Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



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 The old fashioned way (Score 3, Insightful) 273

Scientists do science (hypothesis, theory, test, publish repeat). Engineers apply science and business.

That's the old fashioned way.

The new way is:

1) Do a study with lots of measurements
2) Crunch the numbers looking for an interesting trend
3) Create a plausible explanation for the trend
4) Publish!

Submission + - Massachusetts Prepares to Vacate Nearly 24,000 Tainted Drug Convictions (reason.com)

schwit1 writes: Massachusetts prosecutors will move in mid-April to vacate nearly all of the roughly 24,000 drug convictions tainted by a single corrupt forensic lab chemist, The Boston Globe reported Saturday, marking the denouement of one of the largest drug lab scandals in U.S. history.

A Massachusetts prosecutor told the state's Supreme Judicial Court last week that D.A.'s would seek to keep fewer than 1,000 of the 24,000 convictions tainted by drug lab chemist Annie Dookahn, who pled guilty in 2012 to falsifying test results in favor of law enforcement and tampering with evidence over a nine-year period starting in 2003.

Comment More options (Score 3, Funny) 283

Your house is on fire. Do you:

A. Call the fire department?
B. Accuse the neighbor of telling you your house is on fire that "Fire is just somebody's religion!"
C. Convene a study to determine if the house really is on fire, and if so, if it was due to spontaneous combustion or if there's a arsonist about?
D. "Blame Liberals!"
E. Post to Facebook or instagram?

F. Call the police to report a drunk/delusional hippie running around the neighbourhood who thinks the houses are on fire?

Comment About 1/3 is directly attributed to mankind (Score 0, Troll) 283

As the climate is always changing, and Mr. Hockey Stick says it's man doing it. how much is man doing it and how did he prove that?
If climate change is accelerating because of what man is doing, how much acceleration can they account for? In what way did they come up with their numbers?
Rather than telling me all about the end of days, tell me about real science and hard numbers please.

This is an interesting question that a lot of the evangelists don't know. In interviews and debates, it's a good question to ask.

The answer is: about 1/3 of the noted increase in temperature is directly due to humans, about 1/3 is the result of natural variation, and 1/3 is unaccounted for.

Of course this is a statistical measure, sort of like trying to determine whether throwing 4 heads in a row was a fluke or an indication of a trend, but it's the best answer we have with our current understanding and datasets.

It's interesting to point out the differences between science and, for example, religion.

How does religion typically deal with sceptics and dissenters? Usually with scorn, derision, excommunication, and occasionally death. In the bible it says "shall not suffer a witch to live", and so on.

Science is the complete opposite of religion. Scientists would never ostracise, belittle, or spew hatred on sceptics, would never blackball, blackmail, or threaten other scientists, would never cause them to lose income or hold an undergraduates' opinions hostage as a condition for getting a degree.

So when you read that 97% of scientists believe in global warming, you can tell that they come to that opinion honestly, and without coercion from other scientists.

Science is completely unlike religion.

Comment Re:Our Future. (Score 1) 270

Which will never work, UBI will never work. Why because people will never be satisfied with what they have. They will always want more. The planets resources remain limited. If its no longer a question of how hard they have to work for X; the answer to "why should I not have finer clothes, travel further faster, be warmer or be cooler, eat something nicer, etc will be that I should!"

That sounds a lot like why our current system isn't working!

Comment Re: Our Future. (Score 1) 270

I;m not so sure it accelerated anything. The rollouts of automation so far are happening without regard to the minimum wage in the area. I would say other factors shifted the economic equation such that it makes sense even at the old wage.

That does suggest that increasing the minimum wage is a stopgap measure, but we need that right now while we implement a longer term solution.

Comment Re:Why Fox? (Score 4, Informative) 534

Sorry, no. Texas tried tort reform and the problem got worse than ever as a result. The other key word in your post is wealthy. U.S. healthcare works for the wealthy and leaves the majority of the country with none but for a few charity teaching hospitals.

Americans are going to Mexico for their dentistry and Singapore for major surgery.

Comment Re:Let's see if I have this right (Score 1) 534

Another problem for him is that government negotiations don't benefit as much from using other people's money. For example, Trump came out of Atlantic City OK in spite of building the only casino that couldn't manage to turn a profit during the boom there. Of course, he lost a big pile of other people's money. That particular con isn't useful in government.

Come to think of it, that is more or less what just happened with Obamacare-lite. Only he isn't able to leave Ryan holding the bag because political capitol doesn't work like the financial kind.

Slashdot Top Deals

The first myth of management is that it exists. The second myth of management is that success equals skill. -- Robert Heller

Working...