Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Not really. (Score 1) 323

This graph explains very clearly how far away we are, and why it is taking so long. The reality is, with all the cheap coal (and natural gas), it's just not a priority. Besides, environmentalists hate nuclear so it's not a political winner to fund it. This story is good, too.

That looks like a graph that says 'fusion researchers want more money.' I want more money, too.
If I go to the source report, will it tell me:
1) the technical challenges they face?
2) if they're engineering problems requiring great expenditures?
3) If they're scientific research problems with uncertain outcomes?
4) If the research for a #3 problem involves a massive #2 effort?

Comment Re:From TFA: bit-exact or not? (Score 1) 167

There used to be a web page called "Your Eyes Suck at Blue". You might find it on the Wayback machine.

You can tell the luminance of each individual channel more precisely than you can perceive differences in mixed color. This is due to the difference between rod and cone cells. Your perception of the color gamut is, sorry, imprecise. I'm sure that you really can't discriminate 256 bits of blue in the presence of other, varying, colors.

Comment Re:From TFA: bit-exact or not? (Score 5, Insightful) 167

Rather than abuse every commenter who has not joined your specialty on Slashdot, please take the source and write about what you find.

Given that CPU and memory get less expensive over time, it is no surprise that algorithms work practically today that would not have when various standards groups started meeting. Ultimately, someone like you can state what the trade-offs are in clear English, and indeed whether they work at all, which is more productive than trading naah-naahs.

Comment Re:I don't actually have a problem with this.... (Score 1) 422

>p> There is absolutely *NO* evidence to substantiate that EM sensitivity is caused by anything external to the person claiming to have it.... numerous double-blind studies have been done, and the only factor that determines whether they are "sensing" any EM is simply when the person claiming to have EMS believes that such phenomena is present, whether or not it actually is.

That does not necessarily mean that their suffering is all in their mind because what a person believes or thinks can sometimes have real, measurable effects on their physiology. Although I think that what it does mean is that EM sensitivity needs to be treated as a psychological matter rather than physiological one.

Comment Re: They just don't want to get sued (Score 1) 264

Neither is forming conclusions when comparing apples and oranges.

You compare the raw numbers of intentional car crashes to intentional plane crashes, but the number of all car crashes is much greater than the number of all plane crashes. And the number of car trips is much greater than the number of plane trips.

It might have been fine to compare percentages, but not raw numbers.

Comment Re: the $15 minimum wage... (Score 1) 61

Not even slightly.... The number of people may be very large, but the amount of money they control and spend is still very small compared to overall consumer spending. The top 20% income earners account for 95% of the economy. Even doubling minimum wage wouldn't impact that number in any appreciable way because of the enormous income disparity between the rich and the poor.

Comment Re:Why no test (Score 1) 422

Numerous double blind studies have conclusively shown that such sensitivity ultimately depends on what the subject *believes* to be true, regardless of whether or not it actually is. Whether she would still "sense" anything inside of the Faraday cage actually depends on whether or not she genuinely believes the Faraday cage will truly stop the signals she believes are harming her, and whether or not she believes those signals to be present.

In other words, its all psychosomatic.... and should be treated as such. Psychosomatic disorders can still produce externally measurable changes in a person's body, so the suffering can still be legitimately real, and so I would not think that being simply dismissive of it is necessarily the best approach, but probably psychological help would be for the best so that she can learn how to recognize the false signals that her brain is telling her about, and perhaps eventually overcome the dysfunction.

Comment Re:So I guess CEO's don't get hit with non-compete (Score 1) 130

"Stealing" customers is a different matter... I've seen such agreements before and they are entirely legally enforceable. However, the person *is* still allowed to work for a competitor in the exact same industry, and solicit business from potential customers that did *NOT* have any imminent or active business dealings with the employee's former company while they were there. If the area is not large enough that there are no available customers, then that suggests the market is already saturated anyways, so a person *would* be out of luck in such a case just as if there were no available jobs in an area at all.

Comment I don't actually have a problem with this.... (Score 4, Interesting) 422

.... as long as the woman is getting mandatory psychological treatment.

All available evidence on Electromagnetic sensitivity suggests that is actually a purely psychosomatic disorder, but belief is tremendously powerful thing and can produce real and measurable physiological changes in a person, causing immune reactions without any externally visible cause, change in hormone levels that should otherwise only be explainable by other external phenomonena, etc.

Treating serious psychosomatic disorders requires the person to not just be aware that the problem is all in their own mind, but it also requires that a person be aware of some pathway to a solution to their apparent problem. I have heard it best described by one psychologist as (althouh I am paraphrasing here, this is not a direct quote) "there's nothing actually wrong with your hardware, but basically the software in your brain is misfiring and telling your body the wrong thing.". A person with a psychosomatic disorder needs to learn a skill that is not necessarily easy to come by, and that is to learn how to ignore those essentially false signals that their brain is telling their own body, and causing it to react in ways that might otherwise be attributed to some external phenomena. This is why the person needs psychiatric help.

Simply telling an EHS sufferer that it's just all in their own head and they should be able to simply think their way out of their problem is only going to get you ignored, because their body may still be producing a real reaction to something, even if that something is only imagined.

Comment Re:Comparison? (Score 1) 250

I'm dismayed that in CS that the academic community is putting so much emphasis on replication and not enough on robust reproducibility.

From my experience, the academic community puts no emphasis on either. I think it would be neat to study a paper and attempt to reproduce the results, but that doesn't get me a journal paper in today's academic landscape.

Comment Re:I work in online advertising (Score 1) 233

No, the ads just move out of ad spaces into 'native' space, embedded with content and interspersed into feeds and streams.

Or the adverts become articles, with no indication that they are sponsored. One newspaper website that I read has a "monthly limit" (not effective when you use private browsing) of 10 pages. But even after this limit is reached, some articles can still be read. I assume that the the newspaper is receving payment when someone reads the article. However, there is nothing to indicate that the article is an ad, or sponsored.

If mathematically you end up with the wrong answer, try multiplying by the page number.