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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Windows key = useless to me (Score 1) 683 683

Windows-R is a very nice shortcut for bringing up the run box. Clicking the start button is a mild pain (especially if you have a monitor to the left of your main monitor), ctrl-esc is an extra button to hit...and the 'run' in the start menu in Windows 7 isn't even a normal run thing, it's a search window that happens to let you run things too. You can't scroll through command history. I actually don't know if there's any way to open the run box with a mouse! I can't find it if there is.

Comment Re:The Microsoft key!!!! I've never used it...ever (Score 1) 683 683

I've been using some random ergonomic keyboard (with Windows key included) for over a year without realizing that 1) it didn't have a context-menu key, and 2) that's where the 'fn' key lived, which apparently makes my f-keys do weird undesirable things. So...I guess my curiosity towards "what happens if I try to put the menu key into my workflow" will have to wait for a different keyboard.

Comment Re:Why is this even a story? (Score 3, Insightful) 352 352

As far as I can tell from the summary, it's not about people learning code. Totally it would make the world a better place if everyone who uses a computer regularly could at least write a simple shell script. (Impractical to spend the time to learn or just plain out of reach for a lot of folks, but whatever, it's a dream.) Instead, the objection looks like it's about lowering the barrier to make marketable things for an app store or whatever.

"With this toolkit, anyone can make furniture and sell it!" Learning carpentry is good, opening up the market is good, but if you're going to distribute to the wider world, maybe you should know enough about engineering principles to build a chair that won't collapse after a couple months.

A car analogy would just be gratuitous.

Comment Re:Compare to the Higgs boson (Score 1) 508 508

3 sigma corresponds to 0.135%. It might not be enough for an official discovery, but if I were a betting man operating under the assumption that the results are wrong, I'd bet my money on the existence of some problems with the experimental design that create a signal by some incidental mechanism, and not on the chance that something with 0.135% probability of occurring has occurred.

Comment Re: Looking more and more likely all the time... (Score 2) 508 508

You're the one who's very wrong, because you misunderstood the person you were replying to.

We already know the useful "laws" we use are just approximations, e.g. ohm's law, hooke's law, boyle's law, etc.

That's exactly what GP was saying. Modern physics does not pretend to be anything more than a series of useful approximate predictions. A hammer is neither right nor wrong, it is merely useful or not useful. Same goes for Newtonian mechanics, relativity, quantum theory, etc.

Comment Re:this attitude is part of the problem (Score 1) 195 195

I'd say that people who insist that evil scientists are refusing lower that mortality rate are a much bigger part of the problem. Um, that research is still happening. The fact that you haven't heard of breakthroughs recently can just as easily mean that 1) nobody bothered to write about it or 2) it's a really hard problem, despite the large amount of money thrown at it.

Also, maybe it sucks, but if you have limited research resources, it's more efficient to try and develop a new vaccine to save millions of lives than it is to improve an old one and save dozens. It doesn't mean nobody is working on it--just, there's probably fewer. Triage is no fun for anybody.

Comment Re:When software has no bugs (Score 1) 252 252

Insurance prices are going to go up, I think. Not insurance for the drivers though; insurance for the car manufacturers, who need to pass that cost on to someone. I could imagine premiums being pretty high since you can't take it out of the hide of an at-fault human driver.

1000 pains = 1 Megahertz

Working...