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:People with artificial lenses can already see U (Score 5, Interesting) 136

by jc42 (#49462895) Attached to: UW Scientists, Biotech Firm May Have Cure For Colorblindness

Turns out the biological lens of your eye blocks UV light, but if you get an artificial lens, your retinas can register UV light.

There's some natural variation....

This has been understood for some time. As others have mentioned, various military orgs have used teams with varied color vision as a way of "seeing through" camouflage. Biologists have suggested that the variety in human color vision is adaptive, giving our hunting ancestors' teams an improved chance of spotting spotting prey against various backgrounds, and the addition of dogs (with their very different color vision from ours) improved this teamwork. This is all hypothetical, though, since (as far as I know) it hasn't actually been tested scientifically.

Back in high school (in the 60s), I had a science teacher who did a good illustration of it all. He made the usual demo of a spectrum using a prism, on a sheet of white paper. Then he had students come up and mark the visible ends of the spectrum, covering up each student's marks with another sheet of paper before the next student made their marks. The result was two columns of dots that didn't line up at all; their variants was around 10% of the width of the spectrum. I'd made marks that I could identify, and saw that my UV mark was right at the average point, while my IR mark was one of the farthest out. This explained some things I'd already noticed about the ways that different people saw colors.

This has been known to the photography industry since color film was first produced. Different varieties of film (and now CCDs) have different sensitivities, and different photographers have different preferences for brands of film based on this.

One of my funny personal anecdotes on the topic was once (in Jr High, as I recall), I asked some visitors why the front-left panel of their car was a different color than the rest of the car. They gave me a funny look, then said the car was all black, which everyone else present agreed with. I objected that only that one panel was black; the rest of the car was a deep red. This got me more funny looks, and the fellow who owned the car said that the car had been in a minor accident that damaged the front-left panel, so it was replaced. After that, my family thought I had something called "black-red color blindness" (which is odd, because I was actually the only one without that defect ;-). I was taken to an optometrist, who verified the "condition", but assured my parents that it wasn't a significant problem, and didn't need treating. Actually, there was a simple treatment: glasses that block near-IR light, and I've accidentally got several sunglasses that do just that, making for oddly muted reds.

As I got more into photography, I eventually noticed that my eyes have slightly different color vision, with things looking slightly bluer in the left eye and slightly redder in the right eye. This seems to be extremely common, actually, though most people don't notice it until it's mentioned and they start trying to spot it in different lighting condition. (Hint: It's often easier to spot in lower-light conditions, and difficult in full sunlight.)

Comment: Re: Misleading summary (Score 2) 50

by KGIII (#49451837) Attached to: How Flight Tracking Works: a Global Network of Volunteers

That does help. It gives me some ideas and some potential motivation. The only reason I bought them was to build a cluster and I have absolutely no need for a cluster so I figured I would make one and then make another basement NAS or a media server. I already have a couple of servers down there but no media server. I don't actually have any use for a media server - that is already covered but the goal was to build a cluster, I don't really have a need or a good reason to build one. I figured it would be amusing and that maybe I would get another line put in and maybe make a web facing server. I understand that creating a LAMP stack clustered is really easy but making a clustered LAMP stack RIGHT is actually difficult. I never, I have had them for almost a year and have not done anything with them so I am really liking this plane tracking idea. With all the idiots with small planes in the area, the ones that don't do a flyover before landing their little Cessna or Pipers on water, snow, or a fairly flat field it might get some interesting results. We have those sorts of people crashing all the time. They land parallel to the waves. The hit ridges or small spaces of open water on the ice. Or, often enough they are landing effectively on someone's lawn and they very much misjudge the distance, So it might be interesting.

Comment: Re:Misleading summary (Score 1) 50

by KGIII (#49451759) Attached to: How Flight Tracking Works: a Global Network of Volunteers

Looking it up is the lazy way. Is it a specific meter length required antenna? Did you have to make it? Or is it just some stereo wire taped to a T and then strung up or similar? I do have the absolute perfect tree to tape a fishing sinker to and toss it over and I am on the side of a mountain so I may do well but there's not much traffic out this way. My hand-held scanner does airplane frequencies but I seldom hear (I had actually typed here, I'm glad I preview before the preview.) anything and that has an upgraded antenna. The big scanner does the same and that has a mounted outdoor antenna. The ham does a much better job and I have a buddy who has a tower for sale, cheap, and it's 100' which is legal here. My issue with the tower is aesthetics. I have a pine that it would fit behind, mostly, but that is about 50' from the corner of the house. Do-able but there is a lot of math needed. I might see if there is a "local" ham club that will lend a hand or simply call around and hire someone so that it is right the first time. I can mix the concrete myself and fill four sonotubes and get the bolts in the right spot on my own so I will at least get my hands dirty, :D

