Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

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:He's off his rocker. (Score 1) 531

by kanweg (#49139227) Attached to: Machine Intelligence and Religion

"I'm a Christian and his statements represent a gross misunderstanding of Christianity. "I don't see Christ's redemption limited to human beings," Reverend Dr. Christopher J. Benek ( The Bible time and time again states that Christ died for our disobedience towards God."

Did lizards, cats, mosquito's, eagles and fish eat from the apple too? They do die, don't they?

OK, cats have nine lives. You win.

Comment: Re:Please tell me this is satire (Score 5, Interesting) 320

by kanweg (#49130691) Attached to: Use Astrology To Save Britain's Health System, Says MP

"Reality is, democratically elected parliament isn't supposed to be a bunch of elites but a cross-section of electorate. That means it needs to have a few superstitious people to be able to properly represent the population which also has such people in statistically significant amounts."

We let the people who can cook well be cooks, the people who drive well be drivers, etc. etc. Except politicians. Apparently it is perfectly possible to run a country without any qualifications (except perhaps the skill to convince other to vote for you). Or by averaging the opinion of milions of people. That is a terrible kind of democracy.

I would like politicians to pass various exams before they're allowed to "rule". (Logical reasoning, fallacies, decision making).
I would like anyone to be able to comment on whatever is up for vote (in a moderated system where any comment is allowed only once). So, a single individual could change the outcome, by having a strong argument or a better idea, benefitting everyone.

Why choose for a form of democracy that results in mediocrity, instead of excellence?


Comment: Re:Chromebook Shmomebook (Score 1) 169

by kanweg (#48892027) Attached to: Google Just Made It Easier To Run Linux On Your Chromebook

Getting it to run is probably more appropriate description.

I've made several attempts to install Ubuntu. Following Canonical's instructions didn't work.

I've also enlisted the help of an open source installation tool. I did get to a couple of screens for making basic installation selections and then I believe the installer was supposed to do its magic but the screen turned fully black and remained that until I forced a restart.


Comment: To learn for a possible switch to a linux server (Score 1) 592

by kanweg (#48844629) Attached to: Why Run Linux On Macs?

A recent article confirming my own experience, Apple's software is deteriorating. The newest mini's don't come with a server version anymore, so Apple has lost interest (for a change).

Access with the last few OS X versions to a Mac OS 10.9 server is terrible, so my latent interest in Linux got a boost. I've been trying to get it running on an external HD. However, I can't get Ubuntu to install using Canonicals instructions. I tried a utility, but that didn't work either.


Comment: Off topic (grammar) (Score 1) 42

I'm not a native speaker either (too?). I think I can fix the second sentence
(Anyone will look for google or quora to the response of a usual question that requires one single answer
Anyone will look for Google or Quora for the response to a usual question that requires one single answer
but I would probably write the sentence differently anyway)

but what is wrong with lately in the first sentence?

I would have written recently myself, but according to the dictionary it means the same.


+ - How civilisations can spread across a galaxy->

Submitted by kanweg
kanweg (771128) writes "If you look at the milky way at night, it appears not much is changing. But over time, stars get closer and further to each other. Coryn Bailer-Jones, an astrophysicist at Germany’s Max Planck Institute for Astronomy in Heidelberg, found that of 14 stars coming within 3 light years of Earth, the closest encounter is likely to be HIP 85605, which now lies some 16 light years away in the constellation of Hercules. It will get a close as the Oort cloud.
Human or alien civilisations could practice star hopping. Why travel 16 light years through space when you can just wait until a star with a suitable planet gets close and cover only the last stretch with an artificial spaceship? Take your time for a thoughtful response; it will take another 250,000 to 470,000 year before the close encounter."

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Pretend capitalism (Score 2) 275

by kanweg (#48647045) Attached to: Dish Pulls Fox News, Fox Business Network As Talks Break Down

The interesting thing was also that the Fox rep said: "Hopefully they will vote with their hard earned money". I can't imagine that it was Fox insisting on a lower compensation for their shows. So, Dish could choose either to increase the rate for the customers and take their hard earned dollars for Fox or cough the money up themselves. Is it that Carry is too stupid to realise this (just uttering one of the typical cliche expressions) or what?


Comment: Re:Wasn't there a book about this? (Score 2) 138

by kanweg (#48601733) Attached to: How Birds Lost Their Teeth

Every member of a species is an in-between stage. You carry with you mutations in your genes. Yes, useless. Doesn't prevent you from procreating. If you do, your genes will end up in another individual who happens to get another mutation. Perhaps that does something; perhaps it does and it tweaks a protein's specificity. Mutations that don't have an effect now may have one in the future when more mutations build up. Mutations are not directed, occur without purpose (selection is directed: you get offspring or not).
Glucose oxidase (GO) oxidises glucose. That's what it does, in every organism that has it. Glucose oxidase (GO) of a human and a chimp are very similar. Those of a rose and a dandelion to each other too. As their purpose is just to oxidise glucose, it would have been the death of the theory of evolution if a human's GO and one of the plant GO were more similar than that of the chimp's. But that's not the way it is. It is just one of the powerful tests that the theory of evolution passed, and even better provides an explanation for.
There certainly is a lack of knowledge how everything evolved; but that's not a problem. The only problem the theory of evolution suffers from is people's lack of understanding, or willingness to take the effort to understand.

Butterflies? They didn't evolve in one generation. The earth is very very old. Insects are the most popular animals. Lots and lots and lots of mutations resulted in a plethora of different species. Amazing, yes. God of any particular flavour required? No.


What this country needs is a dime that will buy a good five-cent bagel.