Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:I got a butt chewing for giving my daughter hon (Score 0) 240

by thesupraman (#49121935) Attached to: Study: Peanut Consumption In Infancy Helps Prevent Peanut Allergy

There is also no guaranteed safe way of doing ANYTHING, and I suspect you know that! So stop being an idiot.

I assume that you well know that honey is most certainly not the ONLY place children can be exposed to C.Botulinum, or are you going to try and claim that?

Please, feel free to try and lock children up in a plastic bubble - and see just how well that works out for you.

The rest of us will continue with letting kids grow up the way kids have grown up for a long time, which is being exposed to a wide range of
environments and therefore the nasties that exist there... And I am pretty damn sure whos kids will end up stronger, happier, and more well adjusted
members of society.

If you plan to keep your kids away from Honey because of this, I assume you have NEVER driven them in a car, have nothing in your house that is
smaller than a box of matches (to avoid choking), nothing climbable, never EVER let them play outside (you want the full list of what exists in normal
dirt?) or go in the sun (Skin Cancer!), etc, etc, etc.

LIFE is RISK, avoid it all, and, well..... avoid life.
Well, that and the fact that it is actively unhealthy to avoid all such exposure.

Comment: Re:Future teacher, and I still yet to see good use (Score 1) 139

by thesupraman (#49104285) Attached to: L.A. School Superintendent Folds on Laptops-For-Kids Program

What a complete load of bull. I can only assume you are trying to promote some new form of computer assistance down the throats of educators at a huge profit margin (but of course 'for the good of the children').

There is NO real hardware difference between the usage cases you outlined. AND IT DOESNT MATTER ANYWAY.

Because technology is not actually needed in education! There is pretty much 0 research showing any real learning advantage to it, there is a TON of research showing that it detracts from the learning!

Stop trying to push snake oil. I know its profitable, but GROW SOME DAMN MORALS. These are children you are damaging.

What students need is better teachers, less administrators, less 'profit' being scammed out of the education system by suppliers and secondary services, and did I mention better teachers? (and no I am not calling all teachers bad, there are some great ones... but then there are the rest).
I would list the THREATS to a good education at present as:
#1, Teachers unions (by protecting incompetent teachers no matter what, and making it impossible to remove them and make space for good teachers).
#2, Administrators, who are in it to grown their personal fiefdoms, line their pockets, and get in the way of teaching (remember when principles used to be teachers? wasnt that a unique idea..)
#3, 'Technology' being used as a crutch to reduce the need for teacher/student interaction, which is what kids actually need to learn!
#4, The parents, yes, thats right, you! who cannot possibly accept that their kid is good at some stuff, bad at others, a pain in the arse half of the time, and needs a good (figurative, and sometimes more) kick in the arse from time to time to help them get somewhere.

We love to look back and laugh at 'old style' schooling, claiming it was all rote learning and raps on the knuckles, but we are far to fast to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Respected teachers, who EARNT their respect, KNEW their students, KNEW their subject are worth their weight in gold.. the others NEED TO GO.
And 'technology' doesnt help that, not one little bit.

Comment: Re:textbooks cost money (Score 2) 139

by thesupraman (#49104237) Attached to: L.A. School Superintendent Folds on Laptops-For-Kids Program

Bullshit.

Back in the day the textbooks were not updated yearly, they were owned by the school, and they lasted for 4 or 5 years MINIMUM on average.
They cost the schools significantly less than that also, as they were a negotiated bulk purchase.

NOW the 'etexts' they ARE re-selling zero-cost items to each and every student who comes along, complete with DRM and kills them.

The biggest problem to educating our children is the idea that 'they do need a computer' as that has become a crutch to teachers who are lazy and uneducated themselves (note: not saying all teaches are, just that this is a crutch for the many who are..), as the incompetent teachers then just leave the computer to run most of the courseware, and sit back not caring. I have seen this happening a LOT, and it is a disaster for the children who are having trouble, as they just flouder along and no one does anything about it.
Hands on teaching is dying out FAST, and this is one of the major reasons.

I have nothing against computers being used to teach computer skills, but for F sake, keep them out of OTHER subjects, as it is by now well proven that they detract from learning.

Or you can take the other view of things that the more incompetent kids coming out of schools the better since then they wont compete with you.. Better get used to funding their lifestyle then, since they will be the majority, and they will vote.

Comment: Cause meet Effect. (Score 4, Insightful) 47

by thesupraman (#49072407) Attached to: When Chess Players Blunder

I would suggest that making half as many mistakes gains you about 600 rating points, rather than the other way around.
Unless those points can be magically sprinkled on a player in some form..
But hey, cause and effect seem to be highly, shall we say, flexible these days.

(yes, I know its all semantics here, but hey..)

