that costs $60k a year?
Are kids today really that stupid? If you don't have an income that high, even with a LOT of grants, you're taking on a crushing debt.
The first lesson people need to learn is to live responsibly. Someone who isn't from a family making that much dropping a quarter million dollars on an education is, in fact, a perfect example of not.
Yes. Or perhaps only one (in the relevant time frame).
In terms of a deterrent, I'm not sure 5 years of jail is going to sound any more scary than just expulsion; the penalties here seem out of line.
IMO, not even remotely out of line. Ignoring the impact to students at Harvard (and the cost to the school), it impacted local police, and the area around Harvard.
And more importantly, and the whole point of punishments, is to put the deterrent high enough to prevent others from doing it. If the perception of a moron like this kid is "I'm going to flunk out" vs "I'm going to be expelled", unless there's a 100% chance of being caught making the threat, you're better off making the threat if the only ramification is being expelled.
Citation needed. The paper does not in fact specify the feature size, but it does say it's related to wire size. I think it's much smaller than you think.
But is the resolution actually that bad? Because that would be quite useless. You'd have to machine the final product in practically every case.
I guess we'll never know, because the linked article was hosted on a cracker jack box. Techienews indeed.
Yes, it would be that bad. I can't imagine there's really any use for a "printer" like that... you'd end up with a messy blob of metal with little strength that would need more machining to make useful than it would take to just CNC... or use a real sintering printer.
Its sort of a cool hack, but... I mean, if you want a non-plastic printer, make one that prints out cookie dough. At least you'd get something tasty out of it.
It's hard to imagine that a tech company would screen candidates based on area codes these days. I've been living in Seattle for over five years and still have a 415 (San Francisco) area code. I think people tend not to change their phone numbers when moving anymore.
That being said, I'm graduating soon with a PhD in bioinformatics, have an MS in computer science, and I'm not getting any interviews with large tech companies in the area. Maybe I do need a local phone number...
I would bet anything but the real big companies always does. Local hires (and candidates when it comes time to interview) are a lot cheaper. If your cell phone doesn't match where you live, you should indicate where you live on your resume.
The GPs suggestion of pretending to live in Seattle is a bad idea. I've hired LOTS of people over the years, and if anyone ever pulled that, their resume would be round filed no matter how good they might be.
IMO, if he wants to live in Seattle, and wants to find a job there, his best bet is to just move.
Okay, let me amend my statement, having looked at the Wikipedia page.
Wikipedia isn't wrong. You just made up a number that doesn't appear anywhere in Wikipedia... for some bizarre reason. Did you make up a number to make the 10% figure worse than it is? The real numbers supported your case better.
Wikipedia is wrong. Most EVs get between 3-4 miles per kwh, there's about a 20% loss in charging the battery, so you're looking at 7.5-10 kwh of electricity from the mains to go 25 miles. Only in Alaska and Hawaii is electricity expensive enough to cost $2 to go 25 miles. The average kwh cost in the US is about twelve cents, or $0.90 to $1.20 to go 25 miles.
So I agree with you -- very few people (even the environmentally conscious who tend to buy EVs) would care about the extra dime a day it costs, if it means easy charging. If you cut range 10%, we'd be pissed, but not increase costs 10%.
As many others pointed out, unlike a place of business, the school is publicly funded... so the public has some rights regarding access to fields, water fountains, etc. unless otherwise marked.
The public actually has no access to any of that unless otherwise noted. Even being on those fields outside a permitted school activity is trespassing.
I'm not sure why people seem to think public funding has anything to do with rights of use. The DoD is publicly funded, but I can't hop in an F16, or go for a walk on a secured base. I can't walk into an elementary school and plop on down on a couch to use their Internet. I can't go use the police shooting range because I don't feel like paying at a public one. Hell, even in something explicitly public -- I can't go and set up a tent and have a party in a public park.
If it's a public school, then a tax-paying citizen can reasonably claim he has already paid for the electricity in question. Should we now ask special permission to walk down the sidewalk or drive down the street? No, of course not. We as taxpayers have already paid for it.
The policeman was way, way out of line. He should find himself without a job in short order. Boneheads like him give commanders ulcers with the PR fallout.
Except you can't... you can't go to the public school and use its fields without permission. You can't go into its wood shop and fire up a table saw. You can't sit down in the library and use their wireless. Just like you can't walk into town hall and make photo copies, or grab a cup of coffee from the break room in the police station.
