Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Naked Dictatorship (Score 4, Insightful) 313

By 'earn it' do you mean 'achieve it through struggle'? If yes, does that mean that every country that achieved democracy peacefully has no pride in their liberty? Also, does 'pride in liberty' affect some property of a democracy, like its stability? I'm asking because there are lots of examples of countries which did not have to struggle for liberty (Canada, for example), or whose people suffered during history but not because of a struggle for liberty (like Japan) and now enjoy stable, inclusive democracies. These countries have pride in their liberty (depending on how you define it). I don't think bloody revolution is the only path to democracy.

Comment Read the areticle more carefully (Score 1) 160

The authors are interested in the underlying social mechanism that drives group formation.
They compare two competing theories -- homophily or that like attracts like, and a theory that group formation is driven by a search for compliments -- and conclude that the latter drives group formation in *both* gangs and guilds.
From the article:

Specifically, we used detailed empirical data sets to show that the observed dynamics in two very distinct forms of human activity—one offline activity which is widely considered as a public threat and one online activity which is by contrast considered as relatively harmless—can be reproduced using the same, simple model of individuals seeking groups with complementary attributes; i.e., they want to form a team as opposed to seeking groups with similar attributes homophilic kinship. Just as different ethnicities may have different types of gangs in the same city in terms of their number, size, and stability, the same holds for the different computer servers on which online players play a given game.

Comment and this is a good thing (Score 1) 496

I use Visual Studio because I couldn't program my way out of a wet paper bag. I'd be a bit concerned if the people writing the application were similarly impaired.
VB.NET and Microsoft's other tools make programing possible. People on slashdot will argue that this leads to bad applications, but the choice is between bad applications and no applications, not bad applications and good applications. Granted, sometimes bad applications are dangerous, but that's not a sufficient rationale to withhold these types of tools.

Comment Re:different for ESL students (Score 1) 467

Why would an English-language institution lower its educational standards for lectures in order to cater to non-English-speaking students?

Because (at least in Canada) it's desirable to welcome foreign students into the classroom. Foreign students pay more tuition, subsidizing domestic students. They tend to work harder, enrich the learning environment, and bring a different perspective to an otherwise homogeneous group of people.

Comment different for ESL students (Score 4, Informative) 467

Until recently, I was a vocal opponent of PowerPoint. I had read Tufte's essay and applied the assertion-evidence structure to my slides. When presenting certain types of data to an english audience, these measures are effective.
But when a relevant percentage of the audience does not understand English, or when the presenter does not speak English, writing the entire presentation down on the slides and reading off the slides is a more effective way of communicating. ESL students are more able to comprehend what they read than what they hear. What 'using powerpoint well' means is a function of the audience and the material.

Comment for some, 'good' and 'popular' are the same (Score 4, Insightful) 174

More precisely, popular causes good. Norms cause people to want to act the same way. Some people will listen to music because of its artistic appeal and others will listen to a specific type of music to distinguish themselves from the norm in some way. But the crowd will want to listen to what the crowd listens to *because* that's what the crowd is listening to. Nobody wants to take from the long tail exactly because there's nobody paying attention to the long tail.

Comment Re:This is Slashdot (Score 1) 159

To be clear, I don't think that profit is a complete measure of the performance of the US biotechnology industry. I claim that 'the US is good at biotechnology innovation' but I don't back up that claim with any evidence. By 'reason' I mean 'cause'. Stated another way, 'a cause of the high output of innovative activity in biotechnology is the relative certainty of appropriability provided by patents'. The reason is antecedent to the outcome. My argument is incomplete but not circular.
As to how to measure innovation in biotechnology, most research relies on patents, investments or profitability. If a private firm can't contribute to good health outcomes while making money, backing up my claim with that research would be circular. Health outcomes -- lifespan, infant mortality, etc -- have tons of confounds.
Having said that, the point I'm trying to make stands. Private participation in innovative activity requires an appropriability regime. Reducing patent protection will decrease investments in innovation by decreasing the return on those investments. Whether private participation in health research generally is moral or desirable or effective is another issue, but as long as private firms are able to participate in the provision of health-related products and services, the rate and direction of that participation will be determined by profitability. The institutions that align public and private benefit may be flawed, but any argument against them has to acknowledge their underlying purpose.

