Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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

Comment Solution (Score 5, Interesting) 181

ATMs should have a camera (preferably 2, for stereo) looking at themselves. When there is no customer, take a picture and compare it to the base line one (when it was freshly installed/last inspected etc). If it has been tampered with, the bank can see the difference. A computer program can recognise the change. If they keep recordings, they can even see who did it.


Comment Re:perhaps more of a political choice (Score 1) 140

Despite the existence of problems of the type you mention, this doesn't go for all scientists.

In addition, science has a self-correcting mechanism, something no religion has.

That constant pull to compare everything with reality does get us results.

People should be taught the difference between faith and blind faith. Blind faith is when you bank on your parents being right about religion and not checking whether what you're told matches reality. Faith is what you can have after checking without confirmation bias. But religions are not happy to teach you the difference, something the true religion could easily do.


Comment Re:perhaps more of a political choice (Score 1) 140

There are fewer primates than humans, I think.
Also, the eggs are collected after IVF treatment (desired by the women concerned) and donated with their consent.
A primate would have to be subjected to an unnecessary medical procedure to collect the eggs.
I think the current situation is preferable.


Comment Re:Unbiased? (Score 1) 244

Well, it takes both many people and many years to prove a thing like this and have the results available for the FDA. A company has to start earlier than to have the final results in. Snake oil suggests the lack of any scientific basis, which is not the case here (well, I just noticed the buzz word telomeres, which indeed are a factor in cell longevity).

I'm inclined to let people decide themselves, but require the companies to be registered and requiring the basis for their treatment to be based in science, but no requirements as to effectiveness), with medical staff, and their work independently scientifically monitored. So, a company could offer the service for the number of years required to get some results, and (rich) people would have to pay all of it by themselves. If scientists establish that there is some genetic modification and the extent is in accordance with what the company says, the company can continue the service.


Comment Re: What about Scientology, then? (Score 1) 527

"Because, that is what the majority of abortions are, an inconvenience to a woman who could have made a different choice or done something a different way that would not have resulted in pregnancy."

Not being born and growing up in a culture where abstinence is promoted over practical information and proper availability of the pill etc. was not really a choice they had. There's more teen pregnancies in the US per capita and abortions than in countries with a more mature (less religion dominated) attitude towards sex.
Not every intercourse results in pregnancy. So, many women (and their sex partners) did exactly the same thing as those that did get pregnant. The only difference is they were lucky. But the pregnant ones apparently need some punishment/moral judgement from other people. Hm.


Comment Re:Nothing new (Score 1) 416

But still, despite being performed by humans, the constant checking of facts has brought it to a level that no religion can ever reach.

Download your free PDF copy of "A Great Gift" from which delves deeper into this subject matter.


Comment Re:Ia my impression wrong? (Score 2) 510

"What is the mechanism that causes this lack of collective filtration for logic in one party but not the other."

You're almost there. That is exactly what is going on, but it happens on the candidate level.
Why don't you enter the Olympic games and win the gold medal on 100 m dash? Don't you want to beat Hussain Bolt? Of course you do! Don't you want to earn that medal in less than 10 seconds (much better than 2 hours of hard work for the marathon)? Of course you want that medal.
But you're not going to enter. Why not? Because you know you don't stand a chance.

Self-selection is an important process in society. It is why nerds go to the university to study programming, math, engineering etc. And some other people become politician or priest/imam/rabbi etc.

Not standing a chance is why honest, capable Republicans don't put themselves on the ballot list. Once the question on evolution is raised (something you don't need much knowledge of to be president/congressman or whatever), you know that if you give an honest answer, you lose the vote of a significant part of the electorate. Now, you could lie, but you don't do that. Only people not capable of dealing with some high school level biology or who are willing to lie, then you get your name on the ballot list. I don't think that is a good recipe for good government but until Americans get their act together they get lousy politicians if they let adherence to nonsense guide their vote.

And that is why anyone should speak up for truth and reality. Ignorance/stupidity/ etc are harmful, even if seemingly innocent like a personal belief in how life turned out to be.

The above is part of a booklet "A Great Gift for Amal and for you" that is to be released later this week and will be available for free from

Slashdot Top Deals

"Confound these ancestors.... They've stolen our best ideas!" - Ben Jonson