Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Really should be honoring Woz Instead! (Score 1) 79

You're correct that Woz is brilliant, and did brilliant things, but it's completely incorrect to discount what Jobs did.

But what did he do that actually counts as innovation? What new did he bring into the world?

Some of his logic designs were amazing. I was learning digital logic when I got my //e and started studying schematics. (The //e was a generation removed, but had some features from the ][ series and I studied those as well.) For one example, the ][ disk drive. Just as a quick and simple example, he had a 7400 chip needed and used 1 ro 2 of the NAND gates on it. He used the other gates as amplifiers from the disk signal. Not something that was at all standard at that time (don't know if it is now). That's the one I can remember, but he was using ONE gate as an amp instead of at least one, if not three more chips. Things like that kept the costs down more than most would think.

I can't remember other examples, but his habits of having to keep chip counts down, so he could make what he wanted when his family didn't have a lot of money, came through in a number of ways in his designs.

Comment Really should be honoring Woz Instead! (Score 5, Insightful) 79

They really should be honoring Steve Wozniak instead. He's the one that did the work, did the innovation, made a floppy disk drive work for a price lower than anyone else could imagine by innovating. He's the one who did the designs and made it all possible. But Jobs was more visible and knew how to capture headlines.

Seriously, Jobs and Apple would have been NOTHING without Woz doing the kind of stuff he can do.

Comment Will they build on a novel platform? (Score 1) 74

737 is designed for roll up stairs. Thatâ(TM)s how old it is and why it is so low slung. This is also why the 737 maxes have crashed: lots of mitigation and design choices to accommodate an ancient platform. Hopefully they are starting from the ground up instead of variations on a very tired theme.

Comment Actual physicist in pharma (Score 1) 213

man, you all donâ(TM)t know what the fuck you are talking about. PhD in physics, a decade in clinical trials, 30+ years of science experience starting in NASA labs. But sure, OK, thereâ(TM)s a conspiracy in physics and big pharma is keeping you from baking soda cancer cures. You are fucking idiots.

Comment Not all AI research is bad- depends who does it (Score 1) 111

I mean sure, the average layperson is gonna fuck it up. But what about professionals, e.g., a PhD scientist?

I use LLM-based models for lit searches (typically, these are dedicated tools for lit searches, but I have tried it on ChatGPT). I don't use the summaries, but I do use the lists of papers it comes up with and generally go through them in whatever ranking it spits out.

Works pretty well, saves a ton of time in *starting* lit searches. Still have to do the reading. The AI sucks at interpreting papers, wouldn't ever trust it as it stands now.

Comment Re:Correlation != cause (Score 1) 48

What a bunch of unscientific gobbledygook. Get the fuck out of here with that weakass bullshit hearsay. Show me fucking literature that matters, with pubs in high impact factor journals by reputable authors with tons of citations and references of the same. Build on the shoulder of the giants who came before instead of being a rando layperson dumbass who thinks that they alone can solve all of the complex medical problems of the world alone through their own unique sheer genius.

Slashdot Top Deals

In computing, the mean time to failure keeps getting shorter.

Working...