Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:*different* scores for *standardized* tests (Score 1) 622

What are you going to do if someones culture really does have a significant measurable impact on their learning performance? Tell them that their culture sucks?

Well, you do it to the taliban, don't you? Granted, their approach to schooling and teaching isn't perhaps the main reason, but it's cleary on the agenda, and often discussed.

So there's at least a precedent for telling someone their culture sucks. There's even a precedent for shooting at them... (Not that I'm saying that the cultures discussed here are in any way shape or form similar to the taliban, but there is a precedent for speaking up about it).

Comment Re:That's the long term plan for the industry (Score 1) 226

not even slightly true. nuclear regulation became ridiculous precisely because of non proliferation.

Since we're talking Thorium I would beg to differ. The whole reason we're burning Uranium on a massive scale in the first place is to get Pu that could then be turned into weapons. That's why U/Pu reactors, physical, nuclear, chemical properties etc. were researched and the infrastructure was developed. When we later decided to go all "civilian" then it was too late. The infrastructure/industry was already weaponized.

Now Thorium OTOH was never given the chance just *because* it can't be weaponized, and hence, with only civilian applications, was not even kept on the back burner. Now it suffers a substantial drawback as we would need large industry wide changes (including sending the nuclear engineers back to school) to make it viable. Changing over to molten salt Thorium is not an easy task. And that's even without considering that not all the technical issues are solved yet (molten salt tends to be somewhat corrosive...)

And it's all because of the worlds insatiable thirst for the bomb.

Comment Re:Distance from the power supply (Score 1) 245

Okay, lets look at it scientifically. Our ears hear all the way up to around 22khz, but at 22khz they can still define between sine waves and saw/squares (cant tell much between saws and squares but can between sines and either). At 22khz on a 44.1 sample rate, the only wave possible right at the top is a saw. Because is frame 1 is at max phase (+1), frame two at minimum (-1) and frame three at +1 then you have a 22khz saw. You end up getting aliasing at the top end ultimately.

Well scientifically that's not true. While everybody and his brother seems to have heard about the Nyqvist critiera, very few seem to know how you actually *recreate* the signal after sampling.

And you don't play "connect the points" as you seem to suggest, but filter your time discrete sampled signal with a filter with a transfer function that looks like sin(x)/x (

Nyqvist in fact says that a signal sampled at twice the maximum frequency can be perfectly recreated up to that limit. Note perfectly. That means that the wave forms will be correct, no sin waves converted to sawtooths or whatever.

That you percieve sound as better or worse sounding depends on a lot of other things than the Nyqvist limit...

Comment Re:And this is different...??? (Score 1) 285

It doesn't matter if the translation happens after tokenization. A 'variable' token won't be the same as a 'keyword' token even if they have the same name.

Wishful thinking. In practice it leads to much more complexity in the translation (lexing/parsing) stage than you'd want to handle. I can guarantee you that the error messages your "naive" users will have to decipher when they make a mistake, and the parser derails, will vastly negate any small advantage from having to learn "jos" than "if".

And it's not like that particular idea hasn't been tried before (in PL/1 and others). It wasn't pretty...

Comment Re:Make Cybersex not Cyberwar (Score 1) 181

As for Mosaddegh he was about to nationalize the oil fields that we developed and was dealing with the Russians so it was right to depose him at the time.

That's a gross generalisation. In fact what was later to become BP gave Iran a bum deal, and when Mossadeq tried to negotiate BP answered with a flat out "no". (Which made made Acheson quip "Never had so few lost so much so stupidly and so fast.")

Now, also he didn't really talk the the Russians, as much as that's what the British needed Eisenhower to believe to justify American involvement. The US by and large were not that keen to rake the British chestnuts out of the fire, especially as the fire was of their own making. But painting Mossadeq as "soft on communism" did the trick. Selling that is more of a British diplomatic/intelligence success against a sometimes friendly nation than anything else.

