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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:"Drama of mental illness" (Score 4, Insightful) 353

In short, she is full of shit.

Maybe her perception is subjective. But I'd imagine her to be in a position where she can corelate these cause and effects more easily as you are.

Consider that, even if her clients find her via word of mouth and hence her specialism might skew towards this one demography causing an influx, noone would make such a claim without seeing probable cause.

I imagine many of her patients will mention a lot of the social interaction on "the internet" and "mobile". Which generates the belief this is a large factor and the way her patients relate to it or shift blame.

In the past you'd have the same problems (bullying, self-image issues, displacement, projected expectations, ...) the "always on world" with "instant gratification" with constant new hypes to "belong to or not". The intensity has become higher, the barriere has lowered. So I also think children should not be exposed without supervision and also think it's not a good thing to bring up children with a sense of instant gratification at the press of a button of a flick at a screen. While the "real world" becomes replaced for flickering pixels. And identity sticks only for a single selfie and measured by the amassed likes or views.. Which often borders self-prostitution. In a way which hasn't been possible before other as being manipulated or naïvely seduced into mainstream exploitation. Where there were supervising committées guarding the "boundary of decency or exploitation". Or there were at least people stepping up for others (which - in our immer more individualized society and "personal reinterpretations", people dare not to do out of fear being out of tune or out of sync with the value-systems of others).

So, "full of shit" ? Think not.

Maybe misguided causality ? Perhaps.

Comment: Re:Anecdotal of course (Score 1) 307

With that kind of record, it has to be something to do with your use

That reminds me to the "know it all" and "you are not my real father" kindof kid of my ex.

He sat frustrated and angry, throwing his laptop in the sofa. I inquired "what is wrong?" while his mother signed me I should let it go.

"THE STUPID THING WONT START UP!!!!", he proclaimed. And powered up again while grunting in frustration.

"When was the last time you...", and before I finished my sentence, he saw a commandprompt and jacked out the battery to "force a reboot". Which, I gathered, he was doing for quite a while and quite a few times.

So, I asked why he resolved to removing the battery- to which he proclaimed "windows did a funny update thing and it took too long. But he couldn't skip it to play his game so he yanked out the battery and now it wont boot up". While he janks angrily the battery out another time.

When I explained you shouldn't stop a write process to avoid corruption (oh no criticism! YOUR NOT MY REAL DAD!) and proposed to help and fix the problem - to which his mother added "He can fix it" - he ran off with the laptop saying "he'll fix it himself" while popping the battery another time and running to his room.

I suspect this laptop still sits somewhere unused while he's gotten "one that isn't broken" from his grandfather.

Comment: Re:Seriously? (Score 1) 274

by ZeroExistenZ (#49282349) Attached to: Speaking a Second Language May Change How You See the World

I would rather name it character, personality or way of thinking.

They do say that someone tends to have another personality in another language. As they find other ways to express themselves; I cannot convey or express myself in the same way in every language I speak. (English, French, Dutch, some German and only understanding of Spanish.)

The language does reflect worldview in my vision though: compare Cuban Spanish with Spanish Spanish. Or Mexican Spanish...
They are different. Not only in "character" or intonation, or colour of words but also in concepts and slang.

So to me a language is a representation of the culture but also of the local way of thinking.

Take UK English and US English for "roundabout". The first you could imagine people going "round around", while in the US you just describe it in appearance: "traffic circle". Which gives another sense of perception. "oh, people are are going around it" compared to "there is a circle."

Comment: Re:Seriously? (Score 4, Interesting) 274

by ZeroExistenZ (#49282287) Attached to: Speaking a Second Language May Change How You See the World
I garantee you that in Europe any educated person will be fluent in both their native language and English

It depends on the country though. French have a sense of global importance as the English or the Spanish. They reason "I can be understood at the largest parts of the world and don't NEED another language." and downvalue "languages which will dissapear anyhow" (literally out of the mouth of a French speaking Belgian.). I suspect this is rooted in the settlers past and colonies.

As a result, foreign media is dubbed and foreign words are translated. (Germans tend to do the same but are in my experience more linguistical open - that's why you have much "French rap music" but not really "German rap music". Come to think of it, there isn't much German music without them dressing up silly and getting drunk together.).

There is a shift in the younger generation, which is open for "English media and influences", but French natives are generally poor with English. In meetings there is often the agreement to "communicate in English" but it soon shifts to French as it's too slow and cumbersome or not everyone understands English well enough. While other nationalities have less problem understanding French. In meetings with Indians, Germans, Dutch, Luxembourg English is no problem. With soutern countries (Italy, Spain, Portugal, ...) English is.. "a sort of reinterpretation"

The acceptance of foreign media seems an indicator for English languistic skill as children get "emersion" at a very young age while they get used reading subtitles. And at a later age find information online with a lower barrier to grasp these concepts. Also technical fields often have a closer relationship to English terminology which give a higher comprehension level.

