Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:this report is inconsistent (Score 1) 88

by radtea (#48682039) Attached to: New Paper Claims Neutrino Is Likely a Faster-Than-Light Particle

This is a scientific paper being written for the author's peers, none of whom would ever misinterpret it. I've seen this issue come up in a couple of places where laypeople are confused by the language of physics.

This is not a problem with the language of physics: it is a problem with laypeople.

I'm all for clear scientific communication, but at the end of the day, communication is hard and worrying about how some random person on the 'Net might misinterpret a term you use every day in your professional work is just not a good use of anyone's precious attention.

When I write poetry I do so in a pretty technical way. If people don't appreciate that, sucks to be them, because they are not my audience. I'm the same way in scientific communication: I write for my peers, and everyone else does the same. Let the popular science authors do the translation. They need the work.

Comment: Re:Difficult to reconcile with SN 1987A (Score 1) 88

by radtea (#48682025) Attached to: New Paper Claims Neutrino Is Likely a Faster-Than-Light Particle

The primary difficulty here is going to be the same data that was really tought to reconcile with in the OPERA experiment, namely the data from SN 1987A.

I had the same thought, but it turns out not to be the case. Given the model he's working with, the neutrinos will be as much above the speed of light as they would have been below it if they had the same real mass (0.3 eV or something like that.)

For ~10 MeV neutrinos this gives gamma absurdly close to unity, and it's as impossible to distinguish neutrinos traveling just over c from ones traveling at c from ones traveling just under c.

The paper actually mentions SN1987A and talks a bit about the time resolution required.

Comment: Re:Culture and information matter. (Score 5, Insightful) 114

by MightyMartian (#48681777) Attached to: The Interview Bombs In US, Kills In China, Threatens N. Korea

Because you can't check alternative media sources in the United States. No sirree, there's only one state broadcaster that plays nothing but pro-US government material all year long...

Fucking hell, you fucking moron. There's lots to condemn the US over, but I'd say it would be hard to think of a country with more diversity of voices, to the point of a loud braying cacophony.

Comment: Re:Nobel? (Score 3, Insightful) 114

by MightyMartian (#48681745) Attached to: The Interview Bombs In US, Kills In China, Threatens N. Korea

That's utter BS. The UN released a report on human rights violations months before The Interview became a big issue. You should read it. The treatment of political prisoners (and christ, even unlucky bastards who happen to be distaff kin) is so harrowing that the only thing that really does come close was the Nazi death camps.

Comment: Re:Hopefully (Score 1) 114

by MightyMartian (#48681715) Attached to: The Interview Bombs In US, Kills In China, Threatens N. Korea

First Seth Rogen movie for you? I thought it was one of his better ones, though I still think it sucked. Still, despite all the schlock, it did make the important point that North Korea is a vile regime that condemns millions to near-starvation conditions while the elite live in astonishing luxury. It paints with a broad brush to be sure, but beneath it all there is a true chord playing.

Comment: Re:I automatically disbelieved this post (Score 1) 52

by PopeRatzo (#48681399) Attached to: Google and Apple Weaseling Out of "Do Not Track"

Of course, I have my own opinions but I won't share them because they reflect my own biases.

That may be the single stupidest sentence in the history of stupid sentences on the Internet.

You won't share what you think because it's what you think. Everything you see and think and say and do reflects your own biases. If you decide not to share a single bit of data that is floating around in your head if it happens to reflect your biases, that means you will spend the rest of your life mute, which come to think of it might be best for everyone.

I've just re-read your entire comment and it doesn't seem to say anything at all about anything. Are you a Markov bot? If so, your maker forgot to put in the AI.

Comment: Re:There's no such thing as a free lunch (Score 1) 52

by PopeRatzo (#48681365) Attached to: Google and Apple Weaseling Out of "Do Not Track"

One way or another, you pay for your free Internet services.

It's not "one way or another". It's ONE WAY.

Where do I sign up to pay for Google and Twitter and other internet services directly instead of via my private data? I've been to Google thousands of times, and I've never seen a "subscribe" button.

No, there is no "one way or another". You can ONLY pay for your internet services by letting companies upskirt your private communications and personal data. That gives you some idea of just how valuable your private data really is.

fortune: cpu time/usefulness ratio too high -- core dumped.

Working...