Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
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).
Chief on the list is salt substitute. Many people buy the 'low sodium salt substitute" Potassium Chloride to replace table salt Sodium Chloride. But it is the exact same substance used by several states to execute death penalty cases.
Misleading. It's deadly when injected. So are many other things, including table salt. There is a substantially bigger safety buffer when eating it.
If it's not how you would have portrayed yourself, you're going to lose when you're on your own and have to stand on your own personality. You will eventually expose yourself as a fraud.
That would be true if the advisor were putting words into people's mouths (telling them exactly what to say). But my impression is that this isn't the case (beyond thing such as "wear red", which seem innocuous enough to me). Maybe you're right that this advice borders on "gaming the system" (e.g. username choice) but it's not right, IMO, to say that following this advice will cause you to present a fraudulent image of yourself. It just helps you maximise what you've got.
The advice in the article is no different from the role make up plays on a woman. It makes a heck of a lot of difference but it's not fraud.
Anyone who follows this advice deserves what they get. The age old advice still stands: be yourself.
The summary provides suggestions on choosing a user name, what sort of photo to take (which it suggests should have real smile) and to include real personal traits in the description of yourself. How is this in contradiction of the age old advice?
What the article seems to be about, though, is the way images as viewed in a VR headset get blurrier as you move away from the center, seemingly equally in all directions.
What you're missing is that astigmatism tends to get worse as you move off-axis and astigmatism causes blurring and other similar effects. Thus, more blur at the edges of the field than in the centre. You can correct for this, but it involves a lot heavy and expensive glass.
Well you can find out! Go look at an image of the Andromeda galaxy. Then go to a dark site and look at the summer Milky Way. Compare the two.
many of the colors out in space are pretty muted and there's a whole lot of brown and grey
My astrophotography friends would beg to differ. There's plenty of awesome color there without the need to falsify it.
or are obviously driven by ideology more than anything else ("extreme climate change").
This is not ideology driven. There is a scientific consensus that extreme climate change is a serious threat. The only ideology I see comes from the deniers who don't accept the science.
That said, there is hope that this technology or the transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) experiments will prove useful.
The effects of TMS are generally considered to be very short term. The efficiacy in clinical domains appears weak to me.
That is, I think data scientists would be more useful if they used the study as a jumping off point to doing an actual study.
At which point they'd be "scientists" not "data scientists"