Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment: WTF? (Score 1) 32

by argStyopa (#48672583) Attached to: How Target's Mobile App Uses Location Tech To Track You

1) The /. article is titled: "How Target's Mobile App Uses Location Tech To Track You" (highlight mine).
Yet the article and the conclusion is that this app doesn't track you because of hyper sensitivity to privacy, even though their experience and most surveyed users WANT that feature. So, clickbait headline or didn't you even RTFA yourselves?

2) "I have an aversion to shopping in general, and large-format retail in particular. While I think I have a strong sense of direction most of the time, put me inside of a big box store with its scores of aisles and the sometimes impenetrable logic of its layout, and I get turned around and frustrated right quick. I tend to avoid this kind of shopping, opting instead for the convenience of online purchases or smaller bricks-and-mortar stores that Iâ(TM)m familiar with or that offer a more curated experience." OK, we know you're a condescending douche, got it. We understand that you don't go to these sorts of places, probably because you're tragically hip. Editors at Xconomy: asleep at the switch? Maybe cull out this sort of patronizing crap from reviews?

Comment: Bias in titling (Score 1) 340

by argStyopa (#48670975) Attached to: Study: Police Body-Cams Reduce Unacceptable Use of Force

"During the 12-month Rialto experiment, use-of-force by officers wearing cameras fell by 59% and reports against officers dropped by 87% against the previous year's figures"

From that, you determine that the title of the article should be that it "reduces police use of force"?

Clearly, the MAIN result is that it reduces BS claims of "police brutality" more than anything.

I'd be curious to understand why the submitter and editor so-titled the article.

Comment: Slashdot is exceeding itself lately... (Score 1) 209

by argStyopa (#48664273) Attached to: Tech's Gender Gap Started At Stanford

...in vapid, stupid conclusions based on flawed initial premises.

First I noticed was that "coding" is a superpower.
Second is that tech's gender gap began in 1994? Seriously?

So before 1994, women were nearly equally represented in computing? HAHAHAHA.

It's not even worth refuting, it's such an asinine premise.

Hint to the author: the world began before you.

Comment: Official Transcript of Drill (Score 4, Funny) 69

by argStyopa (#48657981) Attached to: ESA Carries Out Asteroid Impact Drill

Moderator: OK folks, drill is beginning.
Breathless Lacky: Attention important people! Deep space radar shows that a major asteroid strike is due in less than a week! It is likely to have global damage potential, scouring the seas and filling the skies with fire. All human life, in fact all life on earth is potentially at risk.
VIP1: Thank you. Do we have a spaceship that we can use to get away?
VIP2: No, sir. ... ... ...
VIP1: OK, well then, let's call this one complete. Drill ended after 0 minutes, 28 seconds:, Asteroid 1, Earth 0. Thank you all for your participation. Please join us next year, we're shooting for 30 seconds.

Comment: pain works (Score 1) 323

by argStyopa (#48653799) Attached to: Putting Time Out In Time Out: The Science of Discipline

Pain is possibly the oldest, most effective stimulus to changing behavior in the history of, well, life.
To suggest that human behavior isn't modified by pain is to imply that humans are somehow intrinsically different than every other kind of life on this planet.

I doubt that is true.

Now we can talk all day about the long term effects of pain on spent beings, and the concomitant damage that can be done emotionally, socially, or in terms of relationships. But if I'm going to take you seriously as a real scientist (and not just a flake with an agenda) you need to concede that pain CAN change behavior, and that in some cases the behavior change may conceivably be worth the effects.

Comment: Re:Shorten the working week (Score 1) 621

by argStyopa (#48646307) Attached to: What Happens To Society When Robots Replace Workers?

Because they're not "just feeding their family and keeping a roof over their heads"?

At least in the US, what we call "poor" are ridiculously well off by current world standards, and even very comfortable compared to relatively recent US norms. US "poor" typically have cell phones multiple tv's, computers, car(s) and a residence larger than middle class Europeans.

Living a life that would have comfortable in the 1970s - 1 cheap tv, no cable, no computer/internet, one cheapo car, no cell phone, smaller meal sizes, no convenience food - you could have a family of 4 right at the poverty line with out much trouble.

Comment: Re:As long as we're being more specific.... (Score 1) 716

by argStyopa (#48636747) Attached to: Skeptics Would Like Media To Stop Calling Science Deniers 'Skeptics'

Not at all? Why would it?
I think it's great that we work to fix things that we understand and have clear, quantifiable paths forward.
My objection to "climate change" isn't what you seem to believe.
My objection is that it seems to have sucked all the air out of the room for the public to pursue real, tangible, projects that can materially improve life - mostly for the billions on this planet that live in squalor.

