Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Here come the science deniers (Score 1) 560

......made up your mind before you even read the summary. You don't know what science is, you treat science like a religion.

Not surprising you link those two as decline in religion has had its place taken by science in many ways for lay folk (ie. none scientific background). I come across this a lot from people who blindly believe science without having ANY scientific training. They treat a lot of stuff like gospel truth word of God which cannot be refuted or you'll burn at a stake. Even things that are known from educated background as a flawed theory from general PoV can work very well in context of modelling something, or setting constants we know are actually relative values because it gives results in particular model etc. A lot of scientific "proven" theory is considered by people in those fields NOT to be 100% objective truths but more "best idea we have for current time and technology level that gives acceptable results in pushing the boundary to next level".

Often at loggerheads with family friends etc yet in the same breath say you can't argue with science when you question results, sample sizes or context, funding source etc. Usually ends badly when I point out yeah who is the one with the actual science degree here and who is the other who admits that the dumbed down science for entertainment stuff on TV goes over their head.... often they just repeat the same "can't argue with science" increasing in volume until I give up in despair.

Comment Re:That's quite surprising,... (Score 1) 64

I thought all their fucking wealth was tied up in property at Vancouver, LA, SF, London, Sydney, Melbourne, Auckland? ,..........

Or perhaps, just perhaps, your starting premise is at best simplistic and most likely wrong.

That the reasons property prices are high in those cities are for a multitude of reasons, some foreign, but many domestic. Perhaps because (in some of those countries), the economy has been doing relatively well (especially in those specific cities -- relative to the rest of the country -- which are drivers of their country's economic growth). Tax and planning laws in many countries encourage property speculation. Quantitative easing (aka printing money, aka currency manipulation by the Federal Reserve) has led to a prolong period of low interest rates which reduces the interest payments and bumps up property prices. Hey life is complex.

You want cheaper house prices, have a depression where there's an unemployment rate (which only counts people actively looking for work) of 30%, that'd fix you right up. Buy in the rust-belt states.

Fucking decimating a generation over here, fuck our politicians allowing this, fuck them to fucking death.

I guess their wallets truly are endless.

Nah, let's just hate instead. Yeah, spread the hate.

wish I had mod points, refreshing to see someone who actually understands one effect in a complex set of interactions isn't the cause. People simplify complex realities with multi variables and direct and indirect interactions between those variables into binary black/white single variable scenarios with no outside interactions.

Comment Re:mountains of diamonds (Score 1) 365

The flash is more noticeable but it doesn't have more multicoloured fire and flash

Wait, so what you are saying is that diamonds are just as colorful as CZ, but it's more noticeable with CZ?

The flash is more noticeable but it doesn't have more multicoloured fire and flash

Wait, so what you are saying is that diamonds are just as colorful as CZ, but it's more noticeable with CZ?

sorry my wording is terrible at times and have bad habit of assuming people will know what I mean despite pisspoor explanations of what I mean. Lighting and cut is obviously the biggest thing affecting what you see, lighting = not just source but directional and hardness. Much of the comparisson stuff online I've seen is comparing samples under different lighting and completely different cuts (and qualities of) which totally throws it since it isn't comparing materials as much as viewing conditions or cut style. I can and have made same thing look like a different stone in photos for instance with the same flash, bare tube with 7" reflector on from the side compared to through a large multilayered softbox up close and overhead for instance makes the stone look completely different which is obvious when you think about it. Generally under identical lighting with identical cut diamond and CZ side b side look very similar but with the activity turned down a bit in diamond; with few subtle differences like diamond has high brilliance unlike CZ so you get more white sparkle where as the dispersion of CZ means you'll get less. Side by side in same lighting they're closer than a lot of places make out though. There are videos around of people appraising diamonds or showing off character and when checking fire it'll look like unicorn sick due to the lighting and back to mainly white when they change lighting.

I could be wrong and am on the skeptical side but I guess a lot of the info is either deliberate misleading by marketing folks from the gem industry or out of date stuff that used to be true in early days of mass manufacture such as CZ clouding with age which it did before modern recipes with more additives, it can build up soap film and grease/sebum but I've seen natural diamond wedding rings do that too.

Comment Re:mountains of diamonds (Score 1) 365

Cubic zirconia isn't more shiny, it's more sparkly and multi-colored. Diamonds have a more pure glow.

