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


Forgot your password?

Comment You're over-simplifying (Score 3, Insightful) 509

In fact, if women were truly wired better for this, men would not have been able to do anything about it.

By and large, men are physically more powerful -- by a very large margin. Over the vast majority of history, that physical power has been both a key factor in survival, making the male indispensable to the household, and consequently a means to dominate the family unit that could not be excised -- at the same time, it isn't something that depends upon superior cognitive function.

It is only (very) recently that females have become broadly able to support a household without benefit of a male presence. If women are to dominate due to any particular cognitive advantage, they've only just entered the race and it'll most likely be some time yet before we see the results, both due to cultural inertia and learning curves.

There's no telling what women may be capable of as yet in terms of exceeding male performance; they've barely had a few decades to try things on, and they're still being held back by religion, chauvinism, and the divisive backwards ride that sexual-role focused feminism took them on.

Comment Re:What about gays and lesbians? (Score 1) 509

ummm.... what?

perhaps you mean transgendered individuals but a gay man is still a man and a lesbian is still a woman. It would be interesting to look at transgendered individuals but I suspect that if the difference is caused by nurture and not nature that you would still see these effects in transgendered people because most of them do grow up in their birth gender and only transition later in life.

Comment Re:Pros vs Cons (Score 1) 549

hydraulic steering in a motorcycle?

Not that it would be that hard to deal with one of these on a bike, I have had my bike stall under me several times (running close to reserve) and I can usually just flip the switch, hit the starter and ride on... if this were a single pulse I would think you could do the same thing to avoid being caught... I would guess that it stays on till the vehicle is secured.

Comment Where's the wisdom? (Score 1) 73

Infections are bad. Sometimes they are really bad. I can't say I have ever had a serious infection. Could be I've had an extremely lucky life in this first world country I live in. I'm sure that factors in there somewhere. I have had lots of cuts, scrapes, breaks and even a tear of an epic nature. (I was a young teen, running through a field and tripped on a fallen and very old barbed wire fence while wearing sandals. Ripped a very bad area on the top of my foot... looked like a skinned catfish.) I was in a hospital within 2-3 hours, got shots, stitches and released within a few minutes of that. I'm sure some antibiotics were used during that event.

Not going to deny that antibiotics can save lives and limbs.

But we've got to have some sense and wisdom about this stuff. We need some tests not just for natural antibody counts, but for artificial antibody (antibiotics) counts as well. Ideally levels for antibiotics should be at or very nearly zero at any given time. This best enables the body's own natural immune system to function which keeps people generally more healthy and keeps vaccines more effective. (Did you know that a vaccine is useless without a healthy immune system? That's right. You already knew it too! You know a vaccine is a deactivated virus. You know that the body's immune system will adapt itself around the foreign invader to build resistance to it. So naturally, the immune system has to be healthy for this plan to work effectively right?) So it is absolutely critical that antibiotics levels are monitored and minimized.

While I'm not decided on it, I have given some thought to the AIDS situation and wonder how much of it may actually be caused by things other than a virus attacking the immune systems of people. (Not saying AIDS doesn't exist!) We have lots and lots of reasons why a person might have a weakened or even disabled immune system not the least of which is overexposure to antibiotics. I am reminded of the increased rate of diabetes in the US and its lose connection with HFCS. Here we have a body's sugar handling systems getting burned out from handling too much HFCS resulting in a broken system, or diabetes. I have to wonder if there are things other than HIV which may be attacking or even overloading the immune systems of people which leads to a broken immune system? I'm not expert on the topic, but given the general demographic of people with such problems, it would seem to me there may be more to it than gay sex and needle sharing which is at the source.

Regardless of anything else, I think it should be very well accepted that maintaining a strong and healthy immune system should be focus #1 of maintaining health among humans. Creating new antibiotics to handle the super-bugs resulting from the over-use of older antibiotics and/or the persistence of antibiotics in our food and water doesnt seem like a smart answer.

Comment Re:Shocking news (Score 4, Interesting) 293

Ruling seems pretty reasonable to me. If Amazon ditched it's local 3rd party partners then Quill Corp vs North Dakota would apply to the products Amazon itself sells.

There is no SCOTUS ruling. SCOTUS let a (very bad) state decision stand. Why is it bad? Anything that even *leans* towards someone in state A having to pay taxes to, and which were legislated in, state B, is destructive to the very fabric of the states. Federal taxes are bad enough (for their over-reach and the incredible misuses the money is put to and the inability of the citizen to have actual effective representation in any tax matter) but add my state wanting new highways and taxing your purchase in your state to enable that, or any variation thereto... now you have well and truly screwed the pooch.

