Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom - A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at 88% off. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:Artificial Gravity (Score 2) 66

Showers aren't practical in space anyway... forming gravity just for them is ridiculous, and no you don't "need two pumps" (that would be easy!) - you just need air flow. Imagine showering in a wind tunnel - it works just fine and is probably more efficient. The real problem is that you need to seal the entire shower all around as the water will escape from ANY direction.

Sleeping - some of the best reported sleeps are in space, no weight makes for better comfort. But you don't need to be "strapped down", you just need to be lightly tethered so you don't wander off at any speed. Two bungee cords attached to a harness in space will give you the best sleep you ever had.

Laptop fans operate just fine in space. Like the shower, airflow is still present even in the absence of gravity. You're not living in a vacuum.

Body muscles, yes, they deteriorate. Which is why they exercise. But they only deteriorate relative to Earth - for space use they are just fine. Long-term space living, your body adapts to its surroundings rather than building muscle mass that would be wasted anywhere but on Earth.

Comment The thought had crossed my mind (Score 1) 500

but it's kind of a juvenile and derogatory term. It's also one of those terms that's been used too often to exaggerate lunatic conspiracy theories (kinda like "Study it out!").

That's one of the biggest problems we have. When there is an actual conspiracy (e.g. more than one person getting together to do something bad) nobody believes you because of decades of denigrated crackpots. So when you point out that the Tea Party was a conspiracy of wealthy business men to trick people into unquestionably supporting tax cuts it doesn't matter if you've got evidence or not or if a 5 minute google search would prove your point. You've already been lumped into the same boat as JFK nutters and Alien abductees.

Comment Re:I'm not surprised. (Score 1) 762

Except that in an open relationship, I imagine getting to know someone you're sleeping with is probably not a good idea. Too many common interests with the bit on the side can lead to an unplanned change in relationship status.

I recently joined a poly group with 30,000 members on Fb to get more info on what it's really all about and what I've learned is that there is some of everything out there, and there's a label for everything. And there's people whose relationships are at all levels of openness from completely, to completely rules-based. And there's examples of each of these both succeeding and failing, or doing one and then the other... or vice versa.

Comment Re:If Apple built a Hololens we'd never hear about (Score 1) 93

Actually, if I had to speculate, I'd wager MS has realized that the tech needs to take a pretty significant leap before it can be considered remotely usable, and so this announcement reflects that consideration. It's likely that version 2 was only a moderate improvement, but had many of the same limitations of version 1. I haven't worn the headset myself, but the near-universal feedback seems to be that while the tech itself is impressive, the experience is like looking through a mail slot, and the headset is uncomfortable to wear. Improving the viewing angle and shrinking the device should be easier in the future as both processing power and battery tech improve.

Comment Re:An allegation has been made. (Score 1) 762

I'm expecting that whoever does this investigation is going to act in the shareholders' best interest, which among other things means not exposing the company to massive liabilities in court. If the investigation supports the allegations, then those responsible are going to get canned.


Comment Re:I'm not surprised. (Score 1) 762

Why would you equate 'I cannot assert it exists' with 'I can definitely assert it does not exist'. Do you not understand that these are different?

I do. You obviously don't. Your words are supporting a default position of disbelief. That is asserting it does not exist, not asserting you don't have an opinion on the matter.

As to why we should disbelieve, it's simple.

Ah, so in the absence of evidence, you assert it does not exist, in direct contradiction to your earlier lies.

The source of the news is untrustworthy,

So you disbelieve Uber's position that she's not full of lies? Why do you think Uber is so full of lies?

It's not just on the source, but the actions of others. She made quite factual assertions about specific facts. If she's lying, she'll be sued to oblivion. If she's not, she (and Uber) will have documents to support claims. She made a complaint to HR on her first day. You think that's a lie. You are positively definitely asserting it does not exist. The "scientific" response is, a single observation of a single event doesn't make a rule. The generalization of her complaint to all startups is invalid. The generalizatoin of her complaint to all women or men within Uber would be invalid.

But simply disbelieving her because you find complaints of sexism to be inconvenient is scientifically invalid.

You are entitled to your opinion, but don't lie about science to justify it.

Comment Re:I'm not surprised. (Score 1) 762

I have not observed Saturn, yet I refrain from pointing out it's lack of existence to anyone that claims it exists.

Evidence has been provided of specific incidents, no contrary evidence has been provided. So why is your default position to be to disbelieve all the provided evidence, and apparently heavily weight the non-provided exculpatory evidence?

That stance is not based in science.

Slashdot Top Deals

Some of my readers ask me what a "Serial Port" is. The answer is: I don't know. Is it some kind of wine you have with breakfast?