Comment: Re:"risks serious damage to the system" (Score 5, Insightful) 138

by thesupraman (#49065303) Attached to: NVidia Puts the Kibosh On Overclocking of GTX 900M Series

Because NVidia got seriously hammered not that many years ago by 'Bumpgate' when their laptop GPUs were having serious reliability problems with their physical connection to the circuit boards, mainly caused by heat.,
While people like to claim of course they did nothing wrong, I am sure people who cook their laptops overclocking them will always try and point the finger back at NVidia...
Hence, they are playing it safe.

Desktops have MUCH better cooling systems, and hence are much less likely to suffer from extreme temperature problems...

I suspect it is also a sign they are pushing the limits harder - remember, new generation GPUs have built in 'overclocking' in the form of dynamic clocks already,
so they are using up the headroom they had more effectively. This means you are more likely to be pushing past a limit, and less likely to notice (until too late).

They will always wear the fallout from such peoples actions.. so they have obviously decided right now the risk is not worth the reward.

Comment: Re:Pointless (Score 1) 755

by thesupraman (#49062911) Attached to: Removing Libsystemd0 From a Live-running Debian System

And what the hell does THAT have to do with SystemD?

If you think it simplifies anything, then go and try and work out how to change the default runlevel of your machine when it starts up..

Before SystemD, then I just change the file /etc/inittab, been that way for a long long time.

Now... well, I wont ruin the surprise, really, just go and find out.

And this is PROGRESS?

Comment: Re:Submarines are the undisputed... (Score 1) 439

by thesupraman (#49058441) Attached to: Will Submarines Soon Become As Obsolete As the Battleship?

A modern naval task force is a tough nut to crack but the submarine is the best nutcracker there is. They're also historically the greatest threat there is to aircraft carriers.

I assume you very carefully selected the word 'historically' there..

Because these days they are most certainly not. this is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-N-22
And thats if they dont just ICBM your carrier group, for which there is no defense.

Submarines are an effective and 'reasonably safe' ocean denial platform against shipping, of course that only matters
in a drawn out fight where production ability matters - ie: no war the US will likely ever be involved in again.

Then again, I am sure they make a very good profit for the construction, maintenance, etc contractors..

Comment: Re:When did facebook become a right? (Score 1) 176

Actually you are wrong and they are right.
No doubt you think they Seychelles number gives you an out, except it is wrong.
The reason for that very high number is the UK runs a detention centre there that is used to hold international pirates caught
by a number of countries navies, including the US - so it has NOTHING to do with the Seychelles except that it is located there.
(in fact this also applies to several of the other small island nations in that area also reporting high numbers).

The US number, on the other hand exclused a very large amount of people that they decided technically didnt count, for example
anyone in youth detention, military, prisons not on UA soil, etc. so its number is highly underreported.

And yes, the US is approximately 4 TIMES the rate of china.

So, you are completely wrong, he is absolutely correct, and you are an idiot.

Comment: Re:Trees (Score 2) 288

Can you explain how making coloured folks sit in the coloured section of the bus harms them?

*I* Can, but it seems from your position above that you think that would be just fine..

Your second attempt at a strawman is of course totally unrelated. women have the *advantage* of more socially acceptable *choices* including
stay at home parenting - somethings they choose to do that (and yes, sometimes there is no choice, just like sometimes there is no choice
for a husband to go to work in a shitty job).

NO one is telling women to go barefoot and pregnant, this is simple reverse discrimination in an area where there is current no discrimination
to begin with (at least not systemic, if you even know what that means).
VERY few women have an interest in these areas, just as very few men have an interest in nursing, for example...
Where is the corperate funded pushed to fix that?

Then lets consider there elephant in the corner, TEACHING.
Where is the push to have some gender equality there? teachers, especially of younger children, are almost EXCLUSIVELY female.

This is simple another powerplay by women to grab more more more for themselves. It is quite a smart one, however it is pure and simple
discrimination, disadvantaging men to the advantage of women. If you support it, you are sexist.

Comment: Re:Unsettling science (Score 3, Insightful) 180

by thesupraman (#49026943) Attached to: US Gov't To Withdraw Food Warnings About Dietary Cholesterol

You know, if you had done just a little critical thinking, and perhaps a touch of research yourself then you would know that blaming fat for fatness was pure stupidity, mainly pushed by promoters of diets and 'healthy foods' (usually high in carbs instead).

How fat was metabolized, and what was used to produce body fat, have been well known for a long time.
So, who do you plan to sue? the media for jumping on a profitable bandwagon? people themselves for believing everything they are told?

