Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:E for reference, tree's my preference (Score 1) 261

by arvindsg (#49125089) Attached to: The Case Against E-readers -- Why Digital Natives Prefer Reading On Paper

For me its other way round, I can read linear content on ebooks easily, but for notes and reference material where i am going to be jumping around a lot i prefer physical book . Though a properly hyper-linked e-book does work too but that is not always available.

Comment: Ereaders are still way behind books (Score 1) 261

by arvindsg (#49125071) Attached to: The Case Against E-readers -- Why Digital Natives Prefer Reading On Paper

I Personally feel the user interface in ebook readers vs a physical book is completely lacking in features. Consider the following areas in which books certainly excel
1.)Browsing Around: A real book allows you to move forward or backward way more easily then small next/forward,scroll bar does on a ereader. Further when moving between pages, the discontinuous screen refresh in any ereader contributes to you loosing focus.
2.)Viewing Multiple Pages: On a real book you use your hand as a temporary bookmark to quickly jump between two pages, On a ereader this might involve navigating menus, waiting for screen refresh and other annoyances.
3.)Taking Notes: Handwriting beats typing any day for small notes which may contain figures, underlines Symbols. Even with a $1 pen beats any stylus out there.

Of course there are numerous areas where e-readers excel like augmented content, search tools, information to weight ratio etc. I am sure all these will change in time some with ui innovations and other with improved technology.

I am personally surprised no body used a physical knob(iWatch like but larger) for navigating between pages on a ereader.

Comment: Don't underestimate natural selection (Score 1) 391

There are stark differences in stability of an engineered product and product(animal or any other species) created via natural selection.
Engineered products almost always deteriorate when environment changes from the design parameters, often with a completely unplanned behavior.
Natural selection takes up long time to build its product . The product is well tested under a large set of environment conditions at a scale much much larger than an engineered product. After evolution has had long enough time to operate a natural evolved species will respond to any change in environment by changing its behavior in a nearly optimal direction.Further each production is kept a bit different from each other further reducing the risk of universal destruction to a any single random fluctuation.

Based on this an artificial species may although be able to defeat and destroy an intelligent naturally selected species, but after that it may itself deteriorate as soon as first few variations from its design parameters. Consider a solar storm, what good would a super intelligent software do if the processor itself is misbehaving, while at-least some humans are likely to survive.

Hence forgive me but i sure do not welcome artificial alien overloads, they are just a bubble.

"Who alone has reason to *lie himself out* of actuality? He who *suffers* from it." -- Friedrich Nietzsche