Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

Still, Hell no. It's fairly new and expensive, so every lab in the world is not going to have one. But it's commonplace enough that if it's used to support a result, it's not necessarily even advertised in the abstract. These results are cited by other labs as inspiration and support for their work, which in my view counts as usage. Moreover, its usage and acceptance has grown much faster than, say, the confocal microscope.

My altered state of consciousness is a superposition of worlds where Sagan is both right and wrong.

Veracity is not a property of an academic journal. It can refer to a statement. For an example of a statement lacking veracity, consider the assertion that 'does not produce fatal overdoses' is an adverse effect of cannabis.

The number from your rectal studies institute is probably more correct. The total number of people that have been imprisoned is likely much less than the number currently in prison.

Here are a few high-profile citations from the last year. Super-resolution microscopy on fixed cells is a big deal. That's not an argument against its worth. A technology need not satisfy all your wishes to be extraordinarily worthwhile. Current practices on a commercial system do not necessarily limit what is possible in a research setting. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu...

Hell no. STED is widely used by neuroscientists. It has more than proven its worth.

So when banks routinely traded the fomc minutes in the milliseconds before the transcripts were released, we were only allowed to suspect an illicit symbiotic relationship?

Many moons ago Bernanke admitted that the fed has abetted LIBOR manipulation. It is therefore not news that the fed permits large-scale theft by banks. The news is that Goldman makes the underlying decisions, which is not really news, but signifies a shift in popular culture from conspiracy theory to conspiracy fact.

He seems to be arguing that diet and exercise do not improve quality of life before 75. I have news for this arrogant egghead who is obviously spoiled by his own good health: many of us NEED to focus on these things to maintain a decent quality of life before 75. It's not some silly obsession to cheat death. We must do this precisely because the modern sick-care system sustains the cushy status of bioethics "experts" who do very little to rein in the food and pharmaceutical companies who are responsible for the proliferation of widespread, chronic diseases such as diabetes, especially among the poor. This system fails those of use who are cannot adapt to some part of the modern industrial food and chemical complex. We're on our own, there are a lot of us, and obsessing about these things has been the only way we've been able to get our health on track. So instead of belittling the health-conscious, how about calling out public schools and TV advertisers that flood kids' minds and bodies with processed junk snacks? How is this different than passing out crack?? Why would anyone believe that poor diet and lack of exercise will have no effect until age 75, aside from an egocentric lack of personal experience? What kind of fantasy world is this guy living in?

I don't see foresee trusting a robot, if it's even remotely true that 88% of people believe robots are necessary for warfare because it's just too dangerous for humans. It's all good until one of these people deems that I'm not good enough for this planet, then becomes my judge, jury and executioner with one little hack. I'm starting to wonder whether a robot singularity is the best hope for the survival of humanity.

Asperger's was not exactly eliminated from the DSM-V. Its diagnosis criteria were simply lumped into the category of Autism Spectrum Disorder. Many functional slashdotters would be diagnosed with this disease, and perhaps even medicated. How do you know that over-medicating kids isn't the main driver behind actions like these? Sure, psychiatrists are trying to help, but the fact that they're just beginning to explore a difficult new field should scream "HEY, they don't understand the systems they're pharmacologically manipulating, and their actions are quite possible doing kids and society lots of harm!" This is not how science works. It's how fishing works. They didn't catch a fish with their Asperger's lure, so they made up another ad hoc classification which will surely be changed again, probably to be treated with a different cocktail of drugs whose actions are minimally understood, but provide plenty of profit for pharmaceutical companies.

One moral dilemma for the driverless society regards the speed at which a destination can be reached, and individual choice in this matter. Both speed and acceleration reduce fuel economy, driverless cars will know this, and society will demand overall standards for fuel efficiency. I already envy the kids who can afford the 'drive like Andretti' software.

Nice suggestions. My three year old loves angry birds, and I think the realistic physics makes it more natural for him predict the consequences of his actions in the context of the game. For teaching him math, right now it's mostly just learning to count, then learning to add.

Sorry Endo, shit is all you'll get, but it slides right down the feeding tube.

Her budget/platform is full of rainbows and unicorns, but I haven't seen anything much more realistic. Mostly, if we're going to be communists, we might as well have a president who admits it. Moreover, unlike Gary Johnson, who also opposes NDAA, she can evidently run a campaign with legitimate fiscal disclosures on a balanced budget ( http://www.market-ticker.org/akcs-www?singlepost=3054429 ).