Your fundamental premise is absolutely incorrect. You paying for it, as a taxpayer, is completely irrelevant.
I'm getting pretty tired of seeing extension cords snaking through parking lots and parking garages.
I wondered how I would power an electric in my underground (no outlets) and have yet to see the extension cord snaking where I live. I assumed that the parking lot/garage would just forbid it by unplugging or cutting those extensions.
In most cases, you wouldn't power an electric. The costs aren't insignificant -- it can easily be $50-$60 a month in electricity if you drive a lot. Most landlords won't absorb that themselves, and it'd be pretty surprising if they (or the power company) would run a separate meter for it.
I mostly just charge my car at home, and I have power there, but I know a few folks who had luck with apartment managers and/or work building managers agreeing to a flat $50 a month or $100/month fee to charge, once they were educated on what it represented. I have a long commute -- if there was power available in the lot at work, I'd absolutely be willing to pony up $30-$50 a month to charge at work. (It'd save me about $100 of gas, and probably cost them $8/wk in electricity.)
I'm getting pretty tired of seeing extension cords snaking through parking lots and parking garages.
I don't think the issue here is just five cents; some places can't handle the capacity this puts on their systems or wiring, or perhaps they don't want the liability of you screwing up your car thanks to faulty wiring, and suing you for it. And hell, what if some bright person uses a cord that's too light of a gauge for the current, and ends up starting a fire or hurting someone?
Charging should be done where appropriate, not wherever anyone wants.
Saying this as an owner of a car that gets plugged in, I totally agree. Stealing power is stealing power. Common sense says if you aren't paying the bill on that outlet, you ask whoever is paying for it before you plug in, you don't assume its okay.
That's good for a couple of reasons. It avoids situations like this (and this isn't, by any means, the first time its happened), and it also gets the discussion about charging going... lots of places will tell you no problem. Places that don't may or may not have legitimate concerns about it. Considering how many times I've popped breakers with my charging cable, its entirely reasonable for places to say no. This isn't plugging in a cell phone charger, its plugging in a device that nearly maxes out a typical residential circuit.
The thing that is stupid about this article isn't that the police considered it theft (it absolutely, unequivocally is), but rather that the police arrested someone for the theft of something worth so little. I could *almost* see a justification if the guy was arrested on the spot because the officer didn't know the electricity was worth so little, but after a few days of "investigation", it should've been obvious that the amount falls well below the lower limit of what people are arrested for where theft is concerned.
IMO, the guy who plugged is car in is the jackass in this -- its because of people like him that people who actually *ask* run into problems.
You've clearly never been around someone in the final stages of dementia. I can tell you this, I'll be checking out before I get to that point.
That is YOUR own choice. You can do what you want with your life. What you cannot do, and cannot expect is laws that enable other people to kill you legally. There is a world of difference between these 2 alternatives.
Suicide is illegal, as well. So, really, there isn't. The cold hard legal fact is, you do not have a choice. You suffer until you die naturally. And, odds are even if it was legal to kill yourself, at that point you'd be unable to. So you will suffer until that suffering finally ends.
The fucked up thing about it, is because of some bizarre more that was taught to people during impressionable periods of their life, they're completely unable to see the sheer inhumanity of guaranteeing that nearly every living person will suffer needlessly before they die.
Its probably good you posted as an AC, because your position is so blatantly cruel and moronic, having even your virtual identity associated with it should be embarrassing to you.
For the record, I believe euthanasia laws need modernized. But wishing mass deaths on people who don't share your views is just wrong.
Well, I think he was probably being a bit facetious and angry... and, frankly, even if you don't give him the benefit of the doubt, the fact is he's talking about people whose views are torturing his father. If someone was torturing my father, my wishing their death is the least of the things they should be concerned about.
This poorly written article is from March. The problem has already been solved. Why I am reading this on slashdot now?
"In other news, George Clooney reports his iPhone 1 had a bug in 2007"
Articles suggesting the "darling" of the automotive world has issues are very hot right now.
Slashdot, keep in mind, is not a "news for nerds" site anymore -- it hasn't been in a decade, and especially isn't since DICE bought it. Its a Fox News like media channel pumping out drivel for a particular narrow demographic to drive ad revenue.
The FDA decided in 2010 that services claiming to evaluate a customer's risk of disease must be cleared by regulators if the companies sell directly to consumers
So a bunch of un-elected bureaucrats decided whether same un-elected bureaucrats had the power to regulate a product or service? Mind you, I'm not questioning whether this is a good product or not-- just whether the FDA should be deciding what's in its jurisdiction. Where are the progressives clamoring for "checks and balances"?
