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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Lots of cheap carbon stuff (Score 1) 652

by risom (#48109245) Attached to: Living On a Carbon Budget: The End of Recreation As We Know It?
Thanks for following up! You had a small mixup there, 28 million were all pregnancies, including planned ones, leaving only 12.25 unplanned pregnanies, of which 3.3 occur in the U.S, which is a bit above average, given 1.2 billion people in developed nations.

The absolute numbers are misleading, though, as pregnancies are not evenly distributed among the countries. More relevant the relative amount of unplanned pregnancies among all pregnancies among a given country. There, the U.S. has 49% - 51% ([1],[2]) unplanned pregnancies, France has 33% [1] and Britain has 16% [1].

The numbers get even more drastic if you look at teenagers only. There, the US has 5 times as much unplanned pregnancies (relative to overall population) as Germany [3].

[1] =
[2] =
[3] =

Comment: Re:Another child making unsupported claims (Score 1) 203

It's hard to fit into a world where the average person really is dumber than you.

Quite the opposite, the 50% of the population has no problem to "fit into a world where the average person really is dumber than you."

The problem is not the intelligence of the kid, but the fact he thinks he's gifted. If you achieve good grades in school without effort and your parents constantly tell you you're gifted, you never really learn the correlation between effort and achievement. Then, suddenly, the real world kicks in. Other young adults, not gifted but learning none the less, catched up. Now they get the interesting jobs.

If you have contact to a gifted child, it's important to give him/her appropriate input. Put the focus on productive output, on effort (e.g. for a kid with math skills: Present interesting engineering problems, perhaps a bridge has to be built over a creek or something similar). On helping others and on developing the ability to communicate effectively with non-gifted kids (or adults).

Comment: Re:Political/Moral (Score 1) 305

by risom (#47358221) Attached to: How Often Do Economists Commit Misconduct?
An "economist" like in the article is a macro economist while your investing neighbor most probably is a micro economist. Same field, different point of view. A macro economist does stuff like predicting the housing bubble, but may suck mightily as a CEO of a company (and vice versa for the micro economist).

Comment: Re:Good. (Score 1) 138

by risom (#47331773) Attached to: Google Starts Removing Search Results After EU Ruling

That's great and all, but if I walk into the streets of oh let's say France, I don't need to worry if I'm a Jew that Christians are going to start attacking me.

If you are a Jew in France you have a pretty high propability of Christians attacking you. You should read real news more often, France has a massive racism problem right now. Jews are emigrating from France at an unprecedented scale (WW2 excluded).

Comment: Re:IF.. (Score 1) 561

by risom (#47322453) Attached to:, Mensa Create Dating Site For Geniuses

Really? I don't find the legitimate ones bad at all. Much better than the SAT for testing raw, innate intelligence. IQ is like a brightness of a flashlight. It's potential. Brighter is better, but it doesn't guarantee you point it at a useful direction, or even use it for anything useful at all other than to study playboy under the bedsheets.

The problem is that IQ as a variable is pretty useless in practice. It has no prognostic validity for success in life or in a job. Motivation is far more important for that, but it's also harder to measure.

I would think if they took recent Nobel Prize winners in the hard sciences, they would be trending above average and by a margin.

Sure, but you would find even more high-IQ persons in quite mundane jobs. IQ is a confounding variable for success. Counter example: most Nobel Prize winners are male, too. Is that the reason for their success?

Comment: Re:sigh (Score 1) 627

by risom (#46937309) Attached to: US Climate Report Says Global Warming Impact Already Severe

We could fix this problem easily with barely any significant change to our style of life.

Similarly, residential electricity prices in Germany (note that Germany and Denmark, both with heavily subsidized, high share "green" power generation, have electricity pricing on par with small island nations)

Two points:
First, in Germany renewables are not heavily subsidized (i.e. tax-financed) at all, but instead cross-financed trough averaging production costs of non-renewables and renwables. No tax money involved.
Second, It does not make sense to compare the price per kWh when the overall effiency is so vastly different to the USA :While I am paying about .29EUR per kWh on my renewables-only plan, in absolute numbers that amounts to only 40EUR per month on electricity for a 4 person household. We have a well insulated house, efficient appliences, LED lighting everywhere, efficient computers etc. With absolute consumption as low as that, I couldn't care less about the price per kWh.

Comment: Re:Bullshit (Score 3, Interesting) 427

by risom (#46345475) Attached to: YouTube Ordered To Remove "Illegal" Copyright Blocking Notices
No one said they have to licence it for free. The debate between Google and Gema revolves around technicalities of payment. Most other royality collectors agreed to get an undisclosed percentage of advertisement earnings for the licences, but GEMA insists on a flat fee, regardless of amount of viewers etc. of a particular track. AFAIK GEMA is the only royality collector worldwide insisting on that.

Our business is run on trust. We trust you will pay in advance.