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


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

Comment Re:gloves? (Score 1) 375

Pretty much this. Aren't these the FIRST areas where I'd WANT a personalized gun? Rifles that cannot be looted by the enemy and be used against you? Undeniable proof who used the pistol to fire the shot in a shootout in a seedy neighborhood?

That is where anyone who puts his money where his mouth is would WANT such personalized and traceable guns.

Comment Re:Another obvious defense against this (Score 4, Interesting) 362

I want a "panic" finger such that it displays a "could not read fingerprint - try again" message and then immediate sets "allow_unlocking_with_fingerprint=False" internally so that a password is required. Make it indistinguishable from the usual unlock failure message so that it's impossible to tell that it was triggered (even by examining the on-device logs, if that's possible).

Comment Re:About time. (Score 1) 588

Really? Is there any evidence of this? I have serious doubts that servers and food preparers were any good at this even before the whole GF craze. Just look at how it is for people with severe peanut allergies today: everyone's heard about it now, and knows how dangerous and life-threatening it is for these people to consume them, yet we still have reports of restaurants being sloppy and someone having an attack or even dying because of this. You just can't trust a bunch of underpaid fools in a restaurant kitchen to not cross-contaminate foods, unless that restaurant explicitly specializes in food free of a certain allergen (like a gluten-free bakery for instance). People like that really shouldn't be eating out at all; it's just not safe.

Comment Re:About time. (Score 1) 588

People also specialize a lot more now than in the past. If you are in an office full of programmers and all you ever see are other programmers then the chances of you marrying another programmer is higher than if you are in a mixed environment office.

You might have a point about doctors marrying other doctors, but not programmers. That almost never happens, because there's so few women in programming. 90+% of male programmers are not going to marry female programmers because they simply don't exist.

From my experience, programmers and engineers seem to generally marry women who have absolutely nothing to do with tech. The ones who marry "up" the most will marry lawyers or accountants, the rest seem to marry "down" (i.e. a woman who's not a professional, like a secretary or a stay-at-home wife). And a bunch of them seem to stay perpetually single, because women in this culture generally despise men like this.

I believe age of parents is a risk factor. The other big risk factor is if you have autistic traits yourself. If you have autistic traits then your kids are more likely to have those traits and also more likely to have full blown autism.

Now this I can't disagree with in any way. And perhaps more specialization and people marrying within their profession has a little to do with it, but personally I think age has more. And since professionals/"high IQ" type people also tend to be the people who have kids at older ages, compared to less-educated people, there's going to be a big correlation here.

Comment Re:easily made up in peripherals. (Score 1) 492

Your suggestion, in a thread about relative costs of systems, is to buy a custom piece of hardware, from a vendor who's website doesn't actually list a price.

Y'all got Amazon where you live? Or access to any of the vendors they list on their website?

But it's not like Windows can backup to thin air. You have to have something on the other end of that CAT-5, so it's probably a wash hardware-wise.

Do you know what I think when I see a website selling a product but not listing a unit price.

"Huh, I wonder if Amazon has them?" would have been my first thought, but apparently it wasn't yours.

Comment Re:About time. (Score 1) 588

I'm not disagreeing, as I think you may have a valid point about self-selection and high-IQ people, however what was different in the past 100 years or so about how high-IQ people dated and found partners? Are you alleging that high-IQ people generally married stupider people in the past, before dating sites become popular? (This may very well be true, I'm just posing the question.)

I do think it'd be interesting to do a big study on autism-spectrum kids and look at their parents.

But one factor I think that may be much bigger is the parents' ages. People are having kids later in life now than in the past. Women are waiting until their 30s and even 40s before having kids, whereas 50 years ago they always did it in their 20s. Back then, people married younger, and women frequently didn't go to college, so it was probably perfectly normal for a high-IQ man to go to college, finish up in his early 20s (or mid 20s if he did an advanced degree), and then marry a younger woman who's in her very early 20s, and start popping out kids right away. These days, women are all going to college (colleges are now 60% female, 40% male from what I read), and getting professional careers since they can't count on marrying a man to support them (both because of divorce and also the need for dual incomes to maintain a middle-class lifestyle), so they're waiting until much later. Both sperm and egg quality is affected by age, egg quality moreso since the ova are all generated early in a woman's life and don't regenerate.

Comment Re:DCMA Fair Use / Parody (Score 1) 216

No, it wouldn't. These notices are made on behalf of Samsung about an exclusive right to something about the Galaxy 7 which is allegedly being infringed. The assertion of infringement has no legal standing, but the assertion is made on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.