This is all fairly well documented. And given what happened later (the Shah turning bad with tacit US approval) it's not too much of a stretch to say that the US "made Iran into a theocracy. (Esp. when you consider the embarassing intelligence failure on the part of the CIA that completely missed the revolution and hence prevented any mitigating actions by the US herself.)

So no. The US fucked up. Deal with it and learn.

Comment Re:Lazy != Stupid or Ignorant (Score 1) 663

The cheap Windows laptop I'm typing this on has never required more than occasional reboots for updates or crankiness.

So it's like my Linux installation then (Ubuntu 10.04 LTS) only you have to reboot to fix "crankiness" and updates.

I don't. And that's worth it. In my experience it's Windows that doesn't "just work". Linux by and large does. And for the very rare instances where there's a problem, it can be fixed, and finding the fix is easy. (Usually just a Google away.)

My Windows woes always end up with a "Don't know, there's no way to find out, reinstall", or "That's a known problem with no fix available." (Like me recent Win7 slowly eating the SSD partition due to some "backup dlls-if-a-user-should-delete-the-original-one scheme" growing without bounds.) And that's just one.

Comment Re:Lets get a few things clear (Score 1) 400

The woman that he is alleged to have raped has tried to drop the case that she was persuaded to bring.

In Sweden, not for these crimes. They fall under "allmÃnt Ã¥tal", i.e. the prosection doesn't even have to *have* a victim. (Be a bit difficult to bring someone to justice for murder otherwise).

Certain other crimes, while still being criminal and not civil matters, can only proceed as long as the victim presses the charges. But violent crimes such as these (and most others) aren't.

So victims in Sweden don't "bring" a case. They report it. Then it's in the hands of the authorities.

Comment Re:[Stupid] move (Score 1) 400

You don't represent Swedish popular opinion any more than I represent British.

He's not claiming that. He's just reporting the news. I.e. the Assange case was already well covered in the news here, so public opinion can be (and was) judged.

Now the Egyptian case was interesting in that it would probably have caused a much bigger stink than it did, if the foreign minister responsible hadn't gotten herself murdered, and the prime minister was near the end anyway. If Anna Lind (former foreign minister) that was next in line to take over the party had lived, the Egyptian affair would have gotten much more play than it ultimately did.

The Assange case is of course quite different. We're not talking "Swedes" here, i.e. non-ethnic (i.e. "bloody foreigners") Swedish citizens that are suspected of terrorism (nobody *really* cares about those, truth be told, and it pains me to see it), but a white Australian (i.e. western) guy "like us".

To see him sent to the US. Won't happen. It'd be political suicide. While Americans are quite popular, or at least, not impopular in Sweden, we have a long tradition of being suspicious (if not down right hostile) against the USA as a nation.

Comment Re:Finally! (Score 1) 93

It's certainly different from your average OO language, but it's no more "a fucking nightmare" than other functional languages like haskell and ocaml

Well, in the words of the guy behind Erlang, Joe Armstrong, "Erlang is a so-so functional language with excelent concurrency and distributed concurrency model" (paraphrase).

As a pure functional language, it shows it's age IMHO - no Hindley mildner type system, uninspired syntax (based on Prolog), etc. etc. But as a systems language for distributed, soft real time, highly available systems, nothing else can currently touch it. (Yes, I used to work at Ericsson and build routers based on Erlang/C.)

Comment Re:Perspectives (Score 1) 782

Part of that law is the right to wave it if you wish. So if you wave the right to privacy while using workplace computer systems (which you probably did when signing a contract or a click through before login) you ave the company permission to monitor your use.

Again, in my country. No, and it's a general "no". There is a definite limit to what the company can monitor, and you saying "sure go ahead" doesn't make that limit go away. (And furthermore, if you self incriminate by giving access that you shouldn't have been forced/coerced/asked to give, the results can't be used against you.

Now, this has and is not tested in courts over and over, because, drumroll, we treat people like adults in the workplace. And lo and behold, we also act like it.

Slashdot Top Deals

"We shall reach greater and greater platitudes of achievement." -- Richard J. Daley