Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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:No it's not a medical device (Score 1) 47

by EvilSS (#49348923) Attached to: Is the Apple Watch a Useful Medical Device? (Video)

Medical devices are very stringently regulated by the FDA. The Apple Watch is a consumer device, end of discussion ... unless Apple applies to the FDA for approval of the device including it's manufacturing process and locations.

This. And I think this is one reason the Apple Watch was so underwhelming in the sensor department when it was announced. If Apple, or anyone for that matter, wants to really make their smart watches useful for medical applications they are going to have to navigate the FDA. That's a very expensive, slow, and cumbersome route to navigate.

Comment: Re:Instead of a 6 hour flight? (Score 1) 226

by EvilSS (#49344763) Attached to: Russian Official Proposes Road That Could Connect London To NYC

Someone is going to drive 3/4 of the way around the world to avoid a 6 hour flight? Very efficient.

Sometimes it's not about the destination, but the journey. If I was back in my late teens or early 20's this would make for an epic road trip. However I think the bigger potential is for international shipping and not really long commutes. I'm sure this (like all of his past plans for this link) includes a rail line as well. Add in some "road-trains" like they use in Australia and it would make a decent alternative to ship based transport for goods coming out of China.

Still though, this is all just talk. This guy throws this idea out every couple of years and nothing ever comes of it.

Comment: Re:completely irrelevant (Score 1) 116

by EvilSS (#49180951) Attached to: NVIDIA Announces SHIELD Game Console

Dear Nvidia I don't want a console. I have an ultra-fast system that plays games, has wide compatibility, can hook up to a TV wirelessles or via HDMI, can surf the web, run netflix, watch live TV, etc. It's called my PC and it's faster. I also have no interest in using joysticks to control anything ever. Sincerely, everyone

Congratulations, you want a computer. Go build yourself one.

Comment: Re:Changed for me (Score 1) 420

by EvilSS (#49154221) Attached to: Is That Dress White and Gold Or Blue and Black?

The first time I saw the picture I could swear it was white / gold. I could see a slight blue hue to the white part but it was more or less white with gold.

After I read another article and saw the dress in a catalogue I read the first article again and it appeared blue / black. I couldn't believe it appeared so differently and had to check I was reading the same article with the same photo again.

I had the same experience. Kind of jarring isn't it? I had even saved a copy of the image when I first saw it (to play with in photoshop) and checked that to be sure someone wasn't messing with me and everyone else and swapping out the image.

We as a species always seem to be of the "believe it when I see it" persuasion but something like this happens and it is a pretty in-your-face example of just how much our own brains manipulate our sensory input before presenting it to us a reality.

Comment: Re:White balance and contrast in camera. (Score 4, Funny) 420

by EvilSS (#49154173) Attached to: Is That Dress White and Gold Or Blue and Black?

So it appears to be linked to the lighting conditions that your eyes are adjusted to when seeing the image initially... even after they've adjusted to the ambient light, the brain appears to stick to the image it created initially.

Here is a pretty good explanation of why this might happen.

Something is wrong. You said "pretty good explanation" but you then linked to Gizmodo. These two things are mutually exclusive.

Comment: Re:not fit for human consumption (Score 4, Informative) 77

by EvilSS (#49147901) Attached to: Banned Weight-loss Drug Could Combat Liver Disease, Diabetes

We have had Cola for generations.... However the health conditions that we blame it for, have been on the rise just recently.

I see the use of Corn Syrup being a bigger factor than blaming Cola.

Corn Syrup, increasing portion sizes, a shift to low fat, high carb diets, labeling bad fats as good and good fats as bad.... The past 50 years has not been a good period for nutritional science.

Comment: Re:Anti-advertisement for one particular system (Score 1) 248

by EvilSS (#49051243) Attached to: Smart Homes Often Dumb, Never Simple
Probably one of the better hubs on the market. Bulbs have been solid for me too. I also use the GE Wink bulbs with the Philips Hue hub (they are compatible) where I just need lights without the color changing ability. The Wink bulbs run about $15 retail. The Wink bulbs are good if not perfect, they sometimes miss a command from the hub, the philips bulbs never do. The Wink Hub, while a crazy piece of hardware (so many radios) is, at the moment, a bit lacking in the software department.

On the ROI front I'm a bit of an outlier: my system is saving me enough money to pay for itself. I used to leave the 4 lights in my garage on pretty much 24/7 with 24w CFLs. My garage door opener light is pretty much useless and I wasn't fond of coming home to a pitch black garage at night. Swapped the 4 bulbs out with 4 GE Wink bulbs, and I now use the geofence feature of the Philips Hue software along with its timers. Lights come on in the morning at a set time, turn off when I leave, and come back on when I get home, turning off at a preset time a little later in the evening. The power savings from the wattage difference (9 vs 24w) and not having them run constantly comes out to around $28/mo for me doing it this way. Yes, it's my fault leaving the lights on all the time, And yes I could have added a traditional timer or motion detector, but the issue there was the damn CLFs sucked in winter. These days I could get Cree LED bulbs for about $10, but for $5 more I can get the smart bulbs that work with a system I already have so.... The 4 bulbs have literally paid for themselves in a little over two months. Again though, I imagine I'm a bit of an outlier when it comes to this. Most of these systems will never save the homeowner money.

Comment: Nope! (Score 1) 330

by EvilSS (#49039357) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Affordable Large HD/UHD/4K "Stupid" Screens?
If you are looking for a dumb 4K display that is above PC monitor size and cheaper or even the same price as a comparable "smart" tv, then the answer is probably no. The only real options you have are A) get the smart TV and never connect it to your network or B) buy a commercial grade display. Option B is going to be much more expensive than Option A. Well I guess there is always option C) Contract with a manufacturer to create a private brand line of your own. Pretty sure option C is not going to scale down to a production run of 1 very well cost wise though.

"Call immediately. Time is running out. We both need to do something monstrous before we die." -- Message from Ralph Steadman to Hunter Thompson