Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:There's a question about that at Skeptics (Score 1) 294

Well, our body is well evolved to handle natural sources of radiation which, nonetheless, can absolutely harm us.
We can handle a surprising amout of damage from UV, which luckily does not penetrate our entire body. And we've evolved to handle certain other kinds of radiation damage, heck, there's that evidence of hormesis. I don't know how that applies across the wholebody, nor how persistently high levels over a lifetime might cause an issue.

I also don't know how to address all the sources you listed because, well, I don't know much about this, that's why I was asking here. I did look for solar flux at radio frequencies here: http://www.astro.ethz.ch/people/pdf_files/benz/LBReview_thermal.pdf and if I'm reading the units right, it is not even close to being on the same scale, but... not sure really.
And I certainly don't know the power of all those other various sources.

But, this was interesting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DBm

So, seems to me from that chart and inverse square estimate, that a cellphone up close against you would have 500x the wattage of an FM radio station 10km away. Not that that dude's research was necessarily exculpating FM radio stations.

Glancing at the technical data here...
http://www.bag.admin.ch/themen/strahlung/00053/00673/03012/index.html

Seems like a baby monitor transmits about 100mW which is about 1/5th the power of the phone and of course not pressed against the flesh. Sooo.... if the cellphone is cranking out 500mW at say 1cm from some part of the body you might be concerned about, and the baby monitor is cranking out 100mW but 100cm away, then presumably the baby monitor is 1/50,000th the concern of the cell phone, right?

Comment Re:There's a question about that at Skeptics (Score 1) 294

Seems as good a place to ask it as any.
What does /. think of:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21457072

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940937

http://www.physiology.columbia.edu/MartinBlank.html
"
â EMR accelerates the reaction rate, i.e., electron transfer rate
â EMR competes with the chemical force driving the reaction, so the effect of EMR varies inversely with the reaction rate
â Interaction thresholds are low, comparable to levels found in EMR-cancer epidemiology studies
â Effects vary with frequency, and there appear to be different optima for the reactions studied: ATPase (60Hz), cytochrome oxidase (800Hz), BZ (250Hz)

These properties, in addition to stimulation of DNA in the cellular stress response, are consistent with EMR effects on many biological systems through interaction with electrons moving during redox reactions and also within DNA"

I ran into it a couple of weeks ago and it ran contrary to what I was expecting to find.
Curious if there's any problem with his work.

Comment Re:Maximum precision? (Score 1) 289

That's only true for fractions.
1+2 == 3 is always going to be true.
As is 123456789 + 987654321 == 1111111110

You can absolutely express a 32 bit integer in a double with no approximation ever.
We rely on this in our lua scripting as a matter of fact.

http://asmjs.org/spec/latest/ relies on this for the 32 bit integer parts of their spec.

Actually, you can go a lot further than 2^32 - all the way up to 2^53-1.
This is taken advantage of in non-asm.js places. See:
http://bitcoinmagazine.com/7781/satoshis-genius-unexpected-ways-in-which-bitcoin-dodged-some-cryptographic-bullet/

And, you'll be happy to know (well, we were), that Mozilla is adding 64 bit ints to their JS as well, although when that'll be widely available, who knows.

Comment Re:Entries still have to work in Firefox (Score 1) 55

Browser driver blacklists vary a bit across hardware.
On my computer/driver, Firefox rendered webgl by default, while Chromium requires a forced override.
(I say did, haven't checked recently, and ditched fglrx for the foss driver)

Anyway, if you want to try webgl in Firefox anyway, blacklists of unstable drivers be damned, go to about:config
search for webgl
and set webgl.force-enabled to true

You'll probably have to restart.

You might also want to try another driver. Do you have jockey-gtk ? If you're on intel, can check for newer updates from the Intel team. xorg-edgers is an option..

Comment Re:IT's just a study being done nation wide (Score 1) 783

The actual article the lady tried to request to drive on, and the police officer ordered her off the road anyway.

Once she was there, she noted that they were doing passive breathalyser analysis of the air she was exhaling even before the consent form was presented.

So, yeah, "no thank you" was apparently not an option.

Comment Re:And Vise-Versa (Score 2) 161

Hm...

Well, from the actual research paper...
"They estimate that a rock of 3 m across shields D. radiodurans for 10 Myr, and 3.3 Myr for B. subtilis"

10 million years is a loooong time. The simulations were calculating in the mere kiloyears according to the paper.

Take oneof the higher ejection velocities... 12.41km/s - let's make it a nice round 10km/s.
Aaaaand, pick a solar system near-ish to us, that is known, like 10.5 light years away. Call it 10^14 km away...

That's a mere third of a million year transit time. So, like a mere 3% of the survival time for Radiodurans w/ a direct trajectory. And ofc, it doesn't necessarily have to survive fully capable to replicate. Even a bunch of starter DNA would be a big help to the new planet.

Comment Re:It's a self-correcting problem. (Score 1) 153

Welll, you could link me to a few of 'em. I might want to nag the devs or file a bug.
Hrm. My e-mail address below is maybe a bit *too* obfuscated based on your response.
Try:
g r o (dot) y 8 m (at) l a r e n e g

I hope that's discernable.
Could probably just post them on /. too - I don't think there's anything particularly problematic in most of 'em, unless I guess you're worried someone would find something possibly exploitable and target you specifically.

Comment Re:It's a self-correcting problem. (Score 1) 153

Well... Rolling back would require, I guess, using incrementally more and more space. Like, keeping a snapshot copy of each version in your profile. Not only would people object at some point, but it is a security risk, since unless you are on ESR, security fixes are part of new version increment now.

No bugs associated w/ any of the about:crashes links ?

Was stack trace in anything GL related?

Comment Re:It's a self-correcting problem. (Score 1) 153

So, might be worth checking about:crashes to see if there's a bug associated with your particular crash.
Maybe they enabled, like, graphics acceleration for a flakey card, and you can turn it off.
Or maybe they need attention drawn to it.

WRT installing old versions.
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/
Grab one off of there, install it (or unzip it).

If you're under windows btw, you can also try 64 bit nightlies for any date here:
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/nightly/

ESR is another option.
http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all.html

Slashdot Top Deals

Real programs don't eat cache.

Working...