Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Would Pablo Escobar pass these tests? (Score 1) 87

To American kids the ability to do math is completely irrelevant, they'll be able to ask the AI and get an answer right away.

To American oligarchs the kids' ability to do math is undesirable, because that ability would give them a) an appreciation of how badly they're being screwed over and b) the beginning of the means to do something about it.

IMO anyone who thinks that the dumbing down of society and the sabotaging of education aren't part of a plan, simply hasn't been paying attention. Or they've already fallen for the propaganda coming from the would-be architects of neo-feudalism...

Comment Re:not a shock (Score 1) 26

Yeah, that was a big goof, thanks for understanding.

Apple is capable of hiring talented people and creating a useful product. They just don't seem to be capable of being user-friendly in the ways that matter to me. TBH they were never great at it, and MUGs did the heavy lifting in the customer relations department for them for free. Anyway I'm totally capable of believing their performance claims, to a reasonable point, especially when the results aren't putting them first.

I wish they were friendlier, because their hardware is reasonably impressive. I'm also just not in their target demographic apparently because I'd rather have a slightly thicker device with better cooling and battery capacity.

Comment Re: How dense can they be? (Score 1) 46

It's not impossible, but the switch would be expensive. It's probably easier and just as effective just to shield them, and tie the shield to the chassis ground.

Another option would be to switch power to the radio chip, if it's in a package which makes that convenient. This might also disable bluetooth if you do it to the infotainment system, or cause a code to be set...

Comment Re: Mom's of the world will prevent it. (Score 1) 14

Antibacterial soap doesn't use antibiotics, it uses chemicals known to destroy antibiotics directly and physically. It's usually done with compounds they can't reasonably develop resistance to. This is easier than in antibiotics because they don't have to be safe to put in your body.

Comment Re:Too Simplistic (Score 1) 72

Is anyone else suspicious that this generic label of "Ultra-Processed Food" is being applied broadly without really bothering to address actual causes?

I'm not suspicious. I recommend reading books by Robert Lustig, Gary Taubes, and Chris van Tulleken. Note that I'm not advocating just accepting everything they say - some of it is controversial for good reasons, and some of it is probably just wrong. But for me there's more than enough logic and sense in them to result in some pretty compelling suggestions for causal mechanisms.

For example, is it high sodium, high saturated fats, or just high caloric content in general that's the issue? All of the above and in combination, I'm sure, but this seems like a condescending and misleadingly simplistic way of communicating that.

Not really - especially the "high caloric" content. The bomb calorimeter - with its suggestion that all calories are equivalent - has caused untold harm because it's overly simplistic to the point of being fundamentally wrong. For example, I can consume a stupidly high number of calories per day from fat; but if I get enough-but-not-too-much protein and a very limited amount of carbs, I will lose weight and be in good health. Many people on such diets have actually reversed arteriosclerosis; the calcium portion of the arterial plaques always remains, but the pus-filled blood-clot sacs shrink and disappear, and the likelihood of heart attack and stroke is drastically reduced.

Further, it reeks of the naturalistic fallacy... It's not the fact that it's "ultra-processed" that makes it unhealthy to consume, but the ingredients... right? Surely a food can be ultra-processed and also healthy?

I totally get where you're coming from, and I support your skepticism. But if this is something you care about, I recommend a dive - both wide and deep - into the available evidence and theories. I think you'll be surprised at the complexity.

For example, let's look at your last question. One of the things that ultra-processing destroys is an almost-mechanical property that changes both the rate of absorption and the total amount absorbed. For obvious reasons, this alone can make the difference between being good for us and being bad. Apples are good - apple sauce - sweetened or not - is NOT so good.

Also, you may see things like carageenan, lecithin, carob bean gum, guar gum, and a multitude of other emulsifiers and smootheners. Many of these are entirely natural and exist in small quantities in fresh foods. But when they're separated from their sources and added in large quantities to things like chocolate milk - to give them that smooth texture - they also start to emulsify the mucus lining in the gut. This disrupts the gut microbiome, and can also allow things into the bloodstream which a healthy microbiome normally guards against. That 'stuff' that doesn't belong in the bloodstream can have nasty effects, perhaps the least harmful of them being increased inflammation.

To be sure, there's a lot of nuance here. But there's increasing evidence for the contention that 'ultra-processed' - vague though it may seem at first glance - is in fact a pretty good yardstick for the healthiness, or lack thereof, of the food we eat. I think ultra-processed food is a real, serious, society-wide health threat. But please, don't take my word for it. Do some digging, and if you feel that I'm wrong, get back to me and we can discuss it some more.

PS Even the 'saturated fats' thing has a lot of subtlety. Olive oil is such a fat, but consumption of fairly large amounts of it is part of the Mediterranean diet, which doctors recommend for good reason. There's even some suggestion that beef tallow is a healthy fat. But trans-fats, or other similarly modified fats, seem to promote inflammation and contribute to arteriosclerosis. And don't get me started on the whole cholesterol subject. Some of it is good and even necessary, some of it bad, and the goodness and badness may be conditional on a bunch of factors. There's probably enough nuance there for at least one good doctoral thesis.

Comment Re:Keep it simple (Score 1) 72

Beef, chicken, eggs. Fruits, veggies, pasta.

It's relatively easy and tasty to eat healthy, and it's often cheaper too, even if you get the fancier cuts. Certainly when compared to the processed crap.

You had me until 'pasta'. It's almost always a highly-refined carb which will spike insulin release in a manner not that much less drastic than that associated with sugar. Even whole-grain pasta is bad in that way, because the grain is ground so fine that the fibre content does almost nothing to mediate carb absorption in the gut.

It's also important to specify WHOLE fruits and veggies - not juiced or mashed. Even the act of finely chopping these foods - especially the fruits - results in a VERY different insulin response profile. Mashing them - as in making applesauce - makes them almost equivalent to ultra-processed foods, nutritionally speaking.

Comment Re:Surprise!! (Score 1) 72

Why should poor people eat the crap that is ultra-processed food?

Umm... because it's all they can afford? Because it's all they have access to in the 'food deserts' which they live in and don't have the means to venture out of? Because they're addicted to it? Because they don't know better? Because advertising - aka brainwashing - actually works?

Take your pick - any or all of the above, plus probably more that I didn't think of.

Comment Possibly a worse problem? (Score 3, Insightful) 46

Ruter said it is addressing the vulnerability by developing firewalls and delaying the signals sent to the vehicles, among other solutions.

It wouldn't surprise me to learn that there's some programming equivalent to a dead-man switch that disables vehicles - and perhaps other electronic devices - if they haven't successfully 'phoned home' within a programmed time.

After all, if you're going to the trouble of designing and installing remote-kill capabilities - for all kinds of possible motives - it would be very short-sighted to NOT disable the equipment if it fails to contact the mothership within a specified period. The tricky part is making it look like a mundane failure rather than a 'Trojan horseless', so to speak...

Slashdot Top Deals

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo. - Andy Finkel, computer guy

Working...