That isn't necessarily true. One of my many weird hobbies is inlay work involving stones and I use a lot of synthetic stones and diamond simulants. CZ has higher dispersion but diamond has higher refraction, it is the increased dispersion that gives it higher fire than diamond. The flash is more noticeable but it doesn't have more multicoloured fire and flash. There are a load of myths oft repeated about the differences and so much BS around CZ vs diamond. FWIW I like moissanite over CZ as a diamond simulant (synth diamond in high grades are VERY expensive) but actually prefer the look of CZ as its own stone and use it more than most other stones in my designs along with flame fusion/pulled ruby/sapphires (basically carborundum glass as haven't got the structure that flux grown and natural have).

typo corundum rather. Long day, not enough coffee. Carborundum stones are another thing entirely (but I do use those too like I mentioned, just moissanite isn't my fav).

Comment Re:mountains of diamonds (Score 1) 365

Cubic zirconia isn't more shiny, it's more sparkly and multi-colored. Diamonds have a more pure glow.

That isn't necessarily true. One of my many weird hobbies is inlay work involving stones and I use a lot of synthetic stones and diamond simulants. CZ has higher dispersion but diamond has higher refraction, it is the increased dispersion that gives it higher fire than diamond. The flash is more noticeable but it doesn't have more multicoloured fire and flash. There are a load of myths oft repeated about the differences and so much BS around CZ vs diamond.

FWIW I like moissanite over CZ as a diamond simulant (synth diamond in high grades are VERY expensive) but actually prefer the look of CZ as its own stone and use it more than most other stones in my designs along with flame fusion/pulled ruby/sapphires (basically carborundum glass as haven't got the structure that flux grown and natural have).

Comment Re:Stan Lee and Marvel f***ed him and Kirby (Score 1) 44

Ditko and Kirby did most of the job while Lee collected the money and the fame. He didn't support them, the two men he owes most of his prestige.

If only I had mod points. Always pissed me off since Lee is such a media whore and has often taken sole credit for stuff that was collaboration at best, theft at worst. Don't ge me wrong Stan Lee has some talent, just he built a lot of his fame on the backs of others he actively screwed out of recognition.

Comment Re:Legal? (Score 1) 285

From what it reads, it only works when someone cuts the lock with an angle grinder, meaning it may be something that is ignited by heat in order to work, plenty of circumstances where such ignition could be severely delayed (eg. in cold climates). If it's just compressed gas, any sort of metal issues (fatigue, bad welds or rust) or impact could release it (eg. if the biker gets hit by a car).

Terrorism charge is the first thing that springs to mind what you'd get charged with if this gas either intentionally or accidentally gets released in a public area (such as a bike stand).

I doubt it is a heat triggered mechanism, more like simple cheap dumb solution; the likely mode of suspected failure is cutting through the D loop which is probably just hollowed out with pressurised gas in it. If it is that the problem is the method of failure for most is they are popped out with portable bottle jacks NOT angle grinders. It just tears out where the Dloop end mates with the end bar if it is anything like normal locks, so it is just as insecure. I have a very expensive bike and never had a problem as I know there is no such thing as thief proof lock.

My bike is very expensive custom I built to spec I needed from scratch and my lock is decent but I know full well it wont stop thieves, the independent tests show it is highly rated because it will just slow down thieves around 60seconds if they are good. With that in mind I only leave it unattended for short periods in places know; pro thieves go equipped but tend to check particular spots I'd not leave my bike at. If there are a few other bikes that can be taken in 10seconds they'll take them before mine especially in high traffic areas as they are worse than very isolated places for pro thieves generally, opportunists take much longer and can't deal with locks as fast or at all due to equipment and oft wont steal it in full view of public like a pro thief will without raising eyebrows of some passers by (people don't give a shit most the time though).

My antitheft device design would work much better (this is a joke btw I've not really rigged this). Carry a customised seatpost with crappy seat (heat treatable steel tubing is cheap), shim post as needed to accomodate the frame, put a block with crude firing pin inside the frame seattube and as big a gauge you can get shotgun slug inside the seatpost. Loosen the seatpost bolt just enough that it gives but only when weight is on it. Obviously joking (shotgun slugs aren't available here unlike shot) but it'd stop them stealing plus you'd have an audible alert when it was taken so you could get the bike back for the price of a hose down and new sacrificial seat (again this is totally tongue in cheek don't do this. Forgetting to swap to your proper seat would also be worse than the legal problems of doing this). TL DR use better than average lock, don't leave your bike unattended for long time, in hotspots or very isolated or sketchy places. Low hanging fruit tends to be the main target.

