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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:The good news (Score 1) 700

by CanadianRealist (#48207055) Attached to: FTDI Reportedly Bricking Devices Using Competitors' Chips.

Again, I'd say that needs to be proven. Isn't the sequence generally something like:

chip maker -> device maker -> distributor -> retail chain -> local store -> cashier who actually carries out transaction -> buyer

Exactly how far along that chain does knowledge of counterfeit go?

Comment: Re:Where are the links? (Score 1) 425

by CanadianRealist (#47922675) Attached to: Apple Edits iPhone 6's Protruding Camera Out of Official Photos

I went to Apples site and looked around - there were no side views to be seen - hmm.

AC points out that there is a side view and provides a link. frnic:

I followed it and found none of the "edited" photos you claim are there. I found ONE photo that showed the iPhone from an angle that showed the camera bulge and the bulge was there...

Your original claim was that there was no view from the side. There clearly is. So it sounds like you are accusing someone of having created fake photos, rather than showing photos from the Apple site.

The camera bulge is not visible in that photo. Maybe, as some suggest, the angle is such that the lens is not visible. Or maybe the photo was edited. But you were trying to deny that there were any photos from the side - the AC pointed out that there is, it's the fourth image on the page. That's true whether coming from an AC or a logged in user.

I don't see anywhere in the AC's post where he says the photos were edited. Nor did he claim that there were no photos in which the bulge is visible. So one can at least wonder if that photo was edited. You were trying to claim there was no photo to wonder about.

Comment: Re:Biased (Score 2) 221

by CanadianRealist (#47781459) Attached to: Canada Tops List of Most Science-Literate Countries

I guess it was for the 13% of people who got the wrong answer. I liked the following quote in the CBC article:

"While 87 per cent knowing that the earth goes around the sun is pretty good, that still leaves 13 per cent of Canadians that haven't absorbed the scientific knowledge of several centuries ago," Ingram said.

It was also a pretty tough question for the Catholic church for quite a long time. And their top guy is supposed to have a direct line to the guy who created the universe.

And then there are also plenty of people who still have problems with the second question, about humans evolving from earlier species.

Comment: Re:The problem with beaurocrats. (Score 4, Informative) 221

by CanadianRealist (#47780991) Attached to: Canada Tops List of Most Science-Literate Countries

I live near the border and I can see all the wealthy Canadians bypass the socialized system by coming down here with cash.

Now look across the border and see the non wealthy Canadians who still get treated* without going bankrupt just because they got sick. Who don't have to worry about what a trip to the doctor will cost when they need treatment. (*Get treated, including preventative care, without having to wait until problems become serious enough to justify a trip to the emergency room.)

The US health care system may be really good for the wealthy, but it really is not so good for the non wealthy people who can't afford it. We socialist Canadians think everyone should have health care.

Comment: Re:Biased (Score 4, Informative) 221

by CanadianRealist (#47780871) Attached to: Canada Tops List of Most Science-Literate Countries

The linked article is not very clear. There's much better coverage on the CBC site.

The study considered two different things, scientific literacy, and level of reservations towards science.

The "we depend too much on science..." was from the second part - about reservations towards science.

The science literacy part asked questions like:
Does the sun go around the earth or does the earth go around the sun?
Human beings as we know them today developed from earlier species of animals. True or false?
Electrons are smaller than atoms. True or false?

Comment: Re:Not about leverage or influence (Score 1) 266

by CanadianRealist (#47626567) Attached to: Snowden Granted 3 More Years of Russian Residency

Your reason for doing something and whether or not you are brave or a coward are two very different things.

Suppose someone was willing to jump into a cage with multiple wild animals likely to attack them, just for the fame. Would you call them a coward?

In the case of Snowden he might refuse a deal because he doesn't trust the government. And many would say he's smart to do so, there are plenty of examples of the government and the NSA lying already.

Comment: Re:Verizon's Response (Score 2) 390

by CanadianRealist (#47483221) Attached to: Verizon's Accidental Mea Culpa

Woosh? Continuing from the part I quoted:

Maybe they can't afford the small piece of cable between our two ports. If that's the case, we'll provide it.

Does that sound serious to you? I'm sure the part about them being willing to provide the cable is serious. The part about maybe Verizon not being able to afford the cable ... probably not. Verizon are trying to get other people to pay for the service their customers are already paying them to provide. They have to justify that somehow. L3 seems to be pointing out how ridiculous Verizon is being. I was just piling on.

