Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:Uneasy About Starting Without a Physician (Score 3, Interesting) 301

Odd, I highly doubt my credentials to capably identify how professional a practitioner of medicine is in the field of my needs.

I tend to think of them as being like computer technicians and computer scientists... just because you're practicing as a doctor doesn't mean you don't suck at it. Almost universally, "general practitioners" are the least likely people to go back to school for further education while remaining isolated in their own practice.

No thank you! I'd honestly rather read a book/web page and just risk it. Takes less time and if I break myself at least I didn't have to have some guy grab my balls and say cough

Comment Re:That's Funny (Score 1) 301

I don't understand... I can't for the life of me understand one word of what it is you're talking about.

Are you advocating apps which help kill people?

Are you simply trying to make a comment which draws in argument by offending as many people as possible?

Are you a member of a group of people who feels persecuted (we all do at some point)?

Are you suggesting that preventing conception is killing a baby?

Was your point able to be made without trying to use an entire catalog of offensive slurs?

Could instead of "nigger" which I assume is referring to people in rap music since that's the only place I ever hear of people calling themselves that word, maybe you meant people in general but chose "nigger" because it would draw more outrage?

I can't really say after this entire rant that you have said anything sensible.

I'll try to extract something.
- I think you might dislike "left wing liberals"
- I think you might believe that if someone doesn't agree with you, they must be a left wing liberal
- I think you believe that "left wing liberals" are cruel and hateful people hiding behind a facade
- I think your biggest problem is that you seem to think there are a lot of people on the left.
- I think you might be a half-white trash & half-black, southern, transvestite non-lesbian female living as a successful housewife descended from German Jews on your mother's side.

There may be a lot of people on the right or left. We call themselves idiots, fools and morons, you're of course included in that category. Left and Right is the new religions of America. There are many people who are neither left or right and address each issue one by one.

Comment Re: blah blah Steve Jobs blah blah (Score 1) 97

I have to ask... this is the second or third story I've read this morning with childish racist comments on the threads.

Slashdot forums are reserved for degrading the writers, the subjects of the stories and other commentors based on incorrect, incomplete or irrelevant information. We are a group of people who believe it's worth the effort to either show people we don't know how nifty smart we are (and generally fail) or to exert our passive aggressive behavior somewhere it's extremely likely we'll simply make fools of ourselves and not care about it.

You're ruining the comments by filling it with racism. If you want to be a racist, there are many forums available to you out there where you can be so in the good company of others who are like minded. Racists generally prefer segregation when possible and I believe that's a very good thing. I think it's generally best to keep racists away from civilized human beings. I don't think it's possible to cure stupid, so I won't try to fix you and teach you that there are far better reasons to hate other people than their skin color or nationality. I recommend you use me as a target. Instead of hating on people for something meaningless, you are welcome to hate me and I will respect you far more for doing so. I will even be proud of you for hating on me since I genuinely consider you to be meaningless and useless. In fact, I know I don't need racism since there are so many people like you to keep my hate quota filled.

So... either hate on people with good reason and have the balls to do it without the AC... or go join some white power group somewhere and talk with the other brilliant minds there about how "Yeh... that black guy (who I'm jealous of since I KNOW he must have a bigger dick than me) is such an asshole (because he's making millions bouncing a rubber ball for a living) and I don't like him." ... that's how you guys talk right?

Please in the future reserve this forum for comments on a high quality of crap. It's absolutely terrible when I feel the need on Slashdot to inform people that we prefer to maintain a REALLY low standard here and if there is such a thing as a bottom, you're crossing it.

To be fair... when I read the title of the article, I was wondering to myself whether the news was that we're trying to identify whether a professional athlete was actually able to read or simply had a really good memory.

You see what I did there... it wasn't about race or nationality... it was about how I feel regarding people who prefer to devote their time to bouncing a rubber ball instead of learning to read and write and use their brains for something more than thinking "duh...". You can hate on basketball players for so many things. There's absolutely no reason to bring race into it.

Comment Re:Conniving bitch (Score 0) 268

I am certainly no Clinton fan and am resentful that the presidential options this year are down to Lieing, Evil & Stupid 1, Clueless, Evil & Stupid 2 and Blind, Stupid and Goofy 3 as the options. You can choose which is which. The problem with the election is that it has absolutely nothing to do with choosing a presidential candidate to be president but instead has devolved entirely into a reality TV show.

I will however say that I believe that people are always looking for a simple answer to every problem.