Comment Re:Just don't buy HP (Score 1) 250

That doesn't help all the people who bought HP before they knew this "feature" would activate at a later date.

in fairness most who actually research a printer will steer clear of them as HP are one of the worst and have been for a long time, it is folks who bought it due to sale price or it was the first thing they saw in store etc who'd been burned most likely. Canon and Epson are the only two in the game really and even then you need to research and be careful what you install. With decent aftermarket ink and good resetter etc the right printers from those two companies tend to be fine for their life. I've been through several canon ip4500/4600/4700 that I've printed massive amounts through to the point I had to replace them due to not being worth servicing past a certain point; I'd change waste ink pad and use fw hacks, new print heads and so on a couple of times before death but cheap enough to replace once they are knackered. My pro-10 is still doing fine but I steered clear of the next model up I was going to get as the Pro-1 waste ink and the extra greys didn't make a difference big enough to put up with that. Similar things with epson and some I've dealt with in past or friends who run them are a dream with CIS setups but some models are nightmare to operate like that.

Comment Re:When is epson's turn? (Score 1) 250

Just buy lasers, people.

It really is as simple as that. Why anybody would suffer an inkjet in their house is beyond comprehension.

For photos use any one of the millions of photo printing services out there. You'll get better results, better paper, etc. Does anybody even print photos since we have smartphones?

If you work in graphic design and spend all day long printing photos then fair enough. Get an inkjet. The rest of the world should avoid them like the plague.

you don't get better results and paper from any I've seen apart from the VERY expensive gallery mount services who use the same papers I tend to use. For documents and standard disposable printouts inhouse is needed and it is convenient (I use canon ip4700's mainly with aftermarket ink). For my photos I use precisioncolor aftermarket ink in a canon pro-10 and print on ilford gold FB silk. No way I can get photos printed on paper like that with a gamut like that with no fade issue for a similar price esp 13"x19" size which cost me around £3 a print at home but few hundred £ from places that do similar/same paper giclee prints. Most pro printshops print photos on cheap paper like fuji crystal archive, insta-dry microporous style papers are not better apart from fast turnarounds, most places tend to use high OBA papers to give impression of high dmax BUT that wont last with time. A decent alphacellulose or cotton rag paper done right will keep the colours, all of mine look as good as when I printed them (after they dried) despite being mounted for years.

Comment Re: Other than Brother... (Score 1) 387

I used HP printers for years starting with a LaserJet II. From about 2000 on, they were nothing but trouble, constant cartridge errors, clogs, etc. With both OEM and non-OEM ink. One with a scanner had the scanner self-destruct after about 20 page scans. About 5 years ago, I bought a canon. It's been through about 150 non-OEM cartridges. It's sat idle for a month and it's printed 200 photos in a day. And it works like a dream every time. This isn't really a plug for Canon, but HP is just so unbelievably bad. Nobody should buy their printers.

Canon have similar shitty tricks, you're right on them being miles better than HP or lexmark for that matter. Canon and epson are the only two with more good than bad but they both have issues. My main printer is a Canon Pro-10 (precisioncolor aftermarket ink refilling of oem carts) for photos and 13"x19" stuff and I also have a few ip4600 and ip4700's and still use the latter model. The general low ends like the IP4700 have issues with excessive cleaning cycles though despite using oem carts and good resetter, some claim it is much worse if detects 3rd party carts or disable the ink monitor (it isn't optical these days). Nasty habit of spraying out half the cart in cleaning cycles in short period for no real reason.

The pro-10 is MUCH better and only downside is it wont manage ICC profiles it printer for the paper I want in borderless mode (I use ilford gold silk mostly) BUT I disabled printer management and do it all in software with full 10bit start to end workflow and it is perfect. It isn't the cost difference between models though as I stayed away from the Pro-1 as many say it is MUCH worse on ink hogging/wasting for no percievable difference in prints despite extra greys.

Comment Re: Not a nice way to die (Score 1) 429

CO2 is toxic?

Yes. CO2 forms carbonic acid when it is dissolved in water, and acidifies the blood to lethal levels when above about 7%. With conditioning you can tolerate slightly higher levels.

No. You're talking MONOXIDE.

CO is much more toxic than CO2, but either can kill you.

CO2 only deprives the air of usual ratio of oxygen, and is not notice in itself.

No. This is wrong. If you add 7% CO2, you still have about 18% O2, which is more than enough for a healthy person. It is the CO2 that kills you, not the absence of oxygen.

CO2 is taken in by the body despite what highschool ed may say. It is how the blood acidity is regulated as well as important in some other ways. We actually have receptors for that and breathing too much throws things due to that not just mere O2 displacement. You can look up the full process in something like Stryer if you're interested, mine is an old 4th edition (isbn 0716720094) as long time since I used it for study (BSc Biochem) but you can probably find a digital version or more recent edition cheap enough if it interests you.

Comment Re:Not a nice way to die (Score 1) 429

I'm with you, don't give two shits about rats. Good riddance.

