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


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment Re:Cyclists DON'T obey the law! (Score 1) 696

If you live in Toronto then you know that the number of motorists who break the law is pretty is pretty much all of them. I cannot recall every seeing a motorist consistently drive 100 or under on the 400 series. Virtually everyone goes over 100 at some point. So virtually every motorist breaks the law.

Comment Re:Like the Bible (Score 2) 622

It is not known whether Muhammad was illiterate or not.


Gerhard Boewering (2008) "Recent research on the construction of the Qur'an" in Gabriel Said-Reynolds (ed.), The Qur'an in Its Historical Context, Routledge: p. 70-87.


Sebastian Guenther (2002), "Muhammad, the Illiterate Prophet: An Islamic Creed in the Qur'an and Qur'anic Exegesis" Journal of Qur'anic Studies. Volume 4, Issue 1, Page 1-26

Comment Milk (Score 1) 851

Every glass of milk I have every drank has contained transfat. How much more is this going to make milk cost? What will the taste difference be? Will "cow shares" no longer be allowed?

Comment Re:The Dark Age returns (Score 2, Insightful) 479

Scientists believe things all the time. How could you possibly say otherwise?

Here is a sampling peer-reviewed scientific papers where scientists state what they believe. All I did was search Google Scholar for "we believe".

"We believe that these carcinogens have in common a ring system sufficiently planar for a stacking interaction with DNA base pairs and a part of the molecule capable of being metabolized to a reactive group: these structural features are discussed in terms of the theory of frameshift mutagenesis."

"We believe these data thus demonstrate unambiguously that carboxyl groups are exposed at the ends of nanotube tips, and that these groups can be covalently modified to produce probes with very distinct chemical functionalities."

"We believe that the material which gives the X-ray diagrams is the salt, not the free acid."

I really like that last one. Watson and Crick weren't scientists when they had that paper published?

Comment Re:What? Why discriminate? (Score 1) 700

For up-to-date knowledge of all the variants in the Bible, just for the Catholic letters it costs 98 euro, which is about 105 USD. It would cost many thousands of dollars for the whole Bible. That doesn't even come close to including all of the apocrypha and patristics and everything else!

There's never been a decent critical edition of the Quran made. Keith E. Small did a partial one for just the tiny text of 14:35 to 41. It costs 29.85 USD on Amazon. I'm not sure, but I'm estimating that that is only about 1/1000 of the text of the Quran. So, extrapolating, it would be 30,000 for an up-to-date knowledge of Quran variants. And again, that doesn't even come close to including all of the hadiths and sira and everything else!

The "major" religions do not fare well at all for cheaply understanding their "history" and myths either.


Comment Inspire (Score 3, Insightful) 538

She's also mentions Inspire Magazine.

Inspire used to be edited and mainly authored by Samir Khan Samir Khan was an American citizen, convicted of no crime; he was never even indicted. He was assassinated on orders of Barack Obama along with Anwar al-Awlaki in 2011.

So when these criminals like Feinstein talk about banning books, note they may also mean assassinating the authors.

Land of the Free, Home of the Brave.

Comment Re:Waste of money (Score 2) 341

What are you talking about? You said I never bothered to read the paper. I did. You simply used a scurrilous personal attack against me. It has nothing to do with who chose what.

None of the links you gave say that they are paid less for the same work. They are talking about women being paid less in toto.

Women's employment earnings are less than men. No one is denying this. That is totally different claim from the incredible one you originally made: That women are paid less for the very same work.

"And the paper did not say that it wasn't happening"

This is an incredible argument. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You need POSITIVE proof that women are paid less for the same work, not innuendo or faith. The Department of Labor, which has a duty to deal with these issues, did the most thorough investigation ever, and concluded that there was no evidence.

Comment Re:Waste of money (Score 3, Informative) 341

I have read the paper many times, thank you for trying to belittle me. I was objecting to your particular claim that women are paid less for the same work. Now you are raising completely different points about men and women doing DIFFERENT work. I don't deny that men and women do different work and that societal expectations about gender roles is the primary cause of this. I fully agree with that.

There were many claims that women were being paid less for the same work. The Department had a legal obligation to prevent this as a civil rights issue, so they tried to discover what exactly was happening. They could not determine that such a thing was happening. Of course, every economist was saying the same thing: Investors almost universally invest in the highest expected return. If women were doing the same work for less pay, investors would invest in firms that primarily or solely used women as workers, thus increasing demand, and pay, until an equilibrium is reached.

The final conclusion: "As a result, it is not possible now, and doubtless will never be possible, to determine reliably whether any portion of the observed gender wage gap is not attributable to factors that compensate women and men differently on socially acceptable bases, and hence can confidently be attributed to overt discrimination against women. In addition, at a practical level, the complex combnation of factors that collectively determine wages pad to different individuals makes the formulation of policy that will reliably redress ay overt discrimination that does exist a task that is, at least, daunting and, more likely, unachievable." (pg. 36)

The Department of Labor has not done an equivalent study since this 2009 one.

The easiest way to figure the cost of living is to take your income and add ten percent.