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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:Statistical Practitioners need to Modernize (Score 1) 115

by fropenn (#47765609) Attached to: Statistics Losing Ground To CS, Losing Image Among Students
I would add that many disciplines are recognizing the importance of statistics and are therefore introducing applied statistics courses for [discipline X]. This causes a drop in enrollment in the pure statistics courses, thus decreasing the number of pure statistics instructors, thus decreasing the demand for individuals trained in pure statistics. In this way statistics is losing itself as a discipline and is quickly becoming specialized into various disciplines (e.g., the application of statistics for medical research).

Comment: Re:Time to Legislate Data Mining (Score 2) 162

by fropenn (#47324133) Attached to: Hospitals Begin Data-Mining Patients
There are plenty of benefits that can be found from data mining. Lots of research, for example, uses data mining to identify trends, patterns, relationships, etc. that are then used to develop and test hypotheses.

So it's not data mining that's the problem, rather, it's the way some corporations and institutions use data mining for their best interest and not in the best interest of those whose data they have.

Comment: Re: while we're bitching about cable companies.. (Score 1) 170

by fropenn (#47221477) Attached to: Cable Companies Duped Community Groups Into Fighting Net Neutrality
Tossing the niche channels would, presumably, increase viewership on the non-niche channels, thereby making them more profitable. Seems like there could be substantial savings for the consumer. I know I'm not supposed to respond to AC, but, again, the logic makes no sense.

Comment: Re:while we're bitching about cable companies.. (Score 1) 170

by fropenn (#47221461) Attached to: Cable Companies Duped Community Groups Into Fighting Net Neutrality
This reasoning makes no sense. If it's a niche market, then there are other ways of reaching that market than making the masses pay for it. (Have they, perhaps, heard of the internet?) Further, I am guessing that most niche channels make their profit off advertising, not subscriber fees. So they would have a very low (or even negative) monthly cost to subscribers. These niche channels could even be "sweeteners" that the cable companies offer as a competitive advantage over each other.

Comment: Re:won't matter for 90% (Score 3, Insightful) 192

by fropenn (#46903501) Attached to: How 'Fast Lanes' Will Change the Internet
If I wanted the same thing that cable TV provides, I'd buy cable TV. But this isn't about Netflix - they are just the first since they use so much bandwidth. Rather, it's about who gets to decide what is delivered to your computer at what speed. Today the argument is over Netflix. But tomorrow it could be CNN. Or Slashdot. Or YouTube. Or Facebook. It's bad for consumers because it will cost you more for the services you like and use and it discourages competition (just wait and see what "doesn't work" when Comcast decides they want to start a streaming video service).

Information is the inverse of entropy.

Working...