Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Real problem (Score 4, Insightful) 113

Despite his history as a true computer scientist with actual academic credentials, Raghavan chose to bulldoze actual workers and replace them with toadies

People who don't play office politics lose to people who do. Having "toadies" helps you win the game of Survivor. It works because the CEO doesn't recognize actual skill.

Comment Re:For those who support this, could you please st (Score 1) 208

(A) How much you think it will actually cost. (B) How long you think it will actually take to build. (B) Whether you think it is a good idea, given (A) and (B)

No. it’s not a good idea to subsidize gambling addicts too drunk/high to drive or fly, with Federal tax dollars. The fuck do you need a survey for. Common sense.

Comment Abandoned or Actve. Pick one. (Score 2) 40

Sopwith is abandonware, and can be played legally online, without any install or registration requirements https://www.retrogames.cz/play...

The game is one of the oldest PC games still in active development today.

OK, I guess I’ll be the one to question how the hell we’re here celebrating 40 years of ‘active’ development, while using the term abadonware accurately.

I really miss the days when we didn’t have to question EVERY claim.

Comment Re:This. (Score 1) 96

It doesn't have to be legally enforceable it just has to be a threat to someone who's in a weak position.

And that should be considered a different type of crime unrelated to employment. A threat is a threat. And we DO have crimes against that. Threatening employment is about the most direct form of harm short of physical violence.

Comment Active? (Score 1) 40

The game is one of the oldest PC games still in active development today.

Then I clicked on the browser-embedded game to see what 40 years of ‘active’ development looked like.

It looked a lot like clickbait.

Sorry, but I was expecting something quite different given the claim. Can someone elaborate?

Comment Re:Which world? The cancer causing 1 or the cure 1 (Score 2) 19

The threat of any of an offtarget gene edit causing cancer is highly unlikely, but possible. The FDA in Dec.2023, for the first time, approved infusion with CRISPR edited cells as a treatment for sickle cell anemia. The way that works is .. they take some of your blood .. select certain type of stem cells, modify them, and then put them back in you. The reason that approach is safer is because we can check copies of the edited cells to make sure they haven't gotten potentially cancerous mutations. However, I don't believe CRISPR is yet ready for in-vivo (in the body, in a live person) clinical use (and I've worked on/with CRISPR tech for a while now btw fyi). A cell has many features that either block (aka tumor suppressor) or (if over-activated) cause cancer (oncogene). If CRISPR lands off-target on a tumor suppressor, it can enable the cell to become a cancer cell. If the DNA edit happens in the right spot near an oncogene (such as LMO2), it can inadvertently activate it. So off-target is dangerous. But forget off-target, .. even when it lands on-target there's still risks of triggering genome rearrangements (note: CRISPR base editors are not really susceptible to this). We can definitely fix these issues, but it will take time and sustained effort. CRISPR is barely 12 years old. Think of how long it took to make air travel safe, and that was with strong investment.

Slashdot Top Deals

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (5) All right, who's the wiseguy who stuck this trigraph stuff in here?

Working...