I think you have a badly misguided understanding of how government in the US operates... and was explicitly designed.
There's a reason the "founding fathers" intended that your voice carried no weight at the national level -- or even largely at the state level. The "public" doesn't have the knowledge to have their opinions really matter on most topics. The US form of government was explicitly set up so that you'd elect local officials -- on the basis of local matters that you, presumably, have some understanding of -- up to the level of Governor of your state or commonwealth, but beyond that *those* officials voted on national matters.
And its a DAMN good thing that the dimwit "will of the masses" is not involved in the vast majority of things the government does, because the will of the masses is both ignorant and easily controlled. In fact, IMO, the majority of the problem we've got with the federal government today stems from the fact that the separation between the will of the people and the federal government has eroded over time. Instead of good people being elected, the slime balls who can most effectively sway the opinion of the ignorant masses gets elected -- and then has to spend their time playing politics to keep that position.
Slashdot Mirror
And pass both the US and Russia quickly.
Why? Technology is 40 years newer. Materials science has changed, automation, manufacturing techniques and a slew of other core technologies important for space flight have changed as much in the last 40 years as computing technology has. They're going to be able to do more with less the same as other up-starts like SpaceX can do -- but they're going to invest national levels of resources into it, with SpaceX levels of innovation and dramatically less of a "defense contractor welfare" bloat that drags down NASA.
And good for them. For the sake of every living thing that's fought entropy for the last three billion years on Earth, it doesn't matter who is working towards getting life off this rock, it just matters that someone is.
and Slashdot Editors.. if there are any of them left....
If it doesn't reduce ad impressions, why would the editors care?
The criticisms people are leveling against this Ravi Mandali guy are for doing the same crap that DICE has ensured Slashdot does every day.
Freedom is now, has always been and always will be, an illusion given to the masses to keep them pacified.
Why do you think you've lost something?
You mightn't call being in the top 9% of households incomes "exceptionally affluent", but the other 91% of people probably do.
For a school that costs $60k a year?
Are kids today really that stupid? If you don't have an income that high, even with a LOT of grants, you're taking on a crushing debt.
The first lesson people need to learn is to live responsibly. Someone who isn't from a family making that much dropping a quarter million dollars on an education is, in fact, a perfect example of not.
Yes. Or perhaps only one (in the relevant time frame).
In terms of a deterrent, I'm not sure 5 years of jail is going to sound any more scary than just expulsion; the penalties here seem out of line.
IMO, not even remotely out of line. Ignoring the impact to students at Harvard (and the cost to the school), it impacted local police, and the area around Harvard.
And more importantly, and the whole point of punishments, is to put the deterrent high enough to prevent others from doing it. If the perception of a moron like this kid is "I'm going to flunk out" vs "I'm going to be expelled", unless there's a 100% chance of being caught making the threat, you're better off making the threat if the only ramification is being expelled.
Yes, it would be that bad.
Citation needed. The paper does not in fact specify the feature size, but it does say it's related to wire size. I think it's much smaller than you think.
Years of welding experience.
But is the resolution actually that bad? Because that would be quite useless. You'd have to machine the final product in practically every case.
I guess we'll never know, because the linked article was hosted on a cracker jack box. Techienews indeed.
Yes, it would be that bad. I can't imagine there's really any use for a "printer" like that ... you'd end up with a messy blob of metal with little strength that would need more machining to make useful than it would take to just CNC... or use a real sintering printer.
Its sort of a cool hack, but ... I mean, if you want a non-plastic printer, make one that prints out cookie dough. At least you'd get something tasty out of it.
Happened over two billion years ago and we're just hearing about it now!? Typical.
Its Slashdot ... You'll hear about it next week, too!
It's hard to imagine that a tech company would screen candidates based on area codes these days. I've been living in Seattle for over five years and still have a 415 (San Francisco) area code. I think people tend not to change their phone numbers when moving anymore.
That being said, I'm graduating soon with a PhD in bioinformatics, have an MS in computer science, and I'm not getting any interviews with large tech companies in the area. Maybe I do need a local phone number...
I would bet anything but the real big companies always does. Local hires (and candidates when it comes time to interview) are a lot cheaper. If your cell phone doesn't match where you live, you should indicate where you live on your resume.
