Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - 6 month subscription of Pandora One at 46% off. ×

Comment Re:so... now they want to ban knowledge (Score 1) 306

Wasn't that program actually started under the Bush administration?

Well, yes but that's misleading.

So that Obama and Holder ended up taking all manner of shit from the Rabid Right--including a massive anti-Holder PR campaign by the NRA--for continuing to do what their guy had started?

This is the misleading part. The operation that became Fast and Furious began under the Bush administration as Wide Receiver but the program was vastly different under the Obama administration.

There was nearly seven times more guns allowed to walk during the Obama administration than under Bush. The Bush administration ended Wide Receiver in 2007 when they had issues with inadequate tracking. None of the Bush era guns have been used in homicides in the US. The Bush era program notified Mexican law enforcement of guns that they expected would cross the border, that didn't happen under Obama.

Whether you choose to chalk it up to incompetence or malice, there were many differences between Wide Receiver and Fast and Furious that show the Obama administration's operation was a wholly different beast.


Comment Re:To whom did he really appeal? (Score 1) 309

The DNC isn't a charity; they exist to get people elected.

Not only that but to get people elected who will serve the best interests of the party. Some guy who wants to win to "make a statement" and claimed he will leave office in one year, a time frame in which he can't possibly achieve anything meaningful, isn't the guy to support.

The debates promote the entire party, and they're trying to create a contrast with the Republican clown show.

There are plenty of clowns on both sides.

Trump and Hillary may as well play Entrance of the Gladiators as their theme music when they make public appearances.


Comment To whom did he really appeal? (Score 1) 309

He's in favor of government funding for Planned Parenthood and he has expressed both support for gun control and complete ignorance of the current gun laws, so he's not going to pull away any Republican voters.

He has not put forth an agenda on Income inequality, the budget deficit/national debt, union support and police misconduct, so he's not going to be able to develop a connection with the Democrat base.

His one big issue is something that the majority of Americans do not support.


Comment Re:Science journals have done this as well (Score 2) 135

There is no longer any need to filter prior to publishing - filtering can happen after. Researchers should just "publish" their papers on their own or school's website.

There is a need. Look at it from the readers' side. You are asking me to trawl the websites of tens of thousands of labs and researchers in order to keep up with events. And we'd all have to individually act as gatekeepers, sifting out the good stuff from the bad, the deliberately fake and the crap put out by people with mental health problems.

I already spend far too much of my time just trying to stay on top of what happens; without aggregators - places to collect papers in one place - and gatekeepers - people that do the filtering so we don't all have to - I could spend 100% of my time on this and still fail.

I absolutely agree that we don't need the classic limited-space, expensive paper journal. PLoS and the like, along with Arxiv for preprints, are good replacements for that. Especially as they're pushing for applying metrics on a per-paper basis, not journal.

The problem is the editing/gatekeeping/evaluation. Peer review sucks. Problem is, I have yet to hear of another system that would both suck less and actually work in a real-world setting. And we do need it. We need to share the job of filtering out the valid science from the invalid crap, the pranks and the religious rants.

Comment Re:3m x 3m is still pretty big.... (Score 1) 137

Yes; you don't just need the free area, but enough extra margin that you don't risk bumping into things or breaking something when you flail about. Especially since you can't see, are focused on a game and have little clue where you actually are in real life. 3x3m really means 1.5x1.5m of actual, safe space - or less.

Use the Force, Luke.