Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
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 Re:Sounds nice! (Score 1) 121

I'm far less certain of that - look how many people take life-extending drugs now, so that their failing heart/liver/kidneys/whatever won't kill them "before their time"

What makes you think a drug that benefits basically every aspect of your health, plus makes you look and feel younger, would be any less appealing? Granted, after a few decades of failing health perhaps the allure of several more would wear thin. Then again, our culture is rather obsessed with putting off dying as long as possible, at almost any price, so a relatively cheap and powerful aid to that goal would probably find a huge market, even if it did also accelerate the return to a more sane relationship with death.

Even then though, I would not be surprised if death from "old age" remained extremely uncommon, with people instead continuing to take the anti-agapics as long as possible, and then choosing a more pleasant way to go when they decide their time is up. I mean it's basically a choice between decaying as slow as possible and then taking a leap of faith when it's no longer worth it, versus willfully letting the misery of decay accelerate until it kills you.

Comment Re:Rotten Tomatoes is getting self-important (Score 1) 344

>Plus, I use Linux so my time is already worth nothing.

I know it can be hard to adjust, but just because you would have been flushing all that time down the toilet dealing with Windows problems doesn't mean it's worthless. It just means that Windows was a terribly abusive partner. Go, take your newfound free time and learn to live again!

Comment Re: Or... (Score 1) 344

But how many people use Rotten Tomatoes to decide what they might be interested in watching in the first place? It seems much more likely that it's the previews that catch people's interest and then RT lets them know if the movie managed to appeal to the same people as the previews.

I mean there's plenty of abysmal movies with lots of great explosions and fight scenes (looking at you Michael Bay), whose previews don't really promise anything else. And they generally get good popular reviews for the simple reason that they deliver what's promised. Their critic reviews are often terrible, but that's to be expected - they're terrible movies seen through the eyes of someone who watched them in order to write a review, rather than because he preview led them to believe they'd like it.

Comment Re:Can't see the forest for all the trees (Score 1) 344

I'd say the usefulness of aggregators lies in the extremes - if the aggregate score is 80-90%, that's a remarkably wide range of people saying it was good, so clearly it has a broad based appeal and you'll likely enjoy it too. Similarly, if something is ranked at 10-20%, that's a remarkable consensus that it's bad.

The more midrange scores though - that's where things get murky, likely lots of conflicting opinions, so you have to venture further afield to figure out where our own tastes are likely to lie.

There's another way of looking at it though - if you assume most people are initially interested in a movie because of the previews, then even the horribly crude rankings of an aggregator could tell you one important detail: how well does the movie deliver on the promises of the preview? If the preview accurately captures the essence of the movie, then most people who were attracted by the preview are liable to like it. If not... well then the popular review is likely going to be bad unless the movie really managed to do something else *really* well.

Comment Re:Sounds nice! (Score 1) 121

You are assuming that anti-agapics will only prolong the productive years. What if they prolong the long, decaying years as well? I mean it's already obvious that, at least within the US, people are in no hurry to let themselves die just because they're old and worn down, and an anti-agapic might well work to extend those non-productive years just as log as the productive ones.

There's a whole lot of knock-on effects to consider.

Submission + - Why You Should Care About The Supreme Court Case On Toner Cartridges (consumerist.com)

rmdingler writes: A corporate squabble over printer toner cartridges doesn’t sound particularly glamorous, and the phrase “patent exhaustion” is probably already causing your eyes to glaze over. However, these otherwise boring topics are the crux of a Supreme Court case that will answer a question with far-reaching impact for all consumers: Can a company that sold you something use its patent on that product to control how you choose to use after you buy it?

Here’s the background: Lexmark makes printers. Printers need toner in order to print, and Lexmark also happens to sell toner.

Then there’s Impression Products, a third-party company makes and refills toner cartridges for use in printers, including Lexmark’s.

Comment Re:Is this San Francisco "offensive" or the real k (Score 3, Insightful) 235

Why are you objecting to ISIS videos in terms of Trump?

Because the language Google is using sounds like this includes WAY more than just ISIS videos. Words like "derogatory" take on a whole new meaning in Silicon Valley on on college campuses today than they do in red state America. So it's very important to establish EXACTLY whose definitions we're using here and exactly what videos are going to be blacklisted.

Comment Re:Is this San Francisco "offensive" or the real k (Score 5, Interesting) 235

You were going to say that no matter whether it was relevant of not (which it isn't)

It's absolutely relevant if it's true. Youtube is being very cagey about exactly what videos it means here. The meaning of words like "derogatory" vary SIGNIFICANTLY depending on who you're asking.

Comment quality of research vs. patents? (Score 2, Interesting) 38


I am wondering if this has more to do with the quality of the research being done, as opposed to the patent process itself. While India's CSIR-Tech may have failed, Australia's equivalent entity, CSIRO, seems to have done quite well for Australian taxpayers, such as generating income on from Wi-Fi (some essential component of 802.11n, as I recall).


Aryeh Goretsky

Comment Re:This will be denied by all the idiots (Score 1) 364

Real science has been questioning - and NOBODY has come up with ANY alternate explanation for the data. CO2 is a clear and obvious climate forcing factor.

>Data shows no direct correlation to CO2 levels and global temperatures.
Of course not. Data will also show no direct correlation between the height of the flame under a pot of water and the temperature of the water. The relationship is with the rate of warming, not with the temperature. And with a "water pot" the size of Earth, it takes centuries for temperatures to adjust to changes in "flame height".

>Data shows CO2 levels have been insanely higher in the past than they are now.
Yes, if you go back far enough. Like, many times longer than the existence of the human species. But when CO2 is high, Earth has always been a "hothouse", experiencing a radically different set of climate options than anything seen in the last 2.6 million years of ice age (we're only in an interglacial period now - we've still got polar ice caps). And the transition between ice age and hothouse causes a massive planet-wide extinction event lasting for thousands of years.

And no, Global Warming hasn't been debunked - it was even been confirmed by the researchers working directly for Exxon, etc., who decided to keep quiet and fund a massive disinformation campaign to preserve their business model instead. The shift to calling it "Climate Change" was because some people were incapable of understanding that just because the planet as a whole is warming, doesn't mean that every individual location will get warmer - changing weather patterns, like the polar vortex extending all the way down into the US, can easily cause localized cooling.

Comment Re:This will be denied by all the idiots (Score 1) 364

That's the question isn't it? Have we already crossed the tipping point into a "hothouse Earth"? If so we've got some hard adjustments in front of us and it will likely be millions of years before our planet sees another ice age. If not, and we can get our fossil fuel addiction under control, then we may be able to maintain the current interglacial period indefinitely, though sooner or later we're liable to stop managing it and the natural oscillations will resume (if nothing else the collapse of civilization is a recurring theme in history, and today our civilizations are all hopelessly interlinked and likely to fall together)

We've found the keys to an incredibly powerful driver of global climate change - they hold great potential, if we wield them responsibly.

Slashdot Top Deals

Honesty is for the most part less profitable than dishonesty. -- Plato