Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Storage Non-Problem - Sequences Compresses to M (Score 1) 138

Each genetic sequence is ~3GB but since sequences between individuals are very similar it is possible to compress them by only recording the differences from a reference sequences making each genome ~20 MB. This means you could store a sequences for everybody in the world in ~132 PB or 0.05% or total worldwide data storage (295 exabytes)

For a single delta to a reference, but there's probably lots of redundancy in the deltas. If you have a tree/set of variations (Base human + "typical" Asian + "typical" Japanese + "typical" Okinawa + encoding the diff) you can probably bring the world estimate down by a few orders of magnitude, depending on how much is systematic and how much is unique to the individual.

Comment Re:Wrong by law (Score 1) 601

To ignore them is to passively accept what they're doing. To accept a position of trust, then defy it is treason. It's a Catch-22.

Absolutely wrong.

Treason is working against your nation. He worked for this nation. The enemies of this nation are the traitors he outed.

Comment Re:Automation = Rising wages (Score 3, Insightful) 213

In any case you are looking at the situation backwards. Companies only automate for two reasons. The first is if there is a task that cannot be done manually - either requiring precision or due to the job being dangerous. The second and relevant one here is if labor costs are high.

The third reason is if the automation costs are declining, companies won't mind replacing a low wage job if a robot still undercuts it by half. And the labor market can't really adjust because humans have a living wage floor while robots don't. If rising labor costs were the prime driver we'd see more companies leaving China for poorer countries by now.

Comment Re:CoS is a cult ... (Score 4, Insightful) 205

I know plenty of Christians who by definition (it's what makes them Christians) believe stuff that is just as wacked. But unlike Scientologists, these people mean well so they deserve a shitload of slack.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

A specific Catholic might mean well, but they are still supporters of an organization which actively engages in predatory behavior. Their policies are designed toward the specific goal of increasing human suffering in order to increase the demand for their services. Anti-choice to increase the number of poor and unwanted. Lying about condoms to help spread AIDS so that they can use their victims as poster children. Raping children and then blaming the victims while protecting the rapists because if they didn't cover it up people would think they weren't good. Spreading hatred of gay people because they're not going to produce more victims, and hence aren't really people in their book.

They're the most successful business in the history of the world based on their business model of increasing human suffering and using a small part of their income to ameliorate a small portion of it.

A specific fundie nutjob might mean well...who am I kidding, they have nothing but hate.

Not everyone who is delusional, is a sociopath.

No, but almost all religious organizations *are* sociopathic. One's intentions don't matter at all if their results are consistently the opposite of their intentions and they fail to adjust their actions based upon the outcome for the benefit of a sociopathic organization.

Maybe you're talking about some specific Christians who attend some specific churches, but that has little bearing on the big picture.

Unless their church actively supports birth control, reproductive choice and is openly accepting of people who don't harm others, then they are supporters of sociopathic organizations. Actively working to increase human suffering when your stated purpose is to decrease it is a business tactic to increase demand for your services.

They can spend all day whining about their intentions, but what matters are results.

All the major religions have much more in common with Scientology than you admit.
Individual Scientologists might be decent people in their own right, they're just brainwashed and deluded like the rest of religious people. The organizations are hard to tell apart if you look past the specific details and look to the general case.

It's just a different business model.

Comment Re:So is every other church (Score 2) 205

In many countries the mainstream churches were or (as in the US) are an import social factor in the battle against poverty and much of their money is going to 'Worthy Causes' that save the community at large from a lot of grief.

Dead. Fucking. Wrong.

The churches you speak of do everything they can to create and promote those very problems so they can solicit donations and use them to ameliorate a small amount of the damage their policies intentionally cause while pocketing the profits.

Their anti-choice, anti birth control, and anti gay policies exist to *increase* poverty. They exist to ensure that there are *more* children born into poverty in a vicious circle leading to more need for their "help" in the "battle against poverty".

Now, think it through. Even if you don't understand and are unwilling to accept that that is the reason that they have such policies, it is absolutely unassailable that their policies have this effect regardless of their reasons.

If they actually give shit one about anything decent, then they would change these policies in order to attain results with a shred of decency.

But they do not. They continue applying shotgun blasts to the face of society and jump up and down claiming great moral superiority when they toss a band aid at their victims.

Yeah, and let's not forget that the *majority* of Christians support an organization that has as an official policy to aid and abet the rape of children and lie about condoms to promote the spread of AIDS.
And that's not even talking about the whack job fundies in America.

So, no, they are not "import" social factors in the battle against poverty. They're the enemy in that battle. As part of their business plan.

Comment Re:Are people reading fewer paper books? (Score 1) 330

Have you actually read the Old Testament? Utter repetitive dreck and the main character is a bloodthirsty sociopathic asshole who'll kill people for burning the wrong incense.

It's the world's oldest good cop/bad cop story, first we're terrible sinners that must be banished and entire cities nuked from orbit and then comes our savior who loves us and will forgive everything if we just love him back. The whole old testament is a guilt-trip in order to set us up to need redemption, then it comes like water to a man dying of thirst.