1) Hillary probably is not smart enough to understand anything about e-mail
2) Clintonemail.com is a fantastically stupid sounding domain. It's something that if you set it up is meant for friends and family.
3) With her lack of understanding of technology, she probably found the workflow of maintaining two separate e-mail accounts confusing
4) She liked whatever phone she was using and was able to figure out how to send and receive e-mails with it.
5) Her state department phone was probably a Blackberry and frankly... those have sucked for a long time... people who like them like them, people who don't think they are absolute shit. I personally know NATO officials who use free DropBox accounts because the NATO network is so confusing they can't share files or send them in e-mail.
6) She is not a patient person and as soon as she lost her 10th e-mail from her state department phone, she just said "Fuck it, I'll use my own"
7) She didn't want to have her personal conversations on state record. Things like "Bill, while you're at the shop getting cigars to put in your secretary's vagina, can you please pick up milk?"
8) She might even had the state department e-mail address on her phone and couldn't even figure out that you could click "Send from ;" and switch accounts.

At the end of the day, I'm almost 100% convinced that while I think Hillary is the type of person who would recommend using a gas chamber to quiet the babies at a hospital, this was more a case of technical incompetence combined with a lack of patience as oppose to malicious intent. She has so many other places she can be evil, I believe you should give her some credit here. This time I think it was more that she was simply stupid.

Comment Re:Lawyers get millions (Score 5, Insightful) 232

The joys of law.
  - Sony loses lawsuit regarding a change they made in 2010
  - Six years later, you have to show proof that you bought a game system probably 7 years earlier... which you didn't keep because you bought the slimmer model or a PS4 or traded it in for something at the game store.
  - The terms required to collect the $55 recompense are more or less unachievable except for that one guy who got the PS3 for Christmas and his mom actually saved the receipt for her accounting.
  - The amount of time required to earn the $55 is about the same as McDonalds pays their french fry cooks.

So... for the $55... who would give a shit? This will cost Sony $2,000 in recompense and $1,000,000-$10,000,000 in legal fees.

Comment Benjamin Franklin.... Cruel irony? (Score 1, Insightful) 265

Benjamin Franklin is possibly one of the greatest Americans ever. In fact, it is believed he took credit, through extensive use of the Pennsylvania Gazette, of proliferating the name "American" throughout the colonies in order to unite the people under a common name and cause. When people take pride in being an American, it's because of his efforts to get the people to stop being New Yorkers or Bostonians, etc...

Here is a megaship labeled "Benjamin Franklin... London". So his name is stamped on the ass of a ship that is registered in the place he fought against, because his own America has become less of a tyrant than England with regard to taxation.

Let me pause for a moment here and simply express myself with a question "Holy what the fucking fuck?"

Let's continue further and say that this ship is carrying cargo the wrong direction. Benjamin Frankly surely would have been pissed if he knew that his name was stamped on the ass of a megaship designed to carry everything from wind-up frogs to American flags all made in China while the American's shipped back raw materials and money. This ship damn near symbolizes the destruction of almost everything Benjamin worked his entire life to build.

Where the hell is the petition to remove his name from the ship... maybe label it the Genghis Khan instead or maybe just Earth Wrecker?

Comment Re:Demanding or asking? (Score 1) 102

Is there really a difference?

If someone from the FBI calls a communication company and says "Can I please have this information to aid in the investigation of ....", the person with said ability to provide such information would likely turn them down. It has nothing to do with being rude... it's simply that giving up that information like that would almost certainly leave the company to insane lawsuits from someone who has nothing better to do from behind bars than to hire ambulance chasers to go on full attack.

The FBI, if they issue a request without the word please, they are actually more likely to gain the information they're looking for since unless said company is educating their support staff on the laws of privacy etc... they might be able to get what they want. They don't care if it's fruit from a poisoned tree. They'll probably simply use it as a means to get the guy. Sometimes it's just the information they need to bust the guy... it doesn't have to be used to indict him.

Comment Re:Astronomy in a nutshell (Score 1) 146

I sat through a great presentation at CERN the day the Higgs was discovered. The physicist who held the dissertation did an absolutely awful job. He honestly could not string together 10 words together into a single coherent sentence to save his life. He was "The guy in the barrel" that day. It was his job to speak to the visitors and explain what the purpose of the LHC was. He went through a stack of slides presenting the principles of particle physics and strangely enough even covered a little quantum physics which I found strange. He clearly hated speaking in front of "normal people" and beyond simply hating it seemed to lack the ability to do so. I've worked with similar scientists (as a translator to human) in other fields for years. It was basically my "turn in the barrel" because I would be responsible for saying "I think your brain is going far faster than your mouth and you skipped... I don't know... about 16 years worth of information in our terms because you didn't even remember where your mouth currently was. You need to take a step back... talk to me like I'm roughly as intelligent as a single cell organism and dumb it down a bit". I would then take what they said and run it though about 150 Google searches per minute of speech and then present "He said he wants pepperoni".

