Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment: Science is wrong way more often that it is right! (Score 1) 385

by rhyous (#49784283) Attached to: Can Bad Scientific Practice Be Fixed?

Science is wrong way more often that it is right! This is not actually a problem. It is part of the scientific method.

Science is about observing. Creating a "hypothesis." Testing the hypothesis. Changing the hypothesis based on observations and tests. Until a hyptothesis can't be proven wrong, in which case it becomes a "theory." If a hypothesis can be 100% proven with no possible chance of altering, it becomes a law.

There are very few laws. For example, the law of gravity, even if we only have theories on how gravity works, gravity is itself a law.

So with gravity, a hypothesis was proposed that every item, despite the size and weight appear to drop at the same speed. Many tests made this a hypothesis. Then someone drops a feather, and based on observing the feather falling more slowly, the theory is called into question. Test are done. The theory is no longer in question because someone observes air and found evidence that while gravity acts on objects at the same rate, air doesn't. Add in the variable air and the theory of gravity still stands. We have the law of gravity.

However, there are many theories where when the theory is called into question, it is flat out proven wrong.

So for any given law there are multiple (mt) of theories. For any given theory theory their are multiple (mh) hypotheses.
So for every law that science comes up with, there are many incorrect scientific assumptions (isa).
Number of times science is wrong is vastly more than the number of times science is right,

Because something is the "currently accepted theory" doesn't mean it is correct. People often say things like, you are an idiot if you don't believe in the "Theory of Foo." However, the fact that the "Theory of Foo" is still a theory means that isn't proven yet. As a proper scientist, we continue to question everything until it is proven to such an extent that it becomes a law.

However doubting a theory because we don't have 100% evidence is different than doubting a theory because it doesn't jive with some religious belief. There are too many variable for either science or religion to make blatant, "your wrong, I'm right" statements. When either side does so, they look foolish.

I find it interesting that the scientific method is pretty much the same method as faith.

Faith = Believe something, act on it, if it is true, your faith is confirmed.
Scientific method: Hypthosize something. Test it. If your tests support your hypothesis, your theory is confirmed.

Also, sometimes results of scientific experiments don't always mean what one might think they mean. For example, science is trying to recreate the first moment when something moves from a lifeless element to a living thing (even if only a single-celled organism).There are many who say, once man can do this, it will forever disprove the idea of intelligent design. However, as soon as man does this, we also just proved the possibility of intelligent design. We proved man could use its intelligence to design and create life. At that point, all we proved is the necessary steps to create life. Further suppositions such as saying that since man can create life it proves that there is or there is no God are just suppositions are completely not part of the scientific method.

Happy contemplating . . .

Comment: I like pay per mile (Score 1) 826

by rhyous (#49744437) Attached to: Oregon Testing Pay-Per-Mile Driving Fee To Replace Gas Tax

I like pay per mile. Everyone should pay for what they use. It was easy to tax gas when 100% of the cars used gas. This doesn't "target" electric cars, it simply includes them, and they should be included.

We need to tax the amount that is needed to maintain the roads. Everyone who uses the roads should pay. Those who use the roads more, should pay more.
If you have a 50 mile commute, you pay $0.75 each way ($1.50 a day). You also need 50 miles of road to be maintained. You also are increasing the load on the roads for 50 miles.
If you have a 4 mile commute, you pay $0.06 cents each way for a ($.12 a day).

Comment: We should all strive for the three minute standup! (Score 1) 507

by rhyous (#49700609) Attached to: Is Agile Development a Failing Concept?

The three minutes standup

Manager: (looks at Dev 2) Kanban board says you moved Blah task to done yesterday and pulled in foo task today.
Dev 1: Yes.
Manager: Good work. Need anything from me or the team.
Dev 1: No

Manager: (looks at Dev 2) Kanban board says you moved Oober1 task to done yesterday and pulled in Gobblygook task today.
  Kanban board says you moved blah task to done yesterday and pulled in foo task today.
Dev 2: Yes.
Manager: Need anything from me or the team.
Dev 2: Yes, I need help from Dev 1 to do Gobblygook.
Manager: (looks at Dev 1) Dev 1, can you talk to Dev 2 about gobblygook after standup.
Dev 1: Yes

Manager: (looks at Dev 3) Kanban board says you moved Whatsit task to done yesterday and pulled in WrongWork task today.
Dev 3: Oops. Yes, I finished Whatsit yesteday, but I pulled in the wrong story. I am working on RightWork.
Manager: Fix the Kanban board mistake. Need anything from me or the team on RightWork.
Dev 3: Nope

Manager: (Looks at Tester) Kanban board says you finished tests for oober1 and you are working on testing Blah.
Tester: Yes, there was one bug, I verbally told Dev 2, he fixed it. I retested an now all tests pass. I am testing Blah now.
Manager: Good work.Need anything from me or the team.
Tester: I'll maybe need to speek to Dev 1 about Blah sometime after lunch.

