Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment: text is easier to give addresses (Score 4, Informative) 80

by AndroSyn (#47636837) Attached to: FCC Mandates Text-to-911 From All US Wireless Carriers

I think in some regards being able to send an SMS in an emergency, with important details like the exact address(including quadrant in cities like Washington DC). There are often cases in DC where they send an ambulance or something to the correct street address but the wrong quadrant and end up being 5 miles away from where they need to be.

Comment: All they got was the money to do the research... (Score 1) 172

by AndroSyn (#47218575) Attached to: Human Blood Substitute Could Help Meet Donor Blood Shortfall

It sounds like they just got awarded funding to do the research, which is nice and all. If money was the solution to all of the world's medical problems, surely we would have solved all sorts of issues by now, but science just doesn't work that way. Now don't get me wrong, I hope they succeed in producing a blood substitute, but I'll get excited when they have an available product.

Comment: Re:On behalf of all network specialists, (Score 4, Informative) 197

by AndroSyn (#47215521) Attached to: Latin America Exhausts IPv4 Addresses

His point is, slashdot doesn't even have an IPv6 address, he's using 6to4 NAT and can still reach the site. The IPv4 address for slashdot is embedded in the IPv6 address.

$ ping6
PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) 2001:8b0:ca12:3193:7dc2:1078:67fb:31f4 --> 2001:8b0:6464::666:616:d822:b52d
16 bytes from 2001:8b0:6464::666:616:d822:b52d, icmp_seq=0 hlim=241 time=165.418 ms
16 bytes from 2001:8b0:6464::666:616:d822:b52d, icmp_seq=1 hlim=241 time=121.267 ms

The IPv6 address he was pinging was as follows: 2001:8b0:6464::666:616:d822:b52d

The d822:b52d in the IPv6 address, is actually the IPv4 address for slashdot:

d8 = 216
22 = 34
b5 = 181
2d = 45

$ host -t a has address

Make sense? ;)

Comment: Re:Car = driving (Score 2) 191

by AndroSyn (#47161981) Attached to: Intel Wants To Computerize Your Car

Today's cars and electronics will be 30 year old some day. Are you sure you want to integrate them?

Most cars on the road today certainly aren't going to be on the road in 30 years. Especially not cars with out of date radio systems. This is on purpose you know? Automakers want you to buy a new car every 3-5 years, not every 20 to 30 years. They *WANT* the cars to feel outdated in 5 years. You don't make money selling reliable cars anymore. You make money selling an endless line of lemons that mostly do the job of driving while otherwise having the interior fall apart into exploding bits of plastic over time.

Comment: YMMV as they say... (Score 1) 432

by AndroSyn (#47088039) Attached to: Has the Ethanol Threat Manifested In the US?

I've got a flex fuel suv, that I do run E85 in from time to time, when I can find it. Even then, I will only typically fill up on E85 when its at least 20% cheaper per gallon that gasoline. Otherwise, you are paying more for less energy. I usually see a reduction in MPG running on E85, if its a full tank, usually close to 20%. With that said, if you are planning longer trips, through the midwest, E85 can possibly save you a little bit of cash in some places. I took the trip out to the Dayton Hamvention this year, running mostly on E85.

Like they say, YMMV.

Comment: Re:NetBSD time_t (Score 0) 128

by AndroSyn (#46893883) Attached to: OpenBSD 5.5 Released

I disagree. Look at multiarch support in Linux. There is little reason to support 32-bit binaries on 64-bit architectures, _especially_ for FOSS software.

Not all platforms are as brain damaged as the x86. On SPARC64 type systems, you'll find that most all software is run in 32bit mode, as the ABI still allows you full register access. Most software doesn't need to access more than 4GB of memory anyways.

Also there is a lot of non-FOSS software that is only available as Linux x86 32bit executables, keeping that 32 ABI compatiblity sure is useful as well on a 64bit system.

It's not entirely unthinkable to run a 64bit kernel on X86-64 and run entirely a 32bit userspace, in fact, it might run a little bit faster as a lot of the software would have a smaller cache footprint, yet the kernel would still support large amounts of physical memory without PAE tricks.

Just because *YOU* think is convoluted and not useful, doesn't mean it doesn't make sense to someone else.