Oh and:

Not very apparent - seems confusing

I'm pretty sure that subtracting "seems confusing" from "Not very apparent" yields 0. ;-)

Comment: Verizon's Response (Score 5, Funny) 390

by CanadianRealist (#47482157) Attached to: Verizon's Accidental Mea Culpa

Level3 also offered to pay for the necessary upgrades to Verizon hardware: "... these cards are very cheap, a few thousand dollars for each 10 Gbps card which could support 5,000 streams or more

Verizon's response was "Ok, but these cards tend to wear out pretty quickly so we'll need you to pay that amount each month. 5,000 streams may sound like a lot, but they don't last very long. A person watches a few movies a week, maybe a couple of youtube videos per day, that's like 20 streams in one week, and that's only one customer. Before you know it, you've used up all 5,000 of those streams and the card needs to be replaced."

"Oh yeah, and if it's coming from Netflix then we're using twice as many streams. We use one stream from Netflix to us, then another stream from us to our customers. Maybe you should really pay us that amount every week."

Comment: Re:everyone's a brain scientist now (Score 3, Interesting) 211

As someone with a long history of depression and high intelligence I've spent quite a bit of time trying to understand my condition. One thing I've noted frequently is that I tend to derive less enjoyment than other people from most activities. (I think this is a cause of the depression rather than a result of it.) The most notable exception is sexual gratification, whether from sex with a partner or from masturbation. I don't find this surprising as I think that it is such a basic part of the way our brains are wired. Given that I am not in a relationship more often than I am, I frequently watch porn to masturbate.

So in my case, I'd say it seems likely that a deficiency in the part of the brain associated with reward processing causes a greater exposure to porn.

Comment: Re:No, no it's not. (Score 4, Informative) 379

by CanadianRealist (#47034583) Attached to: Studies: Wildfires Worse Due To Global Warming

Fourthly, there's good reason to believe that at least some of the ones this week were started by (d-bag) arsonists.

The claim is that climate change is making the fires worse. That's very different than the question of how any one fire started.

Your argument is like pointing to a smoker killed in a car crash and saying "see, cigarettes don't cause cancer."

Maybe someone did start some of the fires. That's happened in the past as well. The real question is, are the fires worse now? From the article: in the 80's an average of 2.9 million acres burned each year, from 2010 to 2013 it was 6.4 million acres per year. That sounds quite a bit worse. Maybe the last few years were just unlucky years, or maybe the fires really are getting worse.

Maybe it's statements like yours from "non-scientists" arguing issues other than the ones raised that are confusing things.

Comment: Re:Missing the obvious? (Score 1) 183

by CanadianRealist (#46795175) Attached to: The Design Flaw That Almost Wiped Out an NYC Skyscraper

But wind produces considerably less force at angles.

True, which is why that is not normally considered. But in this case the lack of support at the corners made the building particularly vulnerable to diagonal forces. That was the point I was trying to make with the Lego example. And if you're designing such an unusual building maybe you should consider more than just the first "first obvious choice" for what could go wrong.

Comment: Re:Missing the obvious? (Score 1) 183

by CanadianRealist (#46795089) Attached to: The Design Flaw That Almost Wiped Out an NYC Skyscraper

No, they didn't.

LeMessurier had accounted for the perpendicular winds, but not the quartering winds.

With only the forces of the perpendicular winds considered and reported, the contractor's decision was ok. While it is true that the bolts were weaker than the welds would have been, they were strong enough to handle the forces the design specified. There's a quote by LeMessurier in the podcast that says this.

Comment: Missing the obvious? (Score 2) 183

by CanadianRealist (#46794757) Attached to: The Design Flaw That Almost Wiped Out an NYC Skyscraper

I know hindsight is 20/20 but not considering the effect of wind hitting the corners of the building seems unbelievable. With no support at the corners it seems obvious* that the easiest way to cause a failure would be to apply force directed towards a corner. TFA does say that wind at the corners is not usually an issue, but when designing something so radically different you have to consider the effects of those differences.

*For anyone who has ever played with Lego: imagine building something that looks like that building and think of the easiest way to push it over. Consider how you control the direction when felling a tree.

Sentient plasmoids are a gas.