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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Fascinating! (Score 1) 32

Now, yes, there are predictions that you could get a supermassive black hole launched into space, especially during a galaxy merger if the velocity of the smaller black hole exceeds the escape velocity of the combined galaxy.

But I'd be wary of assuming that it's a launched black hole, unless we can find the merger it comes from. There may be ways for such a black hole to form that cause the stars to be launched away rather than the black hole being flung, and if a galaxy isn't rotating fast enough to be stable, one could imagine that a sufficiently small galaxy was simply consumed by its central black hole. Both of these would seem to produce exactly the same outcome, if all we have is the black hole itself and a velocity.

I'm not going to say either of these is likely in this case, or that astronomers haven't examine them (they almost certainly have), but rather that we should be cautious until we've a clearer idea of what the astronomers have actually been able to determine or rule out.

Comment Re:not the tariffs honest (Score 4, Insightful) 73

It was meddling by both D and R in our economy, both were scared of invisible boogiemen of "something bad might happen".

Fear is a great motivator. Courage is standing in the face of danger understanding the risks might be worse doing nothing than doing something. This is a calculated risk and ought to be rewarded in the marketplace if it is correct.

Conglomerates are neither good nor bad in and of themselves. The good is they offer efficiencies in the marketplace. The bad is they take advantage of those efficiencies and often get "too big to fail" (a lie).

People guessing who have no stake in the market are making bad choices, because of other reasons. Both D and R do this. I call it the "There ought to be a law" reactions. Nobody stops long enough to say "no there shouldn't be".

Comment Re:Unaccountable (Score 1) 109

You do not appear to understand what a republic or a democracy is, so I'll ignore the last sentence.

"Independent" does not mean unaccountable to the people. The President is independent of Congress, and vice versa, but both are accountable to the people. Well, the current president doesn't seem to think so, but legally he is.

Comment Re:well (Score 2) 109

You are correct. In principle, presidents have no authority whatsoever to dictate how an agency runs. The executive branch should have zero authority over the civil service, which is intended to constitute a fourth co-equal branch of government.

In the US, in principle, the status of the civil service as co-equal to, and independent of, the executive should be added to the Constitution and enshrined in law for good measure. Not that that would help much with the current SCOTUS, but a Constitutional change might possibly persuade the current government that absolute authoritatian control is not as popular as Trump thinks.

Comment Re:who (Score 3, Informative) 109

That is the idea that, in Britain, entities like the NHS and the BBC have operated under. Charters specify the responsibilties and duties, and guarantee the funding needed to provide these, but the organisation is (supposed) to carry these out wholly independently of the government of the day.

It actually worked quite well for some time, but has been under increasing pressure and subject to increasing government sabotage over the past 20-25 years.

It's also the idea behind science/engineering research funding bodies the world over. These should direct funding for grant proposals not on political whim or popularity but on the basis of what is actually needed. Again, though, it does get sabotaged a fair bit.

Exactly how you'd mitigate this is unclear, many governments have - after all - the leading talent in manipulation, corruption, and kickbacks. But presumably, strategies can be devised to weaken political influence.

Submission + - Companies getting a productivity boost from AI aren't turning around and firing (yahoo.com)

ZipNada writes: The explosion in AI models, software, and agents has raised questions about the impact of the technology on the broader job market as companies find new efficiencies from this new technology.

But according to EY's latest US AI Pulse Survey, just 17% of 500 business executives at US companies that saw productivity gains via AI turned around and cut jobs.

"There's a narrative that we hear quite frequently about companies looking to take that benefit that they're seeing and put it into the financial statements reducing costs, or cutting heads," EY global consulting AI leader Dan Diasio told Yahoo Finance.

"But the data that we asked those 500 executives does not bear that out. That is happening less than one out of five times, and more often they are reinvesting that," he added.

Submission + - Nvidia Has Acquired HPC Slurm Scheduler Developer Schedmd (nvidia.com)

Gilmoure writes: "NVIDIA today announced it has acquired SchedMD — the leading developer of Slurm, an open-source workload management system for high-performance computing (HPC) and AI — to help strengthen the open-source software ecosystem and drive AI innovation for researchers, developers and enterprises.

NVIDIA will continue to develop and distribute Slurm as open-source, vendor-neutral software, making it widely available to and supported by the broader HPC and AI community across diverse hardware and software environments."

Slashdot Top Deals

"A mind is a terrible thing to have leaking out your ears." -- The League of Sadistic Telepaths

Working...