These guys are amazing and I'm not kidding when I say that the ones who smoke the bowl are far easier to communicate with. It slows them down to only 5 times human speed. On the other hand, given them nicotine and caffeine and their speed triples. They are well know for walking around with 5 or more nicotine patches and a 350ml cup of espresso and sugar when they're onto something. If you've see the movie "Hoodwinked"... think of Twitchy with a 190+ IQ.

That being said... scientists absolutely do postulate theories by plucking crazy ideas from their asses. Ideas like quantum pairs and dark matter almost certainly start off as wild assed guesses. And those are the absolute best theories out there. They take a certain level of creativity that is upon epic levels. BUT!!!! those are leaps that are founded on what is believed to be some sound principles.

Though there might be a ton of "If this is true and we believe this theory based on that is also true and therefore this would seem reasonable... it is possible that our lack of ability to observe this is likely because it's some form of matter which can't be observed since we only know how to observe matter as we already understand it. This other wild ass theory talks about anti-matter which we now seem to believe is actually quite possible, but now that we believe we can in fact observe anti-matter.. maybe there's some other state of matter we still haven't discovered that could be... counter-matter! Wait... counter-matter, while technically accurate sounds too much like anti-matter... we need a name for matter we can't really define yet and we also can't really observe... hmm... while simply being too black to see would be entirely wrong as simply not seeing past it would be good enough to detect it, this is more like invisible matter or truly transparent matter that neither absorbs, stores, etc... light or other EM we use to identify matter. Maybe we can call it vacuum matter... sounds stupid. So, for pop science we'll call it 'Dark Matter'... it worked for Superman. Though Bizarro was far cooler, but 'Bizarro matter' just is a little to DC comics."... then before publishing something, the progenitor (proper word?) stood up at a symposium an presented his theory (though it's more likely there was some correspondence before hand) and threw the idea out there with the some fairly vague theory that would apply some level of math or at least references to corresponding science to describe the properties of some sort of "dark matter" that would describe something that appears to have mass without actually being observable other than by consuming space where there should have simply been vacuum.

There was a hell of a leap of faith and to be fair, last I heard, the state of dark matter is currently still unable to be observed either in space or within a laboratory experiment. In fact, if I understand it well enough, what is really freaky is, we work under the presumption that what defines dark matter is something which contains a specific set of properties and more precisely is matter which clearly defines properties dark matter CANNOT contain and as such, if at some time we manage to properly observe what we assume is what we define as dark matter today and find it runs contrary, we'll have to use another name for it. The reason is, the properties of dark matter as a scientific and mathematical theory provide the foundation of many other theories and while dark matter may in fact not exist (not as in not exist, but not actually exist as dark matter itself would not exist as a principle in one way but would exist in the other context... if I understand it as it appears to be currently theorized) therefore other theories and sometimes principles would fail without the existence of such dark matter.

So why wouldn't we just alter the meaning of dark matter to refer to the actual "thingy ma-bobby" (scientific term if I understand it correctly) instead of renaming what we do actually observe even though it would cause all the other theories to implode? Easy... just because we figure out what that non-stuff is, by actually observing it, it doesn't mean that those other theories didn't manage to describe many other principles of science correctly. Often, those other theories will use something that is basically a flawed theory without depending on the founding theory to be actually correct.

Some people need the wild assed crazy idea of something like dark matter to exist and be real in order to establish the foundations of their own math and theories. And their theories still stand true with or without the existence of the thing they founded it on. Instead, dark matter will move from a theoretically real thing to a series of rules which define the conditions needed by something else. Just because dark matter turns out to not be real doesn't mean that the definition of those properties has to change.

BTW... now I have to go figure out if we still purely theorize dark matter or whether we've observed it and confirmed it or if we've observed and confirmed something else and simply kept the name dark matter to confuse the shit out of people using it's definition of properties by making the journalists happy.

Comment Re:Astronomy in a nutshell (Score 4, Interesting) 146

I would suggest that there's something in the middle.

1) Theories typically have to start off as wild assed hypotheses plucked from somewhere. I know of a group of highly published physicists who sit around passing a joint giggling and coming up with theories which they investigate further once they sober up a bit. Thinking outside of the box to find answers often requires creativity... especially when the theory is completely unable to be observed.

2) Due to obvious lack of observed information, new theories are often published citing other theories as their foundation. This is amazing because it can help prove the original theory by providing a possible application. It's very little different than smoking the joint and giggling over "what if...?". It's a necessary step to allow peers to collaborate. Publishing for peer review does not actually mean "I believe I'm indisputably correct, bow to me or prove me wrong". It's a method of sharing information so other people can try and run with it too. There are too frigging many people (especially journalists... even "educated" journalists) who seem to believe papers publish for peer review are proofs. Or worse, because of this stupid religion vs. science debate, there are people "representing science" who are trying to explain "The theory of evolution" to idiots running museums displaying humans riding dinosaurs and misrepresenting the word "Theory" to make it sound like "As good as fact".

