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


Forgot your password?

Comment Oh boy, slashdot sure has changed... (Score 1) 388

Not so long ago, this thread would have been full of technical solutions, but now mostly its like, call cops, look before you rent... blah blah

For your windows, you have to get double glass windows for soundproofing. For the walls get Acoustic foam. Something like this
or this

Not too expensive, and will take care of the noise.
That said, if you are in a concrete building, the sound comes in through doors and windows.

If you fix your doors and windows, the sound should lessen. If you have thin walls, in that case foam will work well.

Comment All the best (Score 1) 150

As somebody in the VLSI field, I am happy that somebody broke out of the monopoly/duopoly of the established players. WE are moving towards "single/double" vendor for everything from mobiles to laptop processors to desktop processors. Having little choice also harms progress.

The other thing which excites me is that you are going towards a completely new architecture. This is what innovation is about!

Hopefully, your success will inspire others also to take the plunge.

Comment I doubt its the cost (Score 1) 654

Most car owners can afford a train/bus ticket. Infact, for many, it may be cheaper.
The problem is time. If it requires me to change 2 buses to get my workplace, I wouldn't do it.

Also, there is the question of time. If car commute takes 25 minutes, but public transport takes 1 hour, people would take the car. I guess it would work if connections are frequent, and convenient.

Comment Peer reviewed (Score 1) 329

Any study is valid if its peer reviewed. So first of all you need to apply this filter. You are not qualified to believe in a study. So people like you and me look for peer reviewed studies.

Secondly, you have to understand that a study is one study.
So if 20 sites quote Study X
and 2 sites quote study Y
It does not mean there are 2 studies Y and 20 studies X

Many times, these denier sites all quote one study, and in the cacophony confusion arises.

So whenever you find something, see if you can follow the breadcrumbs to the source paper.
Find if its peer reviewed.

Then store it.

Collect a few such papers. You will realize that the papers supporting human cause will vastly outnumber those opposing it.

Comment Science does not work like that (Score 4, Informative) 329

Humans are 100% responsible is a claim which makes headlines.
But have you read actual research.

It says, there is enough evidence to prove that most of the warming can be linked to human activities.

Science looks at evidence, and then presents a hypothesis. This is how it has been in the scientific method. When an evidence is discounted science looks at new evidence.

Science is never always right. Scientists make mistakes. And that is why its science. For example, some hypothesis about climate change was proved wrong. Does it mean that entire climate change argument is wrong?
Scientists will update their models, gather more evidence and then present the findings again. Being wrong does not discredit science. It merely improves it.

The problem is, people view science as they have viewed faith. There is no room for error or mistakes. So any process which makes mistakes is ridiculed. IPCC has made mistakes, so have other climate scientists. Some evidence may not be relevant or nonferrous. But it does not matter. We just move on.

There are some things about climate we do not understand. That is also acceptable. Sure, faith based systems have all the answers, but that is not science. You first have to understand what is science, and once you do, you will figure it all out.

Do not fear science. Embibe it. Question. But not because somebody told you to, or some rich publication says so. Question on your own merit. If you do not believe something to be true, instead of ridiculing and pointing to some site on the internet which says its wrong, ask the question.

What site X says, is it true? If not, why? You will find answers to all of it if you start looking for it.

But if you let your faith cloud your judgement, you will never understand. If you want to understand, question. Now ridicule.

Comment Not really... (Score 1) 210

There is a target market for everything.

For example, a high end graphics card can be called overkill, until you bring in gaming.

So who shoots 70000 pics? Well for one, us timelapse folks. often to get a 30fps, a 10 minute time lapse means 600 seconds = 18000 frames.

This is just a 10 minute sequence.
Then there are the sports guys. Often each shot is a 80 frame sequence, then pick out the best. Again, one day means 15-20000 pics. Many shoot RAW+JPEG, so that is going to increase the space.

Last but not the least, 4K video is approaching 100mbps.

Comment The mountain part is bullshit (Score 1) 204

It may be more efficient, but its not going to help at altitude.
Water boils at lower temperature at high altitude. eg. 85 degree C. This means many foods to not get cooked. So you need a "Pressure cooker".

This will help at low altitudes, and that too for some things. For other stuff, this will cause caking and crusing due to too much heat.

Comment We are in a "Engineering" and "financial" bubble (Score 2) 154

I have a different take on this.
AS the 20th century dawned, we had some machines, and some theories. Or machine making was limited by our knowledge of science.
Then came stuff like understanding the physical world. Our world. The science beneath it.

For example, how do people get sick. How does a semiconductor work. This went on till the late 1970s or so, and after that came the engineering boom. The ideas from the last 50 years were put into practice, and we are witnessing the results today.

A combination of advertising, marketing and engineering meant, there is a lot of money to be made, so our efforts to go "fundamental" have weakened. In todays world of MBA and business, every decision is based on "How will it impact our financial quarter".

In the past this mentality was seen mostly in private corporations, but now this is being seen also in universities and research institutions. Often, instead of research, engineering is done because it can reap quicker rewards.

If you look at our sciences, eg metallurgy, chemistry etc., they are languishing because not enough talent is going into them now. It requires a lot less effort(no disrespect to programmers here) to create an android game which can real good rewards.

OTOH, in basic science you may have to slog for 15-20 years before any tangible results. As a result, we are creating a bigger and bigger castle on the same foundation. its going to hold, but one day its going to get to the breaking point.

Human civilization, has reached a point where short term reward reaping has become the primary focus right from the point we get into formal education. In most countries people choose their college major based on job opportunities. It used to happen earlier, but it happens a lot more.

One day our house of cards will grow too big to stand on its on. The higher we go, the faster we fall. Its time to build up the foundation again.

Comment This will blow your mind really... (Score 1) 183

A programmer is instructed to develop a software which generates a random sales tax registration number. This software will be used for random raids.
The officer in charge gives him a small slip with few numbers, and verbally instructs that these numbers should never be generated.
So how do you deal with corruption like this
1. Option 1 - Blow the whistle - No proof. They may come after your family
2. Option 2 - Comply
3. Option 3 - Make software so that first 3 months the numbers never come, but after 3 months the probability of the said number increases by 10X :) Evil ethical developer eh?

Slashdot Top Deals

10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.