Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment Re:A remarkable number of people are idiots (Score 1) 367

"Remember, half the people you meet are dumber than the average."

While not strictly true, because of median/mean ambiguity, the word "dumber", and that you probably don't meet statistically random samples of people, it's still useful because it makes people think "waitaminute, that can't be right" - and then they have to realize that it's probably not, but IQ is also not some objective measure of dumb/smart. It's probably not really a good measure of anything but the ability to do well on IQ tests.

An IQ score only has meaning in relative terms of the population on which it is measured, as "IQ 100" is by definition just the median test score of a certain population. Each standard deviation up or down is +15/-15 points, so 85-115 should contain about 68.2% of the population, with only 2.1% or so being lower than 70 and another 2.1% being higher than 130.

Comment Re:Year 2100 is (Score 1) 298

past the life expectancy of anyone we could conceivably give a crap about.

I'll be long dead in 2100.
My son will be dead in 2100.
His children though, my grandchildren, may very well be alive in 2100.
Their children, my grand-grandchildren, are very likely to be alive in 2100
My nieces and nephews, born between 2009 and 2015, may very well be alive in 2100.

And conceivable for you or not, but I do "give a crap" about them, even the ones not born yet.

Comment Re:Work with cloned mice (Score 1) 203

There is no scientific explanation for the phenomenon of consciousness - no theory about how it arises, not even a definition of what qualifies.

There are several scientific theories - multitudes even - about what consciousness is, how it arises, and what qualifies.

You should also try studying some philosophy; philosophy of mind has been the subject matter of thousands of books, theories, discussions, and theses all the way back to Plato.

Comment Re:So when will this actually happen? (Score 2) 372

So when will all of this destruction and devastation actually happen?

I distinctly recall hearing about how major cities along the U.S. eastern seaboard would be under water "within a decade" back in the mid 1970s. It didn't happen.

Then we were supposed to be completely out of oil by 1990. It didn't happen.

The next prediction was that the ozone layer would be almost completely depleted by 2002. It didn't happen.

Then we were told global warming would spiral out of control by 2011. It didn't happen.

It gets harder and harder to take these claims from environmentalists, scientists and politicians seriously, when they're so wrong again and again and again.

It's not even a case of efforts to mitigate the problems actually having any effect.

Most of the time these efforts haven't even started by the time the problem has either resolved itself, or been shown to have been a load of bullshit in the first place.

When a scientist says "if the current trend continues, X will happen", media reports it as "X will happen".

What they don't report - and what people like you seem unable to understand - is that the current trend DIDN'T continue because people, governments, nations, actually DID something about it.

So the ozone layer is still here (slowly recovering) because we stopped spewing CFCs into the atmosphere. We MADE SURE the trend didn't continue.

We still have oil because we go to silly lengths and spend ridiculous amounts of money to find and extract more. Fracking, anyone? Oil sands? Deep-sea drilling?

The point many scientists - and more and more regular people, and even some politicians in some countries - are making is that unless we DO something, if we allow the current trend of climate change to continue, it is - sooner or later, but most assuredly - going to make this planet a worse place to live than it already is.

It's not going to fix itself, much like the ozone layer wouldn't have just fixed itself. We're going to have to fix it, and a good start is to stop making it worse.

Comment Re:It's almost like the Concord verses the 747 aga (Score 1) 157

But to travel at 800 mph without making your passengers sick and barfing, the route actually needs curves to be 16 times as smooth as the 200 mph CHSR.

Some critics of the Hyperloop concept have focused on the possibly unpleasant and frightening experience of riding in a narrow sealed, windowless capsule, inside a sealed steel tunnel, that is subjected to significant acceleration forces, high noise levels due to air being compressed and ducted around the capsule at near-sonic speeds, and the vibration and jostling created as the capsule shoots through a tube that is not perfectly smooth or level.[25] Even if the tube is smooth upon construction, ground shifting due to settling and ongoing seismic activity will inevitably cause deviations from a perfectly smooth, level path. At speeds approaching 900 feet per second (270 m/s), even 1 millimeter (0.039 in) deviations from a straight path would add considerable buffeting and vibration. With no provisions for passengers to stand, move within the capsule, use a restroom during the trip, or get assistance or relief in case of illness or motion sickness,[26] the potential for a seriously unpleasant travel experience would likely be higher than in any other popular form of public transport.
  - Wikipedia

Comment Re:So is he a replicant, or not? (Score 3, Informative) 222

Deckard and Rachel are both supposed to be dead by their targeted end of life engineering as replicants.

Only the Nexus 6 replicants had targeted end of life (the 4-year lifespan).

Deckard and Rachel can thus not be Nexus 6 replicants if they're still alive 4 years later, but they CAN still be another version of replicant .

You know: "It's too bad she won't live. But then again, who does?".

Humans have an end of life too, you know? We're not exactly immortal.

Comment Re:Don't fucking do it. (Score 3, Informative) 421

Known around these parts as "eighteen-hundred-froze-to-death".

As in "Wow, that's old. Haven't seen one of those since eighteen-hundred-froze-to-death".

My friends usually look at me weird when I explain that the expression references 1816 and the effects of Mount Tambora exploding and putting lots and lots (and lots) of ash into the atmosphere.

Comment Re:Highlander III did it already... (Score 5, Insightful) 421

To quote the (only) movie: "There can be only one".

I refuse to acknowledge that the fantastic movie Highlander ever has had any sequels, prequels, tv shows, a franchise or anything else.

Just that one movie, with its marvellous soundtrack and the mystery of who the immortals were, where they came from, and why there could be only one.

None of this "they came from space. No, the future!" malarkey. It is and was a mystery, never explained.

Comment Re:Hurr durr I'ma sheep?? (Score 4, Informative) 264

"Hurr durr I'ma sheep" won over the alternative "I like online polls" which got 38% of the votes. a vote Torvalds asked people not to vote in, and yet 5,796 people did.

In the real poll, "v4.0" beat out "v3.20" by 56% to 44% out of 29,110 votes.

Since nobody ever use the kernel code name, it doesn't matter in the slightest what it's called. Everyone will refer to the kernel as "4.0".

Comment Re:Sweet F A (Score 4, Insightful) 576

people in 1903 couldn't have dreamed of what the Saturn V would look like or how it would work.

Funny that you chose 1903 as your date, since that was the year Tsiolkovsky published The Exploration of Cosmic Space by Means of Reaction Devices, wherein among other things were mentioned that escape velocity could be achieved with a multistage rocket fueled by liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen.

So yes, at least one person in 1903 not only could have dreamt, but did dream and explicitly state how rockets like the Saturn V would look and work.

Going the speed of light is bad for your age.