Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:You Kids Get Off My Lawn (Score 4, Interesting) 294

by pen (#47936721) Attached to: Study Finds Link Between Artificial Sweeteners and Glucose Intolerance
"Natural" means "tested by hundreds of thousands of your ancestors who lived to reproduce", provided this is actually true for whatever you're eating.

"Artificial" means "some lab tech trying to feed his/her family on 50k/year synthesized it and then it passed FDA testing without killing anyone or making them sick right away"

The Internet

+ - Windows 8 bypasses and modifies the hosts file-> 8

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "Windows 8 has been confirmed to not only ignore, but also modify the hosts file. As soon as a website that should be blocked is accessed, the corresponding entry in the hosts file is removed, even if the hosts file is read-only. The hosts file is a popular, cross-platform way of blocking access to certain domains, such as ad-serving websites, but now that Microsoft clearly wants to control your web browsing experience, the practice not be that cross-platform anymore."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Sadly, agreed (Score 1) 374

by pen (#39855613) Attached to: Is Humanity Still Evolving?

Women who are pregnant read magazines that educate them as to how to protect their wombs. The articles they read state things like "Doing this increases the chance of first trimester spontaneous abortion by 300%". I can't possibly imagine how a comment like that can be made, there are an infinite number of variables that are involved in gestation, to suggest any single event can increase the risks of spontaneous abortion in the first trimester is just plain rubbish. What is worse, are we talking about 1 in a million to 3 in a million? Are we talking 1 in 10 to 3 in 10? It doesn't say, just says by 300%. Yet, women will instantly stop doing whatever it says they shouldn't do to avoid that.

"Pregnant women magazines" may not cite this information -- or even paraphrase it correctly -- but it like this typically comes from scientific studies, where that behavior actually increased the risk of first trimester spontaneous abortion by 300%.

If you have a problem with pregnant women using information provided by science to improve their own chances, you probably disagree with most of humanity, and not just the Wal-Mart people.

+ - A popular social news site has been infected by ja-> 1

Submitted by
violent.ed writes "Someone has figured out a way to exploit a mouseover javascript event within the popular social-news site The javascript attacks the comments section which is designed to make one's web browser (Firefox 3.5.3 Confirmed) resubmit the exploit code as a reply to every existing comment in the existing thread, causing not only severe server load but locking up the browser of the affected client."
Link to Original Source

Comment: As long as they keep the native WM frame (Score 1) 556

by pen (#29286739) Attached to: Firefox 4.0 Goes Chrome, New UI In Q4 2010
Chrome's UI is kind of annoying but tolerable overall. One reason I really hate it, though, is that they replace the native window manager's UI with their own home-brewed crap. Not only is it kind of buggy, since it hasn't had nearly as much user testing, but it breaks all kinds of standard WM functionality. Chrome windows don't respond to "Minimize All" or "Move to Other Monitor" or any other kind of functionality that's handled by the WM that doesn't know what to do with this window that doesn't have a frame. Please, Mozilla, don't repeat this mistake!

Yahoo Revives Pay-Per-Email, With Charitable Twist 287

Posted by timothy
from the penny-post-sans-post dept.
holy_calamity writes "Yahoo research have started a private beta of a scheme that resurrects the idea of charging people to send email to cut spam. Centmail users pay $0.01 for each message they send, with the money going to a charity of their choice. The hope is that the feel good effect of donating to charity will reduce the perceived cost of paying for mail and encourage mass adoption, making it possible for mail filters to build in recognition of Centmail stamps."

Comment: Re:Train wreck phenomenon (Score 4, Insightful) 543

by pen (#29005283) Attached to: The Outing of Pranknet
What are you talking about? There is a lot more of a difference between these pranks and movies; For example, the actors' and crews' voluntary participation, and not causing uncompensated damage to someone's property and psyche. I'm sure there are some examples, but they're generally frowned upon. Causing millions of dollars in damages to someone's property and not compensating them for it is not the same as paying a crew millions of dollars to film a movie. Give me a break!

"Free markets select for winning solutions." -- Eric S. Raymond