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


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Lots of people criticize this for its obviousne (Score 1) 182

You mean the gigantic[citation needed] on the summary/headline?

So, I did a cursory search on Google and what I've found was that the lowest priced filter was around 1500 RMB*. Now, according to that table, it is easy to see that the pricier ones perform better and can handle larger amounts of air. There seems to be an issue with formaldehyde (HCHO), which the pricier ones seem to remove more than the cheaper ones. Wikipedia seems to think that HCHO is harmful to human health, but I'm no expert and we all know how reliable wikipedia is for facts (it suffices, though).

So, no. Not all air purifiers are 1000$. However, the ones that provide around 96% (which seems consistent with what would be a HEPA filter) and also filteer for that formaldehyde at a similar rate are the more expensive ones.

What this does show is that the summary is lacking information and we are being fed an apple to oranges comparison. Smart Air's website seems more sensible than the summary (what was I thinking, this is slashdot), at least mentioning that the filter is an alternative only if your only concern is particle pollution.

Also, I need to stop taking the summary at face value.

* other articles found in the search suggest that those values are not false

Comment: Re:Bullshit.... (Score 1) 133

by Ardyvee (#47554013) Attached to: A Fictional Compression Metric Moves Into the Real World

Why generate a score in the first place, when you can just provide compression ratio, compression speed, or in the case of the card: fps (at settings), energy used, consistency of the fps (at settings), along with any other characteristic you know or can test that doesn't combine two other things and let the user decide which of those things are better instead of trying to boil it all down to a single number?

Comment: Re:More the economics of publishing (Score 1) 192

by Ardyvee (#47490567) Attached to: Amazon Isn't Killing Writing, the Market Is

I'm inclined to agree with you. As somebody who hopes to one day write a novel (or anything worthwhile, really), I would like to be published by the traditional route as it would be a validation that my book is "good". Of course, I am not dismissing self-publishing. It is a valid strategy if you believe you are good enough. I just know that a publishing house isn't going to pick my book just because. It is going to pick it because it is has chances to sell, which means it is probably better than the average produced by humanity.

Comment: Re:Good since OpenID failed to take over (Score 1) 280

by Ardyvee (#47467117) Attached to: Selectively Reusing Bad Passwords Is Not a Bad Idea, Researchers Say

What about the remember your password function on your browser? Do you, would you use that?

Note: I consider this to be on a different category than password managers since (by my experience) anybody capable of logging-in on the machine has access to the account.

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain." -- The Wizard Of Oz