Anyone who wants to defend the rats, then surely must feel the same about roaches, so lets just fill their houses with roaches and rats and we'll call it the roach and rat reserve.

wtf are you on about talk about missing the point, they didn't say something like don't kill them and infestations make lovely house pets, they claimed there are more humane ways to kill them cheaply. What don't use understand about that, you response is relevant to a completely different conversation. It is called civilisation. If you start drawing lines between what does and doesn't deserve humane death and what circumstanced that species qualifies for it things get messy compared to blanket respect for anything you cull. Sure some thing need culling we GET that, but doing it in a humane manner is not an unreasonable request in educated civilised societies. If you're gonna argue back, play devils advocate or whatever at least make sure you're making fucking sense first.

Comment Re:Goodbye Quality (Score 1) 69

I'm not confident this won't just result in Saitek being pilfered for engineers and then allowed to stagnate or close, while we are still stuck with Logitech quality. I have had a number of lousy experiences with Logitech gaming devices. Most recently, a Logitech Extreme 3D Pro that developed an annoying permanent yaw to the left, for which calibration has not worked to solve or alleviate. Of course, Windows 10 borked calibration, but still...similar experiences with several other Logitech sticks.

Now mice, that's a different story. Logitech makes a good basic mouse. I've got a few that are 10+ year old laser mice that still work just fine.

I've had issues with their mice, razer and corsair too. Only company whos mice work perfect for me are Mionix. Opening mice up I notice most are not made to be repaired but mionix ones although aren't made for that are designed in a way swapping a switch to differentactuation pressure or changing cable for shorter one etc are easier than a few other brands. Only issue I actually had with my stock naos 7000 was the middle button jammed hence opened it up but it was fine, just some crap had got in the hole hence the jam. I noted how easy the insides would be to mod but not felt the need yet. Usually I have to swap switches or recable due to it breaking easy on other brands. Also the software is good. Stay away from the 8200 laser models though as they are more expensive and not as good as the avago optical sensor ones. Only company I found who get the most from that sensor with no built in -/+ accel and so on.

As for sticks I haven't used logitech but most sticks are rubbish aside from CH and VKB. I like twist so went with a Cobra M5 (vkb design but defender makes it unlike the other higher end vkb sticks) and highly recommend them for the price especially if you want to tweak stuff. The sensors are 2 per axis so you don't get that yaw issue as sticks wear due to 1 sensor with a +/- setting. You can swap out the controller so can support more switches and toggles etc whatever you want (upgrade is njoy32 based), also change the twist sensor (pot) to a mag one. The Warthog is a bad stick imho due to flimsy plastic gimbal, good engineering plastic would have been better but it is abs or something, sim forums have worrying threads on warhogs breaking. VKB sticks either have metal gimbal or in case of M5 you can get gimbal upgrades. If you have cash get a Fat Black Mamba instead (yeah sounds like a sex toy I know).

Comment Re: Shocking! (Score 1) 527

It's also worth mentioning that HFCS is not all fructose.

HFCS is about 5% more fructose than table sugar. Whoopee shit. Replacing sucrose with HFCS is not the problem. The problem is [still] replacing vegetable oil. Oil spoils and goes rancid, which means things made out of fats have short shelf lives. So they replace the fats with HFCS, which has a similar textural result in the finished product, and they kill the sweetness with citric acid. Citric acid is one of those things that's lovely for you in small quantities, and causes gastrointestinal distress in large ones. So for the sake of shelf life, the processed food industry is willing to give you heartburn and diabetes (we know beyond any doubt that excessive sugar intake can at least bring on if not actually cause Type II diabetes.)

The other big problem with processed foods is divorcing sugar from enzymes in food. Eating a piece of fruit raises your insulin levels much less than drinking pasteurized fruit juice because the enzymes help to break down the sugar. You can actually buy cultured fruit enzymes to add to your fruit juice... or just eat the goddamned fruit. Oh, but that doesn't keep on the shelf for a year and a half...

the type II caused by sugar was revised some time back. Don't get me wrong there is a link and it seems to be a trigger but genetics and other things play bigger role in causing. I know as there was a big issue when I was still a student (late 90's biochem BSc) because one of the old close to retirement lecturers was refusing to change what he had been teaching in previous decades despite modern research showed it was likely wrong and sugar wasn't a cause (but is related to it thus the original mistake of labelling it the cause). Also the thing with fruit isn't just enzymes but fibre and macrostructure, think of slow dissolving "modified release" drug that are often pearled large grains. They break down slow in the digestive system. Not if you powdered them and ate them they will be taken up much much faster. That is why juice has higher GI. A lot of the enzyme difference etc is BS made to sell people stuff. Yeah some things can make a difference but often not what is claimed, and also out of context of nature adding stuff often wont work hence a lot of vit suppliments aren't taken up by the body.

Slashdot Top Deals

If in any problem you find yourself doing an immense amount of work, the answer can be obtained by simple inspection.

Working...