The GPs suggestion of pretending to live in Seattle is a bad idea. I've hired LOTS of people over the years, and if anyone ever pulled that, their resume would be round filed no matter how good they might be.
IMO, if he wants to live in Seattle, and wants to find a job there, his best bet is to just move.
Okay, let me amend my statement, having looked at the Wikipedia page.
Wikipedia isn't wrong. You just made up a number that doesn't appear anywhere in Wikipedia... for some bizarre reason. Did you make up a number to make the 10% figure worse than it is? The real numbers supported your case better.
Would they? I'm not so sure. According to Wikipedia, the cost of power to drive 25 miles in an electric car is in the $1-$2 range.
Wikipedia is wrong. Most EVs get between 3-4 miles per kwh, there's about a 20% loss in charging the battery, so you're looking at 7.5-10 kwh of electricity from the mains to go 25 miles. Only in Alaska and Hawaii is electricity expensive enough to cost $2 to go 25 miles. The average kwh cost in the US is about twelve cents, or $0.90 to $1.20 to go 25 miles.
So I agree with you -- very few people (even the environmentally conscious who tend to buy EVs) would care about the extra dime a day it costs, if it means easy charging. If you cut range 10%, we'd be pissed, but not increase costs 10%.
That said, I doubt its only 10% loss...
As many others pointed out, unlike a place of business, the school is publicly funded ... so the public has some rights regarding access to fields, water fountains, etc. unless otherwise marked.
The public actually has no access to any of that unless otherwise noted. Even being on those fields outside a permitted school activity is trespassing.
I'm not sure why people seem to think public funding has anything to do with rights of use. The DoD is publicly funded, but I can't hop in an F16, or go for a walk on a secured base. I can't walk into an elementary school and plop on down on a couch to use their Internet. I can't go use the police shooting range because I don't feel like paying at a public one. Hell, even in something explicitly public -- I can't go and set up a tent and have a party in a public park.
If it's a public school, then a tax-paying citizen can reasonably claim he has already paid for the electricity in question. Should we now ask special permission to walk down the sidewalk or drive down the street? No, of course not. We as taxpayers have already paid for it.
The policeman was way, way out of line. He should find himself without a job in short order. Boneheads like him give commanders ulcers with the PR fallout.
Except you can't... you can't go to the public school and use its fields without permission. You can't go into its wood shop and fire up a table saw. You can't sit down in the library and use their wireless. Just like you can't walk into town hall and make photo copies, or grab a cup of coffee from the break room in the police station.
Your fundamental premise is absolutely incorrect. You paying for it, as a taxpayer, is completely irrelevant.
I'm getting pretty tired of seeing extension cords snaking through parking lots and parking garages.
I wondered how I would power an electric in my underground (no outlets) and have yet to see the extension cord snaking where I live. I assumed that the parking lot/garage would just forbid it by unplugging or cutting those extensions.
In most cases, you wouldn't power an electric. The costs aren't insignificant -- it can easily be $50-$60 a month in electricity if you drive a lot. Most landlords won't absorb that themselves, and it'd be pretty surprising if they (or the power company) would run a separate meter for it.
I mostly just charge my car at home, and I have power there, but I know a few folks who had luck with apartment managers and/or work building managers agreeing to a flat $50 a month or $100/month fee to charge, once they were educated on what it represented. I have a long commute -- if there was power available in the lot at work, I'd absolutely be willing to pony up $30-$50 a month to charge at work. (It'd save me about $100 of gas, and probably cost them $8/wk in electricity.)
I'm getting pretty tired of seeing extension cords snaking through parking lots and parking garages.
I don't think the issue here is just five cents; some places can't handle the capacity this puts on their systems or wiring, or perhaps they don't want the liability of you screwing up your car thanks to faulty wiring, and suing you for it. And hell, what if some bright person uses a cord that's too light of a gauge for the current, and ends up starting a fire or hurting someone?
Charging should be done where appropriate, not wherever anyone wants.
Saying this as an owner of a car that gets plugged in, I totally agree. Stealing power is stealing power. Common sense says if you aren't paying the bill on that outlet, you ask whoever is paying for it before you plug in, you don't assume its okay.
That's good for a couple of reasons. It avoids situations like this (and this isn't, by any means, the first time its happened), and it also gets the discussion about charging going... lots of places will tell you no problem. Places that don't may or may not have legitimate concerns about it. Considering how many times I've popped breakers with my charging cable, its entirely reasonable for places to say no. This isn't plugging in a cell phone charger, its plugging in a device that nearly maxes out a typical residential circuit.