Manager: Great job team. Keep up the good work.

Stand up ends.

Comment: Why when I can code in C#? (Score 1) 270

by rhyous (#49697913) Attached to: Swift Vs. Objective-C: Why the Future Favors Swift

Why would I learn objective-c (which I already learned and loath) or Swift, when I can code in C#.

Sure objective-C will be nice for a fast thin layer between a big game and the OS.
Many consumer apps already exists.

The big white space now is enterprise apps. You watch, C# is going to own the enterprise app market thanks to Visual Studio 2015, open source .NET, and Xamarin.

Comment: I think you just descript WPF and XAML (Score 1) 276

by rhyous (#49674171) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What's the Future of Desktop Applications?

I think you just descript WPF and XAML.

You create the View that an object is supposed to look like, then you simply bind the object to that View. Most controls exists, either out of the box or purchased third party controls, and all you have to do is define it.

Best UI ever made or designed.

Comment: Confused (Score 1) 892


So she is saying Woman aren't as good as men at negotiating? I thought the point here was that Women are equal to men.
Which is it? Are women equal to men, or aren't they?

She is also saying that this supposedly margin of pay difference that supposedly proves we are still a sexist society is caused by women negotiating with less skill than men. So she is blaming women for their own low salaries and she is removing the blame on sexism.

So that means we have reached equality and women are be treated equally to men because a man with poor negotiating skills gets paid less too.

Did I miss anything here?

Comment: Wow. So you are saying I am the most valuable? (Score 1) 397

by rhyous (#49387103) Attached to: Why America's Obsession With STEM Education Is Dangerous

So I am a Software Engineer with an undergrand in English (Creative Writing emphasys), minor in Spanish, a Masters of Computer Science (well, I have my thesis left). I have worked as a Network Engineer and Level III Support Engineer before becoming a developer. So since my career is the marriage of a humanity (English) and computer science, does that make me the most valuable?

Comment: What if genes didn't evolve and were created? (Score 1) 111

by rhyous (#49357221) Attached to: The One Thousand Genes You Could Live Without

No, I am not saying "believe in God over evolution." I am just saying that looking at DNA without considering the possibility of intelligent design is myopic.

At least some DNA studies should assume intelligent design.

Start looking at DNA and everything that interacts with it as a programming language created by something intelligent.

In a programming language, there is code and data. Code contains all the method and functions to do small amounts of work. Data is used or acted upon by the code. Data can be read only, read/write/delete, etc...

Think of our bodies as a biological artificial intelligence created using this biological programming language.

What if it DNA is code or a database.

Who knows what is used and what isn't?

Comment: Use a tablet (Score 1) 169

by rhyous (#49235169) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Video Storage For Time Capsule?

Don't use one medium, use many.

Use open source codecs and include the codecs and their source on the media

1. An MP4 on an SD Card.
2. A DVD - in a case and shrink-wrapped.
3. A USB thumb drive.
4. Also A shrinkwrapped tablet in a sealed container might last 100 years.

Put the Video on a tablet.
Shut down the tablet.
Remove the battery from the tablet.
Shrink wrap the tablet and place the tablet in a sealed container.

Now all they have to do is add a battery in the future or connect power and turn the tablet on to see the video.

Comment: Tablets for Work failed! (Score 1) 130

by rhyous (#48812163) Attached to: PC Shipments Are Slowly Recovering

Tablets for Work failed! They are consumer devices.

Now, my Surface Pro 3 on the other hand. It rocks. It is a tablet, every bit as awesome as the iPad or Kindle, yet I can do my work on it too. Sure Microsoft missed the Tablet explosion, but now that it is over, everyone but Microsoft, and hardware manufacturers who put Windows on their devices, is missing the hybrid market.

An inclined plane is a slope up. -- Willard Espy, "An Almanac of Words at Play"