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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Correlation Does Not Imply Causation (Score 1) 281

Most diet failures I've observed happen not because the diet doesn't work, but because once they reach their target weight, they revert to their old diet, and naturally revert to the old pattern of weight gain. This is regardless of lifestyle.

Fact is, you have to pick a diet you can live with the rest of your life. Cuz otherwise it will "fail" as soon as you stop following it.

Comment Re:Correlation Does Not Imply Causation (Score 1) 281

If your brain is responding to sugar like cocaine, get your thyroid checked. That sort of response is very typical for insuffucient thyroid hormone -- the brain is always starved for glucose, so if you provide FREE SUGAR! it suddenly gets a boost, which lasts a couple hours or so.

Comment Re:ha! Inuit diet. Hazda diet. (Score 1) 281

Just because there's less or no marbling in wild game doesn't mean that "lean meat" was all they ate. Toward fall, wild game carry a lot of fat. And from what I've read, the fatty tissues were the most-prized portions, and consumed first -- being not only the most calorie-dense, but more prone to spoilage with time (fats go rancid, while meat can be preserved by drying).

Comment Re:I see 2 problems (Score 1) 83

it's very difficult for the algorithm to determine the difference

Again. They aren't false positives. You buy stuff like that. The system doesn't care who you buy it for, or why you buy it. If you bought it for others before, you're likely to do it again, and while you may have never wanted it in the first place, you clearly wanted to buy it, or you wouldn't have purchased it.

Except for the case where I bought something from a wishlist and had it shipped to the person who put it on the wishlist. Then

A) it should be trivial to determine that this is a gift
2) The appropriate response is to show me other things that person also wished for.

Personally, I think both of you are wrong.

Comment Re:I had to switch my stepson's junior high school (Score 1) 421

Fortunate that you had another school to switch to. Many places, you have a choice of one.

And I'm with the other two replies... this was the time to start a rifle club!

I don't think it's coincidence that we also have the insanity of "trigger warnings" lest someone be traumatized anew by the mere mention of whatever evil befell them... in Another Forum[TM] I griped that soon mere breathing will require a 'trigger warning' lest it traumatize someone who once had a sip of water go down the wrong way.

Cuz, ya know, the mere mentioning of something (eg. a gun) is the same as doing horrible things with it.

Comment Re:What about Confidence (Score 1) 243

"Unless kid #2 in fact had tried very hard but still failed, and says to himself, "Even my best attempt was not good enough. Next time I won't try so hard; that way, if I fail, I can just claim/believe it's because I didn't try my best."

THAT is what happens when no matter how hard you try, your best is never good enough. Parents, take heed: if you regard anything less than perfect success as "failure", you will raise a kid who is afraid to try.

Comment Re:I'm looking now (Score 1) 134

What lead to a change in the Iraqi government was that Maliki refused to allow US troops to stay permanently. Word is the successor comes pre-agreed on that issue.

Meanwhile IS is the enemy in Iraq but somehow we're not supposed to notice that they are our allies in Syria. Who would have thought that they might use the same weapons we gave them in A suddenly in B?

And since they are additionally quite heavily funded mostly from Saudi Arabia, which is basically the most brutal theocratic dictatorship on the planet, not to mention our favorite client state in the region, killing IS supply lines really should just be a matter of saying the word.

Comment Re:MUCH easier. (Score 1) 239

but can accurately detect where they are.

From what range, 2 inches? Maybe if you lined up A-J across the road edge-to-edge it would have a hard time getting around them, but I'd like to believe that the sensors would be able to observe an obstruction from far enough ahead that it would be able to stop safely in this event. So instead you have A-J moving about. The laws of physics mean that nothing can simply teleport in front of us, nor can anything attain infinite acceleration, so we can detect the vehicle, child and/or dog that is moving towards our current path well before it cuts us off.

D) would probably be the worst hazard of the lot, since being light-weight it would be able to accelerate and change direction much faster than most of the other obstacles. Worst case, having come to a complete stop to wait for it to cross the road, the vehicle is blocking the breeze that was pushing it in the first place, leaving us at a standstill.

Comment Re:MUCH easier. (Score 1) 239

For example, hitting an elderly person in order to avoid hitting a small child.

Or maybe it will just note the existence of an object moving at x m/s to the right towards the current lane while the obstacle is y meters away while establishing a list of the smoothest paths out of the infinitely many paths that would prevent the vehicle from striking any of the obstacles.

Definitely easier than trying to determine whether the first obstacle is a baby carriage and the second obstacle is granny. Believe it or not, that light pole did NOT just "jump out in front of you" no matter how drunk you insist you aren't. Neither did granny and/or the baby.

Slashdot Top Deals

I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning. -- Plato

Working...