Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 25% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY25". ×

Comment Pouring money into a myth (Score 3, Interesting) 162

This would be great, but it is likely not true. According to more recent research kid's learning styles is not true. This theory has been reported as fact, but is not backed up by science. In fact it is better to get a kid out of their comfort zone for them to learn more.



Comment Future Babble (Score 1) 155

"The course of human history is strongly influenced by the growth of human knowledge. [But it is impossible to] predict by rational or scientific methods, the future growth of our scientific knowledge [because doing so would require us to know that future knowledge, and, if we did, it would be present knowledge, not future knowledge.] We cannot therefore predict the future course of human history." - Karl Popper paraphrased from the book Future Babble by Dan Gardner

This is why Cryonics is currently a waste of money and resources.



Aral Sea May Recover; Dead Sea Needs a Lifeline 131

An anonymous reader writes "It's a tale of two seas. The drying up of the Aral Sea is considered one of the greatest environmental catastrophes in history, but the northern sector of the sea, at least, is showing signs of life. A dam completed in 2005 has increased the North Aral's span by 20 percent, and birds, fish, and people are all returning to the area. Meanwhile, the Dead Sea is still in the midst of precipitous decline, since too much water is being drawn out of the Jordan River for thirsty populations and crops. To keep the sea from shrinking more, scientists are pushing an ambitious scheme called the 'Red-Dead conduit,' which would channel huge amounts of water from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea. However, the environmental consequences of such a project may be troubling."
The Courts

Submission + - How should I have responded to RIAA lawyer? 10

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: "The RIAA's lawyers are a bit jumpy these days since their standard "making available" boilerplate was rejected by the Court in Interscope v. Rodriguez. But I still never expected, when I initiated a dismissal motion in Elektra v. Schwartz, that they would be reaching out to me , of all people, for help. But so they did, asking me "in the interest of efficiency... what precisely Defendant contends is lacking from Plaintiffs' Complaint for Defendant to consider it sufficient. Perhaps Plaintiffs may be able to satisfy these alleged deficiencies and spare both parties additional and unnecessary motions practice." Unfortunately my response was not very helpful; I couldn't think of anything better than to say, more or less, that "Plaintiffs have no case whatsoever against Ms. Schwartz, and their case against her was frivolous in its inception. Accordingly, there are no facts they can allege that will satisfy the plausibility standard." On reflection, I'm feeling kind of guilty that I didn't give them a more creative, and helpful answer, and I thought to turn to my friends at Slashdot, who are (a) almost always helpful, and (b) always creative. What would you have said?"

Comment Probable Cause? (Score 3, Interesting) 593

If you read the response from the record industry, Richard Altman is not an innocent bystander. According to the RIAA he has reinstalled Windows on his mom's computer several times and he was the one who delivered his mom's computer's hard drive to the RIAA. It is not like he has not been involved

The RIAA says that the hard drive they have is not the hard drive that was attached to the computer they are looking for, so they are looking at Richard Altman's computer equipment to see if he has the information they want.

Do they have probable cause to do this? I don't think so, but that is their argument.


Machines certainly can solve problems, store information, correlate, and play games -- but not with pleasure. -- Leo Rosten