3) There are good scientists who work for a living and try to establish a foundation for their theories before simply grabbing 5 papers written by others, gluing them together like a collage and spamming them into the first journal to take them. These guys will actually put some effort into it, visit the local university and peer review with students, professors, etc... and eventually after believing they've reached a point of reasonable certainty that their theory isn't simply shit, they'll release the paper to be torn apart by a group of people who will like the idea and try to run with it, like the idea and try to disprove it as a favor to the author, or others who will try to disprove the idea using nothing but a crayon and a napkin because they're dicks.

4) There are bad scientists who somehow manage to establish published bibliographies that span multiple pages. Some of these guys are people who got their Ph.D., "mentored" shit loads of grad students and put his name first on the paper. What's worse is that he also made the student pay to get it published. Even worse is that he didn't put his name on other papers that he should have. Even worse, he didn't even really read the paper he put his name on, he simply said "He looks pretty smart... If I take credit for his work, I won't likely get burned". That scientist, when he eventually publishes his own work likely doesn't have 2 grams of originality. What's worse is that since he's such an amazingly highly published scientist with so many good papers under his belt, the journalists will flock to his paper.

Science and the scientific process is not flawless and has to be constantly improved on. I obviously represented it terribly here and that was because I'm playing devil's advocate. I hold science in incredibly high regard and respect. I spent two years of my life helping scientists and mathematicians translate from Ph.D. to human for the purpose of publishing papers or patents. I learned more by doing that then I could in a hundred years of reading. I believe part of the scientific process that works well is the hecklers and the critics. They're like the fellow who would stand behind the roman general upon his chariot while entering Rome whose job it was was to whisper "You're not a god" as a reminder.

Comment Smart Idiot Box (Score 1) 507

I love it... the proper name for a TV is "The idiot box". I learned this from my friend's grandmother while I was growing up. She stomped around yelling "Quit sitting in front of that idiot box. Your brain will fall out of your heads".

I don't watch TV anymore. I have better things to do with my time. Movies are for airplanes and sometimes while sitting at a restaurant waiting for my food. There's absolutely no value what-so-ever to spending money on another one of those idiot boxes. In all fairness, while I do in fact own an idiot box capable of meeting the requirements mentioned, it's because I needed a low cost 4K screen to fit more code on. I have never used it for watching videos of any type... though my kids watch YouTube on it once in a blue moon.

So... do yourself a favor... don't waste your money... you'd be absolutely amazed at how awesome life is without one of those things.

Comment Re:Netflix 4K only on Smart TV (Score 1) 507

Technically incorrect... 4K video is not actually sharper at the same bitrate. In fact, 1080p at the same bitrate generally produces much higher quality since most of the bitrate is used on things like actual data reducing the effects of quantization. Add additional color depth on top of that and it's amazing. In fact, you'd be absolutely shocked to see old fashioned SD at the same bitrate. I developed software to compress masters for years. I would receive 100 new films in 270Mb/s raw 10-bit 4:2:2 every year. Even now, 1080p H.265 at 50Mbit/sec is a much poorer quality picture than those were.

As you add resolution, you add massive amount of motion vector information as well as having to reduce the encoded data following quantization to scale across four times as many pixels. As such, the amount of data left over following compression is crap at 4K.

So... now the real question is... how do you get a decent 1080p stream from Netflix... the answer of course is... you don't. We don't watch Netflix for quality... we watch it for cost and variety.

Comment Extremely inaccurate. (Score 2) 158

Google is first and foremost a data warehouse who sells data directly or indirectly of every type to anyone willing to pay or it.

Every single project from Google exists for gathering data. This means that things like self-driving car data, traffic information gathering, etc... they are all gathered by Google at all times. You are willing to buy Android and use Google maps because it makes your life better... you're willing to pay for the features supplied by collecting location data from other peoples phones and soon cars. In exchange you give all your data to Google.

To be more accurate... Google is first and foremost a corporation responsible to the needs and desires of their shareholders and are responsible above all else (including any form of ethic related bonds) to produce a return on investment to all shareholders. As long as no written law is being broken or if the law is being broken, Google can beat it in court, or so long as any possible fines related to losing in court will be less than the profit gained by breaking the law, Google has a responsibility to its shareholders to rape, pillage and plunder every possible customer to make that return on investment.

This is free market capitalism. It's the core responsibility of free market capitalism. Return on investment is more important than anything else. There are gamblers managing your retirement fund somewhere who dump their money into your company and whether you're ethical or not, whether you have to have people murdered in back alleys or not... that's irrelevant... free market capitalism says "You must show a profit or we'll find someone to replace you who is willing to do what it takes"

Slashdot Top Deals

"Never give in. Never give in. Never. Never. Never." -- Winston Churchill

Working...