Hell, next you are going to tell me you still believe fruit juice is a 'healthy alternative'
Or that energy/sports drinks are somehow good for normal people (not only active atheletes)
Perhaps you also believe that sugar alternatives are a perfectly safe alternative?
Or that calorie intake doesnt matter if you 'balance' it by exercising it back off?
Maybe that breakfast is somehow 'the most important meal of the day'?
OR that small snacks continuously are better than larger means somehow?
Hell, perhaps you even buy pesticide free foods, while having one of these horrors in your house: http://www.raidautomatic.com.au/index.html
Or hammer down a handful of supplements every day, when the tiny trace amounts you actually need are present in all your food?
You could even be crazy enough to think Vitamin C somehow kills viruses!

Its usually not too hard to see through the bs, rhetoric, and marketing and work out whats obvious BS..
And if you thought there was much settled 'science' behind government and market food recommendations, then sorry, you are beyond hope.
Its called MARKETING, and its not science.

Science has well and truly made available everything you need to know about fat, quite some time ago.

Comment: Close, but the answer is encryption. (Score 5, Insightful) 239

by thesupraman (#49023447) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Will It Take To End Mass Surveillance?

The ONE think they fear is effective encryption.

It is a sad situation, because that will also get in the way of legitimate (and yes, it can exist) investigation, however that is the arms race they are forcing you in to.
NOT encryption-when-you-have-something-to-hide, but encryption of EVERYTHING, as standard operating principle.

Right now exception is a nice bold flag to them that you should be monitored, however if even 20% of the population are regularly using it, that no longer works.

We are starting to see some very small movements in the encryption systems to escape from the over-complex not interoperable situation they let themselves
be pushed in to, and THAT is a big part of the problem, but some people now get it, and in a few years we may well have a much better choice in the area of
easy to use, interoperable, and open enough to be trustable encryption systems... and then the monitoring will work much less.

They will of course still see who is 'communicating' with who for some forms of link, that will be the next step.. protect the content first.

Like many things, the governments stupidity is going to make sensible law enforcement more difficult.
Go USA! and all that.. sigh.

Comment: Re:Still going strong (Score 1) 422

by thesupraman (#49007165) Attached to: What Happened To the Photography Industry In 2014?

Um, no it cannot.
Have you not looked at the film gain on ISO800 film? ISO800 is grainy as all hell and only really usable for small prints.
it most certainly CANNOT look like 80MP, its grain size is huge and it wont come close to that.

It is fine to enjoy your process.. but what you are doing is lying.. and that is not good.

for example 'The Canon 1Ds (11MP) is simply superior to 35mm slide film both in grain and detail and is seriously challenging medium format performance.'
and thats at ISO100..

read this, you may learn something (however I suspect you wont, sad..):
http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF7.html

Comment: Re:The scam was found out (Score 1) 422

by thesupraman (#49007103) Attached to: What Happened To the Photography Industry In 2014?

Complete and utter bullshit.

A *good* photographer is actually working often - THAT is the different.
There is however a subset of photographers who seem to think that working a few days a month is 'work' and therefore that they
need huge fees for those few days to keep up their lifestyles.... they are fools... the Hipsters of photography.

Once upon a time photography was very different - hours or days were spend developing and processing film. on site you were highly
limited in what you could take, and you could not see the results until after the event, so you HAD to get the right shots - that was
very difficult. These days exactly none of that is true - the work has become MUCH simpler.

Let alone the insanity of photographers thinking they can DEMAND copyright on works created for pay.. what an insult!
do they think that broadcast cameramen keep copyright of the output of their camera when working? how about film cameramen?
are they somehow 'less creative' because their whole output is under consideration not just single frames? It is a huge scam which
would collapse overnight is people would stop falling for it.
IF they want to come along (with permission) at no cost and take photographs and then offer them for sale later, then sure claim
copyright - as they have carried the cost of creation. However they dont! they are (well) paid for their work at the time, so the
copyright of the images created belongs EXACTLY with the people who paid them to create them!

Comment: Re:What happened? (Score 2) 422

by thesupraman (#49007005) Attached to: What Happened To the Photography Industry In 2014?

You, sir, are what we technically refer to an 'an uninformed idiot'
noise is increased by pixel count, as the photosensors become relatively noisier as they become smaller. so your 8mp sensor will have less noise than your 20mp if the sensor area is the same.
As a 4k screen has approximately 8mp anyway, an 8mp sensor is just about right for it. there is no need for more.
The giveaway to your incorrectness is the low light, which increases relative NOISE, nothing else.
with the same sensor size, a modern 8mp sensor will outperform a modern 20mp sensor in low light, easily.
if your sensor sizes are different, then THAT is the issue, not the number of MP.
so, basically, you are completely incorrect and in fact the truth is almost exactly the opposite of what you claim.

If you analyse anything, you destroy it. -- Arthur Miller

Working...