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


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - 6 month subscription of Pandora One at 46% off. ×

Comment Re:Why is this news? (Score 1) 162

On the topic of can vs cannot, the same benefits are of course available for those who adopt.

Another question would be regarding those who choose vs don't choose to become parents, and there I see it as a question of society spending money on investing in itself.

(As to those who think it's a walk in the park to be on parental leave ... everyone I know, including myself, considers coming back to work to be a very welcome vacation ... )

Comment Re:Why is this news? (Score 5, Informative) 162

I took out 19 months with our firstborn - from when he was 4 months old.

Of course, I'm Swedish. Anyone who would only take two months would be seen as quite uninterested in their children.

(In Sweden you get 480 days per child, to be divided as you see fit between mother and father. 120 of those days are however locked, divided up as 60 each, to each parent. You get 80% of your salary during parental leave, capped to a maximum which is far far below what anyone in "IT" makes)

Comment Re:Bitcoin (Score 1) 172

... which makes no sense. You cannot have a secure blockchains unless you have a lot of processing power verifying it - and no one will invest in processing power unless there's an incentive for doing so. That incentive, for the most secure blockchain that exists (processing power surpassing _all_ computers in the top 500 super computing list) is called "bitcoin".

Banks cooperating on a blockchain is equivalent to them agreeing on using the same database.

Or in geek terms: If you want to solve the Byzantine Generals' problem you need a blockchain with incentives. If you do not want to solve the Byzantine Generals' problem you can just as well use MySQL.

Comment Re:Global warming is a joke (Score 2) 249

natural warming doesn't happen on such a short time-scale.

It most certainly does.

Until a few decades ago it was generally thought that all large-scale global and regional climate changes occurred gradually over a timescale of many centuries or millennia, scarcely perceptible during a human lifetime. The tendency of climate to change relatively suddenly has been one of the most suprising outcomes of the study of earth history, specifically the last 150,000 years (e.g., Taylor et al., 1993). Some and possibly most large climate changes (involving, for example, a regional change in mean annual temperature of several degrees celsius) occurred at most on a timescale of a few centuries, sometimes decades, and perhaps even just a few years. The decadal-timescale transitions would presumably have been quite noticeable to humans living at such times, and may have created difficulties or opportunities (e.g., the possibility of crossing exposed land bridges, before sea level could rise)

Comment Re:Probably not in this case (Score 1) 114

Calculations of possible future worth of bitcoin are indeed based in "normal rules of money".

If X of something (illegal drugs, remittance) is done through Bitcoin (because lower fees, pseudonomity, whatever the reasons) then the value of the total Bitcoin network must be able to handle Y size economic transfers. Since there's a finite number of bitcoin at any point in time that means the valuation of a bitcoin needs to be Z.

The "only" thing you need to guess is the likelihood of X happening for a reasonable prediction of Z. At some point in time.

Comment Re:Need a new cryptocurrency (Score 1) 59

If multiple parties distribute the block-chain, how do you protect it from validation unless mining is an arms race? ... and the incentive for an arms race will be a token of value. It doesn't need to be named a "coin", but will in effect be one.

(PoS etc are nice theories but we're back to the equivalent of a regular database in effect)

Comment Re:Need a new cryptocurrency (Score 1) 59

There's no added security in that scenario compared to a regular database. That is, they must contractually agree not to try to outmine (thus risk a rogue bank doing double spends) each other. From that follows they cannot be sure that an external actor won't outmine them unless they keep the blockchain secret. From that follows ...

Comment Re:Need a new cryptocurrency (Score 1) 59

A blockchain cannot function without verification ("mining"). There needs to be incentives for "mining" to occur. Those tokens of incentives don't need to be called "coins" - but they must have some sort of value.

Thus, for any blockchain to be successful it needs to have have "coins".

A failure will not appear until a unit has passed final inspection.