Comment: Re:Cutting edge journalism (Score 1) 179

by KGIII (#49451683) Attached to: Google Lollipop Bricking Nexus 5 and Nexus 7 Devices

Sorry for my doubting you. I've since been corrected and now have a better understanding. I Googled before I asked and, well, all the results in my quick scan looked like ads for carriers and the only Nexus devices I've seen are all carrier branded. Even in my quick Google the Google link looked like an ad for a carrier. My most sincere apologies are offered if you want them,

Comment: Re:Cutting edge journalism (Score 1) 179

by KGIII (#49451669) Attached to: Google Lollipop Bricking Nexus 5 and Nexus 7 Devices

Thank you for the correction. The "Nexus branded devices..." could just as easily mean from a carrier. My Motorola is a Motorola not a US Cellular.

HOWEVER... I was still clearly mistaken and confused. I even Googled before commenting and the results seemed to indicate that they were all carrier devices, All I did was a quick scan so even the Google link looked like a Google ad for a carrier. It was/is my mistake and I thank you, again, for the correction.

Comment: Re:Cutting edge journalism (Score 1) 179

by KGIII (#49451635) Attached to: Google Lollipop Bricking Nexus 5 and Nexus 7 Devices

I see where I was mistaken - thank you all for the corrections. I shall now go through the comments and see what more people add and what more I can learn. That/this is why I love /. so much and have stuck around all these years. Some of you might be tough or rough but by tomorrow all is forgiven or forgotten (unless you are a continued asshole and then you get what you deserve).

Comment: Re:Not Brick (Score 1, Offtopic) 179

by KGIII (#49451467) Attached to: Google Lollipop Bricking Nexus 5 and Nexus 7 Devices

I don't trust or use eBay so I can not speak for them nor their pricing. I do use Amazon a lot. Okay, so I use Amazon way too much. Anyhow, when it comes to cables my first stop is here: as they usually have good/great pricing on the cable(s) I require. They have great customer service where you can call them up and say, "So I have this funny looking cable with 18 pins and...." and they are great at helping you out. I am not affiliated but I am a fan and certainly recommend them - more so when they're non-standard cables. My spool didn't quite have enough left in it so I called them and they made me a 100' CAT6 for a very excellent price. I am not sure if the pricing was standard or if they cut me a deal because I have placed a lot of orders over the years and they know me by name from having just called in to get a cable name or whatnot. I've spent a good deal of money there over the years. The price has been right and the service has been unbeatable. There has yet to be a cable, and I have had some rarities, that they have not been able to find for me, Not all products are on the site, an example is I wanted a VIC20 power supply cable and it, obviously, was no longer on the site but they had a few in stock in the back room. They had three left, I bought all three. So, as I said, I am not affiliated but I am a very happy customer.

Comment: Re:Cutting edge journalism (Score -1) 179

by KGIII (#49451325) Attached to: Google Lollipop Bricking Nexus 5 and Nexus 7 Devices

That sounds like complete bullshit to me. Got a source for that information? I've had many OTA updates and all of them included vendor supplied bloatware and new "features" for you. Now unless you are speaking of JUST the Nexus branded device (your comment is tough to determine your intent) then that may be true and I would not know as I don't own one. However I would still like to see a source or two. (I will even accept Wikipedia.)

Comment: Re:Cutting edge journalism (Score 0) 179

by KGIII (#49451289) Attached to: Google Lollipop Bricking Nexus 5 and Nexus 7 Devices

That is what I was thinking. This isn't a Google issue, they most certainly did NOT perform the OTA update. They provide vendors (and probably manufacturers) with the update. They are then supposed to vet the update, ensure all is well, and then do an OTA update. The issue really has (and I'm not trying to make excuses here) nothing whatsoever with Google. Google did their part completely and should not be subject to the blame. The blame rests squarely on the shoulders of the vendor.

You scratch my tape, and I'll scratch yours.