But hey, you keep paying indulgences for your sins, er, I mean 'carbon credits' (and that $ goes where, exactly, once it's done salving your conscience?) to make yourself feel like you're "doing something".

Comment: Genetic changes as a result of development (Score 1) 56

by argStyopa (#48634077) Attached to: Scientists Discover That Exercise Changes Your DNA

....aren't we skating a hairsbreadth from Lamarckism?
I recognize that the article doesn't imply that these genetic changes have any impact on the reproductive genes, but is it absolutely impossible that these methylation changes have some impact - if even only generally, for example on overall fitness of the offspring - that would almost be Lamarckian?

IANARG - I am not a reproductive geneticist - but as my amateur understanding is that a woman's ova are all in-place early in life, while a man's sperm are made anew regularly, I'd imagine this (hypothesized) impact could only apply to males' reproductive cells anyway?

Comment: We suck as a people (Score 2) 28

by argStyopa (#48633975) Attached to: Kepler Makes First Exoplanet Discovery After Mission Reboot

Seriously, we do.

The fact that we're finding other PLANETS is now so humdrum that this gets 7 comments, this smells very much like the latter Apollo missions "Oh, we've got guys on the moon again? Zzzz."

If I simply posted something controversial*, like an entire article about how "global warming is bullshit", that would get 300 comments, easily.

*of course, I can't use /. as my personal blog. I'm not Bennett Haselton.

Comment: As long as we're being more specific.... (Score 2) 716

by argStyopa (#48633931) Attached to: Skeptics Would Like Media To Stop Calling Science Deniers 'Skeptics'

I'll trade the label of 'skeptic' for 'science denier' sure, but I'd ask that people stop using the blanket term 'climate change' when they really mean 'a host of sweeping economic, societal, and governmental changes that spend $billions and $trillions to effect what we optimistically expect to be trivial changes in a dynamic system that we mostly don't really understand and have been unable to reliably predict, and which only coincidentally SEEM to conform to a leftist agenda that otherwise nobody was listening to'.

That'd be great, thanks!

Comment: Political inertia (Score 3, Informative) 141

by argStyopa (#48626013) Attached to: Who's To Blame For Rules That Block Tesla Sales In Most US States?

First, let's remember that lawmaking politicians of influence of either party are typically what, 60+ years old? 70+? These guys still have their staff print their emails for them and are surprised when a someone says 'let's watch a movie' and it doesn't involve (at best) a VCR. Not super-quick at adapting to change.

Second, until pretty recently the "target demographic" of electric car buyers was some sprout-eating weirdo from the Bay Area, ie, someone who wouldn't piss on a Republican if they were on fire, ie not someone that ever, in a million years, would VOTE Republican. OTOH, Car Dealerships are relatively typical small businessmen, whose concerns about running a business tend to coincide with GOP viewpoints and platforms. Whether they vote Dem/Rep is irrelevant, it's that they [i]could[/i] vote Republican, so which group would a Republican politician reasonably spend their time serving?

Comment: Economists....yeah (Score 1) 677

by argStyopa (#48616125) Attached to: Economists Say Newest AI Technology Destroys More Jobs Than It Creates

Ask 10 economists a question and you'll get 11 answers.

"...But if we just put it on autopilot, there's no guarantee this will work out...."
That sounds suspiciously like someone wants to run something.
I'd ask - sincerely - if there's a way to tell if world economics has run better since politicians started actually listening to economists? The moment economists moved from descriptive to prescriptive was arguably not a step upward.

Comment: We'll see if Grotius was right (Score 1) 189

by argStyopa (#48609073) Attached to: Denmark Makes Claim To North Pole, Based On Undersea Geography

The world of geopolitics are much more Hobbesian "red in tooth and claw" - certainly there are international "laws" but considering that a) being subject to them is entirely voluntary and b) there are no punishments for law-breakers beyond what other states are willing to exert, "international law" is more like a voluntary coordination of diplomatic efforts than an actual binding structure of laws. I know it didn't help Ukraine for shit (bye Crimea!), and is unlikely to do much for the Philippines or Vietnam in terms of a logical (ie not China-uber-alles) resolution of the various sea-disputes they're in.

If there are truly vast swathes of resources beneath the polar cap, ultimately, it's going to go to whomever can protect it (or who has big enough friends ok with them having it - in particular them having it instead of someone they like less...).

In short, Good Luck Denmark! My suspicion is that legal victory here, if they win, will be short-lived: Denmark *may* have a legitimate claim in the World Court, but this case would be followed almost immediately by a just-as-legitimate claim by Greenlanders for independence from a pre-modern colonial tie.

Interchangeable parts won't.