Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Yeah I saw that on... (Score 1) 164

by Marcx77 (#38723098) Attached to: Statisticians Uncover the Mathematics of a Serial Killer
Your argument goes astray when you say that it makes no difference to the producer whether you watch something without ads through TiVo and the like, or by torrenting something. It makes a difference in the sense that built into the price of broadcast tv (i.e.: free) is the assumption that a certain portion of viewers will find the ads so annoying that they'll get it on DVD. From a producer's point of view, the choice isn't between watching it on TV (while skipping the ads) and watching a torrented episode (without ads); the choice is between watching it on TV and buying it on DVD. An often heard counterargument to the above is that the people who download wouldn't have bought in the first place. I can at least anecdotally disprove that by saying that since I got a media box with Sickbeard I haven't bought any series on DVD, which previously I did (albeit incidentally). And even though downloading (without uploading) is legal in my country, it's not something I feel particularly good about.

Comment: Re:flaunt? (Score 1) 197

by Marcx77 (#34908490) Attached to: Apple iPhone 5 To Flaunt New A8 Processor
I guess that these days it's mostly out of a habit created back when iOS was, in fact, amazing when compared to other phone OSes at the time. These days, I think that anyone neutral will have to agree that it definitely can be improved upon. And I'm saying this as a iPhone user who has only briefly used Android phones.

Comment: Re:Wait, what? (Score 3, Interesting) 217

by Marcx77 (#34626298) Attached to: Scientists Decipher 3-Billion-Year-Old Genomic Fossils

The point is that this is extremely complex biochemical machinery that is mind boggling to even imagine how this somehow came together.

I am more inclined to think it came from space than anything.

How would that make it less mind-boggling? It just relocates the problem. Does it somehow make more sense to think that life had a few billion more years to evolve on some other planet than just 1.5 billion years here on earth? I'm not trying to be pedantic here, I'm genuinely curious as to how you'd think "space" is a better explanation...

Comment: Re:Impact probability (Score 1) 83

by Marcx77 (#32978864) Attached to: Evidence For 200-Year-Old Comet Impact On Neptune
See, and that's where I think you're wrong. The chance an object is going to hit a target isn't determined by its acceleration like you describe it is. You could say that its trajectory will be more affected by Jupiter than by Earth, which will mean that it'll probably pass by Jupiter closer (only a little, mind you) than by Earth, and will move away from Jupiter at a greater angle with the original trajectory than from Earth, all other circumstances being equal. But an object would have to be moving very slowly, or have a trajectory *very* close to it for the gravitational force to actually make it collide with the planet at all. Again, without doing the calculations (which I'd be hard-pressd to do correctly, by the way, although I do have a BSc in physics) I'd say the cross section is the major factor here, which would make an impact on Earth much more likely than the 1:300,000 you project.

Comment: Re:Impact probability (Score 1) 83

by Marcx77 (#32975242) Attached to: Evidence For 200-Year-Old Comet Impact On Neptune
How do you figure the mass has anything to do with the probability of impact? The cross section, yes, that's obvious, but the mass? The trajectories of the colliding objects are overwhelmingly determined by the gravitational interaction between those objects and the sun, not between those objects.

"There is nothing new under the sun, but there are lots of old things we don't know yet." -Ambrose Bierce