The thing that is stupid about this article isn't that the police considered it theft (it absolutely, unequivocally is), but rather that the police arrested someone for the theft of something worth so little. I could *almost* see a justification if the guy was arrested on the spot because the officer didn't know the electricity was worth so little, but after a few days of "investigation", it should've been obvious that the amount falls well below the lower limit of what people are arrested for where theft is concerned.
IMO, the guy who plugged is car in is the jackass in this -- its because of people like him that people who actually *ask* run into problems.
Careful...hipster-hating is the new cool thing. And slavishly doing the new cool thing...makes you a hipster.
I was hating hipsters before they were a thing. You wouldn't understand.
RMS wants a totally anonymous payment system but never offer us a clue on how to achieve it.
Give us some clues, RMS. At the very least, show us where to look for the clues, please !
If I had to guess, he has keeping his name talked about in mind.
The Siberian Traps in the Permian was a MASSIVE volcanic eruption. The flood basalt event covered an area the size of Europe. This is not that.
So you think ... didn't you see that 2012 movie? This is how it starts!
Anything that's going to be "available within 4-5 years" is pretty much bullshit. A real plan would have a real date.
The real date isn't based on technology, its based on FAA licensing.
A real date would prove they didn't know what they were doing.
First amendment is about what the government can't restrict you.fromdoing, not anyone else.
...you can expect a really, really long jail sentence. And the health care in those for-profit prisons sucks.
No, you can expect no death benefits, insurance payouts, pension or anything else to the family you leave behind.
You've clearly never been around someone in the final stages of dementia.
I can tell you this, I'll be checking out before I get to that point.
That is YOUR own choice. You can do what you want with your life.
What you cannot do, and cannot expect is laws that enable other people to kill you legally.
There is a world of difference between these 2 alternatives.
Suicide is illegal, as well. So, really, there isn't. The cold hard legal fact is, you do not have a choice. You suffer until you die naturally. And, odds are even if it was legal to kill yourself, at that point you'd be unable to. So you will suffer until that suffering finally ends.
The fucked up thing about it, is because of some bizarre more that was taught to people during impressionable periods of their life, they're completely unable to see the sheer inhumanity of guaranteeing that nearly every living person will suffer needlessly before they die.
Its probably good you posted as an AC, because your position is so blatantly cruel and moronic, having even your virtual identity associated with it should be embarrassing to you.
For the record, I believe euthanasia laws need modernized. But wishing mass deaths on people who don't share your views is just wrong.
Well, I think he was probably being a bit facetious and angry ... and, frankly, even if you don't give him the benefit of the doubt, the fact is he's talking about people whose views are torturing his father. If someone was torturing my father, my wishing their death is the least of the things they should be concerned about.
This poorly written article is from March. The problem has already been solved. Why I am reading this on slashdot now?
"In other news, George Clooney reports his iPhone 1 had a bug in 2007"
Articles suggesting the "darling" of the automotive world has issues are very hot right now.
Slashdot, keep in mind, is not a "news for nerds" site anymore -- it hasn't been in a decade, and especially isn't since DICE bought it. Its a Fox News like media channel pumping out drivel for a particular narrow demographic to drive ad revenue.
So a bunch of un-elected bureaucrats decided whether same un-elected bureaucrats had the power to regulate a product or service? Mind you, I'm not questioning whether this is a good product or not-- just whether the FDA should be deciding what's in its jurisdiction. Where are the progressives clamoring for "checks and balances"?
I think you have a badly misguided understanding of how government in the US operates... and was explicitly designed.
There's a reason the "founding fathers" intended that your voice carried no weight at the national level -- or even largely at the state level. The "public" doesn't have the knowledge to have their opinions really matter on most topics. The US form of government was explicitly set up so that you'd elect local officials -- on the basis of local matters that you, presumably, have some understanding of -- up to the level of Governor of your state or commonwealth, but beyond that *those* officials voted on national matters.
And its a DAMN good thing that the dimwit "will of the masses" is not involved in the vast majority of things the government does, because the will of the masses is both ignorant and easily controlled. In fact, IMO, the majority of the problem we've got with the federal government today stems from the fact that the separation between the will of the people and the federal government has eroded over time. Instead of good people being elected, the slime balls who can most effectively sway the opinion of the ignorant masses gets elected -- and then has to spend their time playing politics to keep that position.