Comment Re:"lying ONLY 22 light-years from Earth"...! (Score 1) 203

Still, if we ever manage to get our act together well enough to actually build something like a generation ship, 22 light years away is pretty close, relatively speaking.

Voyager has been underway for 36 years and is less than 0.002 light years from earth so it's 10,000+ generations away unless we can go much, much faster. And the concept of generation ships is exactly the opposite, they're massive constructions big enough to sustain a civilization that move very slowly between stars. If we send "humans" I expect it'll be frozen embryos or electronic DNA sequences to be reconstructed on site on a massive rocket ship that'll still take hundreds of years. A light year sounds so short until you realize that if you've traveled 7.5 times around the world you've gone one light second. Only 31,556,925 more to go in order to make a light year.

Comment Re:"Nearby star" (Score 1) 203

Yes, it should also be noted that we've put no humans on the moon but NASA, ESA, Japan, India, China have all had missions to the moon since and Russia is also planning new missions after they stopped the Luna program in 1976. Mostly what we lack is a compelling reason to send people, it's been done and even repeated a few times so it's a bit like after the first 10 people had been on Mount Everest there's not really much to be proven that we could climb it again. I'd say go straight for Mars, break some new ground not just revisit the old ones.

Comment Re:Expectations lowered by all the crap out there (Score 2) 279

Whatever, if they were complaining about things like what the Wii was to the XB360 and PS3 that'd be one thing but when you get quotes like

Sadly, it's also presently an ungainly mess of a consumer product that requires more work than it's worth to get the most out of it.

The controller sounds nice on paper, but it's sadly close to being outright junk. The touchpad is the worst touchpad I've ever used.

That is real hardware and software usability issues, not just lack of eye candy. It's an entertainment device, if it's more annoying and frustrating than entertaining it'll be a $99 paperweight.

Comment Re:"lying ONLY 22 light-years from Earth"...! (Score 3, Interesting) 203

Yeah, but 11 years ago getting from NY to London in less than 4 hours was an everyday thing (if pricier than other flights). Now it's unheard of.

Yes but it was sort of like the pony express shutting down their rush service because the telegraph arrived, maybe that sucks if you wanted to send a package but for the 95% that wanted to send a letter the telegraph was faster and better. Not every aspect of every old service is going to be preserved by the new ones, there will always be some regressions in the overall picture. Even though we're making incremental improvements I doubt we'll see any revolutionary changes in things like jet propulsion, internal combustion, gas turbines and whatnot - it's just minor tweaks to squeeze more efficiency out of it.

The overwhelming number of changes I expect is for things to get smaller, smarter and for more and more things to go electronically rather than physically and applying brute force. Maybe you get another 5 mph on the interstate but the main difference is an AI that drives itself. My dream of "real technological development" would be things like having nanobots to destroy bacteria, viruses, toxins, cancer cells, cure genetic diseases and prevent aging on the cell level. In the future maybe we all have personal assistants like only the rich have today, only they're robotic. It couldn't be done today because to have servants somebody would have to be the servants, but we could all have a robot the way we all have cell phones.

I'm not going to bash the system we have today, I can go down to the grocery store and buy a finished meal, pop it in the microwave and put the dishes in the dishwasher but it certainly could be taken to the next level where I just tell a robot I'd like spaghetti bolognese today and it'd shop, cook like a professional chef, serve and clear the tables when I'm done. Having a washing machine and a dryer is also rather relaxed, but again being able to throw dirty clothes in the bin and have them sorted, washed, dried, ironed if applicable and put back in the closest by themselves would be even better. Roombas and electronic lawn mowers are just a shadow of what robot housekeepers and gardeners could be. In short, even if I don't see flying cars on the horizon I see plenty things that could make life in 2013 seem rather primitive compared to 100 years from now.

Comment Re:Stupid Question of the day! (Score 2) 203

A probe would probably be meant for observation, not communication since it's so much easier to just boost the signal if there's someone answering at the other end. I think we'd already know if there was a probe in orbit, if it's in transit or just doing a fly-by it'd be a silent black speck of dust we'd have no chance of detecting.

Comment Re:Why does the cynic in me. . . (Score 1) 116

Rights to one self take presidence over someone else. You have the right to speak, I have the right to not listen.

But you've never had the right to control what people say about you to others. If that was the case we'd be casually breaking the law all the time every time we mentioned somebody else.

Cant really prevent someoen from them posting "check out this picture of me and X, Y and Z!" however, so the same problem will still exist, just not as easy to find (yet...)

And here's really the issue, tagging is more formal but in principle it's the same thing so to you want to make that posting illegal? Just saying it too?

No, I own my own memories and have the right to talk about them to others. If I see you cheating on your wife then I don't need your permission to tell her, if I saw an anti-porn priest go to a strip club where he thought no one would recognize him I don't need his permission to call him out on his hypocrisy. It is a very important part of free speech to be able to talk about somebody against their will. Do you think all the "birthers" should be put in jail for questioning Obama's heritage without his permission? Don't be silly. You can ask people not to tag and not to post photos, but I don't think you with force of law can demand that they don't.

Slashdot Top Deals

The trouble with opportunity is that it always comes disguised as hard work. -- Herbert V. Prochnow

Working...