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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:I don't think so (Score 2) 456

It depends on a lot. Carrie Fisher carried off an incredulous vibe in critical parts that .. transformed the story and our interpretation of the characters, I think? Who's to know how much of that was written-in, how much was directed, how much was her interpretation, how much was her talent, and how much was her chemistry with the rest of the cast.

Comment I worry a bit about the safety of this (Score 2) 131

Population density and machines mean various kinds of pollution which you don't really want getting concentrated in your food (solvents and plasticizers from trash, medications, oil from runoff, lead from water in municipal water systems, and tailpipe emissions and particulates from everywhere).

On the other hand, it's probably great for disaster preparedness and robustness of the supply chain if a few percent of a city's nutrient needs can come from rooftop gardens, and people find farming enjoyable. And food grown in small batches rather than industrially is super yummy.

So, I'm not sure of the net impact of this. I hope in 20 years the increase in urban farming is seen as something good, rather than another way that we concentrated lead into poor peoples' bodies.

Comment Re:So... (Score 1) 170

If they cross the equator and go from fall to spring, they're already alternating directions at 6 mo intervals in response to (pretty much) the same initial circadian stimulus. That is, flip the world over, and the algorithms to follow work the same.

Comment Re:So... (Score 5, Informative) 170

TIL macro-evolved life wasn't around 780k years ago.

It's an event that's happened 3 times per million years on average for a long, long time that complicated life was around for. Yes, the weakening involved with a flip has had varying severity, but at this point there's a pretty large N.

Will it kill us off? Almost certainly not. Could there be bad cancer rates for a couple or a few generations as a result? Heck yes.

Comment Re: Dick Response = (Score 2) 96

> They've done a great job making it clear the device is defective. I think people who still have a Note 7 are aware and it's entirely their choice to keep the device if they wish.

This is great solace to someone whose apartment burns down because there's a Note 7 charging next door. And I'm sure whoever decides to keep the device has fully indemnified Samsung for any damages that may come from the defect.

I'm not saying that they should be able to force the recall necessarily-- just that the issue is a little more complicated than informed consent.

Comment Re:Never understood some trial criteria (Score 2) 40

> Colon cancer is curable with surgery in the early stages, but uncurable by anything after it metastasizes.

Just a curious aside-- the survival / staging thing is probably somewhat misleading.

Some fraction of cancers are probably incapable of establishing themselves in other tissue; and aggressively-growing cancers tend to get diagnosed later in phase of disease progression. So in other words, there's a selection bias where the inherently nastier cancers show up with a worse staging.

A lot of attempts to detect cancer earlier / screen more frequently have spotted earlier stage cancers but have not delivered nearly the survival benefit you'd expect from the staging changes.

(This effect is clearly present in colon cancer but there's still really big benefits from colonoscopy--- this effect has shown up to a greater degree in mammography, prostate cancer screening, etc)

Comment Re:Never understood some trial criteria (Score 1) 40

> I can't understand why clinical trials reject people who aren't in bad enough condition. What if the treatment only works before the disease gets really bad? Wouldn't you want to know this?

A key reason is that there are already pretty good treatments for stage 1 or stage 2 colon cancer that significantly drop 5 year mortality. So the potential for doing more harm (by doing this instead of other treatments) or confusing the results and potentially creating harm (by offering this with existing treatments) are much greater.

So it's a much lower bar to justify trying it on late-stage cancer patients who don't have a proven, really effective therapy available and are pretty likely to die anyways even if your treatment is somewhat dangerous.

Slashdot Top Deals

"This is lemma 1.1. We start a new chapter so the numbers all go back to one." -- Prof. Seager, C&O 351

Working...