Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Why would he care? (Score 1) 146

That sounds unrealistic to me. I think a more realistic assumption is that someone will spend $400 for the unit, use it a couple times, and realize that they've been had, and then stick it in the closet for a while until they finally give it away as a bonus gift for another sale during a garage sale.

Comment Re:Oops (Score 1) 223

Isn't it 7% among people drinking 0 diet soda and 22% among those drinking 1+/day?
I'm looking at the DM n (%) row of table 1.

Anyways, that's a good criticism of the study. Other posters' criticisms were not so good. Please understand that I am not defending the study. I am defending the scientific method. I have no expectation that the study is correct.

Comment Re:Huh? What? (Score 1) 223

The headlines are written by journalists and are click-bait. The scientific journal article itself has the title "Sugar- and Artificially Sweetened Beverages and the Risks of Incident Stroke and Dementia". That's not click-bait. It's typical of scientific modesty.

Science doesn't ever prove things; it just provides evidence. There is always a "May" in a scientific conclusion. Over additional studies, evidence can either corroborate or contradict previous evidence, and we can make that "May" stronger or weaker. It may or may not be newsworthy, but that's how science works.

Comment Re: Nice trick (Score 2) 117

In general relativity, gravity is a curvature of spacetime. It does not produce any proper acceleration of a test object, so it can be regarded as a fictitious force, like centrifugal force. In other words, we can choose coordinates in which there is no acceleration in the test object.

Of course, this is just one way to look at it. In other physical contexts, we can view gravity as a force. It's not wrong to do so, since the meaning is context sensitive.

Comment Re:misread as ISIS (Score 1) 141

There is always the potential for civilian casualties, especially with large impact remote weapons systems. The next question is what is a legitimate target. I don't think if you are fighting a war for example all civilians are really off limits in terms of targets. What about the guy working in the tire factory, or the oil field. You know his effort supports the war effort and he knows it too but is still working there, is he fair target? What about the farmer tending his wheat field? I would say yes! If taking out that facility means either sweeping it with ground forces and loosing American lives or bombing / sending in terminator unit and killing some 'enemy' non-combatants, better them than us, would be my call.

You make a good war criminal. The problem with going down that route is that everybody loses. Civilization stagnates as infrastructure and knowledge is continually destroyed, so we return to a period where we have fragmented tribes at total war with each other. You don't think America will be able to maintain military superiority forever, do you?

Slashdot Top Deals

If you had better tools, you could more effectively demonstrate your total incompetence.

Working...