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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:just leave (Score 1) 845

Google glass is at least visible, many people in the future will simply put the camera in a piece of jewelry or a pen just because it looks less geeky.

Especially if the business in question caters to hipsters and half the customers are wearing those godawful chunky plastic BCGs. You can hide a lot of recording and processing power in those things these days ...

Comment Re:Honesty is never treasured in corporate world (Score 5, Insightful) 141

Unfortunately, the corporate world has become very much like the political arena.

Honesty is no longer treasured.

"Has become"? "No longer"? Look, whistleblowers have always been treated badly. Governmental, corporate, academic--no matter what kind of organization you're in, the organization will react badly to anything it sees as a threat. And the problem gets worse the larger the organizations are. In small groups, human beings act like human beings, but in large groups, they act more like the cells of some vast organism. Imagine how you'd react if some of your muscle cells suddenly started refusing to contract when you told them to, even if by that refusal they were preventing you from doing something you really shouldn't do.

Comment Re:Uncertainty is the killer (Score 2) 233

So, welcome to the real world then

where uncertainty rules.

be glad you get 3 years in between.

I've worked in government, industry, and now academia each for about a third of my adult life. Believe me when I say that the uncertainty in academia is much, much greater than in the others. There are rewards, obviously, or people wouldn't do it at all, but security is not one of them. By comparison, the other sectors are much safer.

Of course, if you're one of those people who thinks "academics don't know anything about the real world," this probably won't get through to you.

Comment Re:Behaviour change due to social pressure? (Score 4, Informative) 241

It's not a disease, it's simply the trait of a predator. It means that he can manipulate people more easily, which is a useful skill. Rejecting it because it's badly seen by society is a mistake.

When people in a society prey on other people in that society, we usually identify their behavior a a disease, and rightly so.

Comment Re:We keep dancing around it (Score 1) 238

This is called "Lewontin's fallacy" and has been debunked far and wide.

Calling something a fallacy does not make it fallacious, nor does claiming it has been debunked constitute a debunking. I recommend you follow the links from the Hsu article and learn some more about what is still a very active debate.

Comment Re:"human-like" (Score 1) 238

So we have a world where many biologists are in denial and just stick their fingers in their ears and go "LALALALALAAA I cannot hear you LALALALAAA" when people start wondering about the potential for viable hybrids to occur in nature.

Um, biologists have been aware of the fuzziness of species boundaries for a very long time. It's non-biologists who remember the archaic "mate and produce fertile offspring" definition of "species" from high school science class who make comments like OP's.

Comment Re:armor on the struck ship was disappointing (Score 1) 109

I forget the name, but a book exists ( yes it's classified ) that outlines all of the current warships that sail the Earth. Their known defenses, and how many / what type of offensive firepower it will take to guarantee a kill.

The book you're probably thinking of is Jane's Fighting Ships, which isn't classified at all--you can buy it on Amazon. Which is something that's been giving counterintelligence people fits for well over a century. The Jane's group is one of the world's largest and most effective spy agencies, and they sell everything they know.

Comment Blockbuster failed like Sears (Score 1) 385

Blockbuster fell into the same myopic hole as Sears did in the 90s. At the start of the Internet boom, Sears had everything in place to be what Amazon is - they already had a full catalog service that delivered by mail and also had in-store pickup. A simple "order from" website would have been all that was needed as the rest of the infrastructure was already in place. Instead, Amazon owned that space and Sears is struggling to remain relevant.

Comment Re:That book about the bell curve (Score 2) 182

The CLT is one of the most elegant and powerful results in all of mathematics, and can be used, quite appropriately, to justify normal models for all sorts of measurements. That being said, its usefulness has led to the dumbed-down idea of "the bell curve" being the appropriate model for all sorts of things where it's clearly not--I don't know how many times I've seen a normal curve superimposed on a histogram or kernel density estimation of data that are clearly non-normal. As another poster pointed out, there are simple and well-understood tests for normality, and failure to apply them when constructing a normal model is just ridiculous.

Comment Re:Or you know.. (Score 4, Insightful) 182

The problem with frequentist statistics as used in the article is that its "recipe" character often results in people using statistics that do not understand its limitations (a good example is assuming a normal distribution when there is none). The bayesian approach does not suffer from this problem, also because it forces you to think a little bit more about the problem you are trying to solve compared to the frequentist approach.

If only. The number of people who think "sprinkle a little Bayes on it" is the solution to everything is frighteningly large, and growing exponentially AFAICT. There's now a Bayesian recipe counterpart to just about every non-Bayesian recipe, and the only difference between them, as a practical matter, is that the people using the former think they're doing something special and better. One might say that their prior is on the order of P(correct|Bayes) = 1, which makes it very hard to convince them otherwise ...

Slashdot Top Deals

If you didn't have to work so hard, you'd have more time to be depressed.