A judge can find a load of other shit you're doing wrong if you're misusing the statute. Abuse of the legal system is frowned upon.

Comment Re:About time. (Score 1) 588

My mother was a nurse. I met some of her coworkers, and even worked in the same hospital for a little while as food service worker before college. Not only did they not impress me with their intelligence, I thought it really interesting just how many of these nurses were smokers and had to take regular smoke breaks. My mother complained a lot about how they could take paid time to go outside and smoke, but she wasn't supposed to because she wasn't a smoker.

I'm sorry, but anyone who willingly smokes cigarettes is not someone I'm going to trust over an MD for medical advice.

Comment Re:About time. (Score 1) 588

I've never heard that there's different strains of Measles, and I suspect it's not true.

What *is* true is that getting a vaccine does not necessarily make you immune to the virus. There's a 90-something percent chance it'll work for you, but there's some small chance it won't "take". Nothing's perfect in biology. But this isn't normally a problem because when 90+% of the population is properly vaccinated, we get "herd immunity", and the virus becomes extremely rare or even extinct because there's insufficient vectors to spread it. So if you're one of the unlucky few who don't gain lasting immunity to the virus, you'll probably never notice because the disease is so rare due to herd immunity that you're never exposed to it.

The big problem with these anti-vax morons is that when too many people listen to them, too many people (usually children) go unvaccinated, and the whole herd immunity protection breaks down and we get outbreaks at Disneyland.

And it's not just an unlucky 1% or so who don't gain immunity for some reason, there's also a small portion of the population that's allergic to the vaccine or can't have it for some valid medical reason: those people are also relying on herd immunity to keep them safe from infection, so these anti-vax assholes are putting their lives at risk too.

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 1) 126

I spent quite a bit more than that for my phone, but it too was a used phone from Ebay, a Galaxy S5 (about $150). I'm quite happy with it, and a couple of years ago when it was new it was the fanciest phone out there, and still is very, very nice (plus it has great CyanogenMod support, lots of cheap repair parts available in case something breaks, cheap OEM batteries available, etc.). It's still getting regular OS updates too. I'm quite happy with it and don't see why I'd want to pay any more than that for a phone when I can get a barely-used flagship phone for so cheap just by staying a couple years behind the cutting edge. Phones have plateaued technologically anyway, so I don't see how newer phones are really any better; I don't need a 4k screen, when my 1080p screen already looks fantastic. Maybe in 2-3 years I'll upgrade to what's state-of-the-art today.

I agree about Ting too. I have 3 phones on that, and the bill is around $55/month, so less than $20/month per phone. It helps using WiFi calling when I'm at home to keep my usage down.

Comment Re:They are richer (Score 1) 126

That's not necessarily true. I've noticed, and I've seen at least one other comment in this discussion here saying, that a lot of people with the latest iPhones are frequently people who complain about money problems and are not even remotely rich. The monthly payment plan makes it possible for them to afford these phones, even though they really have no business spending that money on a high-end phone when they don't have any savings and probably wouldn't be able to pay their rent if they had a hiccup with their paycheck.

Comment Re:A well known psychological bias (Score 1) 126

MP3s are very lossy, and there really is a difference between 128kbps and 160kbps (not "kps", that's kilometers per second) files, particularly in the upper ranges.

However, if you're talking about actually recoding an existing 128k MP3 to 160k, instead of going back to the lossless version (CD/WAV or FLAC) and re-encoding from that, then yeah, that's really, really stupid. You can't get more information out of less information.

Comment Re:A well known psychological bias (Score 1) 126

That's how audiophiles will clearly notice the effect of their $1000+ cables and will consider it money well spent whereas the one who used zip chord will probably be less satisfied, even though he paid 100x less for the same objective result.

I disagree.

Yes, the moron who spent $1000 on speaker cables will indeed "hear" a difference and think it was money well spent, thanks to something akin to the placebo effect.

However, the guy who uses cheap lamp wire or other perfectly adequate wire, because he understands that the $1000 wire is just a big scam and knows how wire works, will also be satisfied, perhaps even more satisfied, because he didn't waste $997 and can feel smug about not being a sucker like the first guy.

This happens to me every time I meet an iPhone user.

The second path is a little harder, though: you have to do some research before you buy things (esp. expensive things), and not just listen to what marketers and salespeople tell you. But thanks to the internet, that really isn't that hard these days.

Slashdot Top Deals

I'm always looking for a new idea that will be more productive than its cost. -- David Rockefeller