Comment Re:This is Slashdot (Score 2, Insightful) 159

The purpose of patent protection is to allow the patent holder to appropriate the investment the underlying innovation requires. Without patents, the incentive to invest in R&D is diminished. The US is good at biotechnology innovation, and part of the reason for this is because biotech firms know that if their research is successful, they'll be given a chance to recuperate their investment. Any solution to this problem has to continue to encourage research.

Comment except decisions aren't made in a vaccum (Score 1) 244

...so when we're faced with an uncertain decision, we take cues from those around us rather than from our social insurance numbers. As a result, industries characterized by high technological uncertainty -- like those discussed on /. -- tend to be governed less by the the clarity of perfect information in competitive markets and more by inherently social processes: imitation of either past behavior or the behavior of successful competitors.

Comment like movie studio or book publisher... (Score 5, Interesting) 173

Book publishers edit, ship, manage the printing of, and distribute books. They also balance the riskiness of publishing each individual book across their portfolio of books. In the same way, movie studios are good at financing and distribution, but a big part of what they do is invest in multiple pictures, so that even if one movie bombs there are always others.
Something -- regardless of what it's called -- has to be able to hold a portfolio of games. To make informed investments, that entity is probably going to have to understand the industry. That knowledge is likely to be valuable and applicable high-level marketing and strategy decisions, and *rightly or wrongly* the investment will only be made if that knowledge can be applied, or if the investor has some power of the developers.
Workers in other very capital-intensive creative industries -- film and television, for example -- tend to be stratified into two economic classes. People in the upper classes eventually get money and are then able to call the shots. There's no reason why the same thing can't happen in gaming. But money will, for the most part, determine who has the power.

Comment Re:Sample error? (Score 1) 86

From the published article:

Some argue that interviews with active, free-ranging offenders have numerous advantages over those with incarcerated offenders (Jacobs & Wright, 2006). Purportedly, findings based on inmate interviews may be biased because the participants are âoeunsuccessful,â fearful of further legal sanctions, and likely to reconstruct their offenses in an overly rational manner. However, many of these claims against captive populations are overstated (Copes & Hochstetler, in press). In fact, a recent study examining target selection of burglars found a âoestriking similarityâ between studies using free-ranging and prison-based samples (Nee & Taylor 2000, p. 45). Little is gained by denying that the interview setting colors narratives or that conversations with social scientists are not different than what might be said elsewhere. Yet offenders appear to report similar patterns of behavior regardless of how they were originally contacted or where they were interviewed. Semistructured interviews were used to explore

Comment but you'd still be doing something illegal (Score 5, Insightful) 40

If Green Dam software were required in China (and it's not yet clear that it will be), disabling it might be trivial but the act of disabling it would open the user to prosecution. A Chinese user could 'accidentally' click on a site they should not have seen but it's hard to see disabling Green Dam software as anything but deliberate. Having said that, I think Oberheide's work is commendable.

Comment Re:Typical (Score 3, Insightful) 293

I think it's the other way around. People make largely symbolic choices -- driving a marginally more fuel efficient car that costs five times more to build, for example -- rather than making real sacrifices for the environment. Go to a typical supermarket this morning and look at the choices people make. People buy produce flown in from Argentina, beef raised using unsustainable practices and products whose packaging is unnecessarily elaborate. The number of people living in suburbs (accessible only by car and inefficient in so many other ways), the paucity of clotheslines in those suburbs and the size of cars in people's driveways all point to how little people are willing to sacrifice for the environment. Then along comes Fisker, offering very expensive scapegoats for secular yuppies, on which their collective sins can be heaped and because of which they can spend the rest of the weekend grilling tuna steaks while feeling good. Fisker's customers are *using* the product as a means of feeling better about themselves and as a way of taking action on something they think they care about without really changing their lifestyles. For its part, Fisker is going to push hybrid technology forward and (hopefully) accelerate the diffusion of more fuel efficient cars. They're not to blame here if only because they're working to satisfy a demand that comes from people choosing to buy a clean conscience in the same way that they buy Cheerios. Living without a car -- that would be a sacrifice.

Slashdot Top Deals

"What man has done, man can aspire to do." -- Jerry Pournelle, about space flight

Working...