Comment Re:What RMS has in mind ? (Score 1) 287

We (here in the USA) already had a mechanism to reign in the bad actors. It's called probable cause, which in turn is used to get a warrant, which then enables examination of the thing in question, and subsequent action if indeed the cause is found to be as described.

This whole "look at everyone all the time" is a blatant fishing expedition implemented by unauthorized government legislators in violation of their oaths to the constitution.

And frankly -- if the "harm" done by the "bad actors" is so subtle that one can't even find it -- then I question if it is all that much harm after all. I *really* question if it's enough harm to justify screwing everyone else in the nation over and over again.

Reminds me (very much) of the harm done by smoking a joint. No one finds out? No harm done. Government finds out? Lives are ruined. Where's the harm? Out of control government, that's where.

Comment reporting threshold (Score 1) 287

If the reporting threshold is arbitrary based on suspicion

No. The reporting threshold is completely arbitrary, based upon gross violation of the 4th amendment. Also, purest bullshit including save the children, drug war, "terrists", and so forth. Same with every other government invasion of your papers and finances without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and backed by a judicially issued warrant.

But hey. It's the US government. Totally out of control, far outside the bounds of legitimate authorization, and way, way more powerful than anyone else. And willing to prove it. On your ass.

Comment Re:This raises a question they try to avoid (Score 1) 260

Knowing if something is right or wrong at the right time is key and is truly the issue with impulse control disorders. Typically this arises in no small part due to prioritization of feelings versus facts. Rage is a feeling. Perceived danger is a fact. One of these situation may call for the use of a firearm while the other does not. So which sort of mental disorder is also a matter which warrants scrutiny.

What you describe is someone making a reasoned decision of some sort. And you know, by that definition, it may well be the primary reason most high-level, powerful people, should be denied the right to bear arms. After all, aren't most corporate leaders, government leaders and military leaders sociopathic? Gives you something to think about when these people are attempting to disarm the rest of the population doesn't it?

Comment TADA!!! (Score 1) 246

And that's the way it's supposed to be done. The problem with the big copyright industry is that the big artists are harder to control and especially harder to take advantage of. Once their ridiculously abusive contracts are up and the band or artist has a strong and loyal fan base, the copyright clowns have no further control over anything new these people create. They won't tolerate it. So what have they been doing? They have dumbed down the products and the producers. They have genericized them to the point they lack originality and quality.

Why do we have 20+ year old bands out there as popular with people today as they were when I was a teenager? Quality is the reason, in my opinion. We had it long ago, and we don't have it today.

It has always been clear to the people here that it was never about artists and has always been about the copyright industry at large. Why else would we read so much about people being sued for copyright infringement over works which the plaintiffs have no clear title to? It has always been about this and always will be. Artists -- the good artists -- will always be fine so long as big copyright is unable to screw them over.

Comment This raises a question they try to avoid (Score 4, Interesting) 260

Are we responsible for the crimes we commit? If we are mentally ill, then surely we're not responsible. And if we're not responsible, then surely we need to have another "protected class" of people defined to prevent harassment, discrimination and unjust punishment. What they are attempting to do is reduce and even remove freedoms and rights which are both natural and constitutionally guaranteed. I'm not going to say that mentally unstable people should have access to dangerous things such as cars, knives, heavy bludgeoning devices and especially not firearms. If someone is indeed a "danger to society" we need to be serious about it -- very serious and very consistent. To deny someone their rights such as the right to self defense while at the same time not affording them appropriate protections under the law to compensate creates an extremely unfair situation.

Comment Re:This would explain a lot (Score 1) 253

In regards to the constant bickering and wars, it all makes sense! Three families? That is a shit ton of brothers fighting over stupid shit

They don't even need three... The Habsurgs, in all their imbred glory, managed to keep south-western Europe in a state of more or less constant dynastic turmoil for a few centuries...

Comment Re:Proof! (Score 4, Funny) 253

So did most Europeans. It's one of the reasons that European history is such an unmitigated meatgrinder from about the moment the Roman Empire started to lose it, right up until the US and USSR got serious about stocking up on nukes. (or, um, I mean, the humanitarian ideals of the UN and EU ushered in a new era of peaceful cooperation. I, um, must have made typo there. Or maybe my keyboard firmware is misanthropic.)

Slashdot Top Deals

If you can count your money, you don't have a billion dollars. -- J. Paul Getty