Comment: Re:IBM no longer a tech company? (Score 1) 283

by ZeroExistenZ (#48232501) Attached to: Ballmer Says Amazon Isn't a "Real Business"

IBM isn't a tech company? Shut your mouth.

IBM isn't anymore. I know this from inside source from different fronts: IBM buys companies, then squeezes the lemon. Then dumps it.

For years, IBM has taken over departments of companies tired of "managing IT", rehired the people who were fired on worse terms. while they are declined training or any other investment. "Take it or leave it".

They have one huge battery of dusty old consultants, who have been unmarkettable. IBM itself isn't anything progressive from themselves anymore. Dusty, clunky legacy pile of shit software.

Comment: Re: 1-600 kilotons (Score 1) 172

by RsG (#46834457) Attached to: Asteroid Impacts Bigger Risk Than Thought

It's "Hiroshima" ,and you really ought to read up on the details before commenting.

Roughly 80K were killed INSTANTLY from the blast. Blown to bits, vaporized, incinerated, or rather more prosaically by killed shrapnel. Others were killed when the city burned - lots of wooden construction, especially far from the city center. Many more were fatally wounded but did NOT die in the blast - burn or shrapnel victims who would die of infection or lack of treatment days, or even weeks later. The fatality list would have been smaller had the bombing not eliminated most medical staff and facilities within the city, leading to treatable wounds becoming septic.

You can't take the total fatalities, subtract the immediate deaths and arrive at the figure for "death by radiation poisoning". In point of fact, there were a great many people killed from radiation, but anyone close enough to the blast to receive a lethal dose ALSO received other injuries, meaning that, rather than having discrete categories for radiation poisoning, burns, shrapnel/blast and infection casualties, you have people who were wounded in multiple ways, and died of more than one cause.

Comment: Re:Don't be ridiculous (Score 2) 207

by RsG (#46800609) Attached to: Cody Wilson Interview at Reason: Happiness Is a 3D Printed Gun

Limited demand. They'd be selling a product that's both low quality and illegal to own. The target market for that would be criminals with money to spend, who don't already have access to equal or better guns. And it's not like you can set up shop on a street corner; secrecy is expensive.

Basically, a black market Sten Gun factory has all the drawbacks of illegal arms dealing AND startup costs to boot. I'm not surprised it isn't a thing yet. Oh, and I doubt 3D printing will make it a reality any time soon - the startup costs would be lower, but the 3D printed guns would be even worse than cheap locally manufactured metal guns.

There are places in the world where the locals make cheap metal guns en masse, but they tend to be places like Chechnya rather than the UK.

Comment: Re:Enjoy it while it floats (Score 4, Informative) 66

by RsG (#46556139) Attached to: Goodyear's New State-of-the-Art Airship Makes Its First Flight

When underground radioactive elements decay, helium is a byproduct (look up "alpha particle radiation"). Because it's a noble gas and doesn't bond with anything, it seeps its way to the surface, where it escapes into the upper atmosphere. Some helium can instead become trapped by non-porous rock, in underground pockets. Those same pockets sometimes have natural gas deposits.

So you find a natural gas deposit, tap it, and what comes out as well? Helium. It's not the main product they're after when they go drilling, but it is valuable enough to set aside and sell.

Comment: Re:Is this really a _good_ idea? (Score 4, Interesting) 177

by RsG (#45431085) Attached to: Military Robots Expected To Outnumber Troops By 2023

It actually wouldn't be that difficult to avoid what you describe as "silly sci-fi crap" scenarios. The key concept is autonomy.

Meatbag infantry aren't that autonomous to begin with. They need their supply lines; an army marches on its stomach. And they need orders. For every squad of grunts shooting/getting shot at there's a legion of grunts keeping them in ammo, food, water and fuel, bare minimum, and and whole line of dummies (excuse me, officers) telling them where to go and what to do. Interrupt either and they stop being effective in a hurry.

Despite these limits infantry are still the MOST autonomous branch of the military. Tanks need entire shops for of full time specialists, aircraft spend more time getting fixed than getting flown, and ships go through fuel by the tanker.

A super advanced drone with onboard guidance still needs fuel, and if it wants to kill anyone, ammo. And it'll probably need a direct order, possibly with an access code, to unlock its weapons, seeing as ROE are already that restrictive for human soldiers.

And the kinds of traits your talking about in an advanced computer - self-determination, intellectual autonomy, freedom - are the polar OPPOSITE of what the military wants in a drone. If Cyberdyne made a pitch to the Pentagon that started with "Our new T800 Killbots are able to learn, think and adapt", they wouldn't make it halfway through the first PowerPoint slide before getting politely asked to leave. Top brass don't even want regular grunts doing any of those things.

Machines certainly can solve problems, store information, correlate, and play games -- but not with pleasure. -- Leo Rosten

Working...