Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Think about it (Score 3, Insightful) 278

We got to the top of the food chain by being the grand champions of the solar system at killing shit. We're so good at killing things that we pass laws against slaughtering animals to keep us from wiping them out. The Dodo Bird and Carrier Pigeon are examples of species we've exterminated and we nearly killed off a bunch of others.

It makes sense to guess that the dominant species on other worlds got to the top of the food chain because they're also the most skillful killers. It's wishful thinking to suppose that a more technically advanced civilization would be more peaceful and tolerant. Just like it was wishful thinking for the Aztecs to give the Spanish gold and hope they'd go away.

He's right. We should be careful about broadcasting our presence around the 'verse.

Comment You can't be okay with this (Score 0, Troll) 271

Whatever Wikileaks was in the past, you can't be okay with them acting as a front for Russian espionage. Does anyone think for a second that the Russians are going to turn over emails they acquire illegally without editing the content? They're okay with hacking government and political party servers but they're going to be honest about what they turn over? Not a chance.

This isn't just hackers run amok. If it's state sponsored this is bordering on an act of war and Wikileaks is party to it.

Comment Then there's the Russians (Score 1) 306

There's also that matter of cooperating with a foreign power committing espionage in an effort to influence an election in the U.S. We're supposed to trust that the Russians haven't altered any of those emails? When the source is a foreign intelligence service, that makes Wikileaks a tool.

Comment Conservatives are professional complainers (Score 1, Insightful) 236

I know conservative publications make a living by complaining about the president, but fabricating something new to be offended about every single day eventually leads to some really bizarre complaints. Like the $400 million payment to Iran that was part of a deal announced in January.

It's just not working anymore.

Comment Perspective (Score 4, Insightful) 177

That it takes $90,000 worth of equipment and then always doesn't work right is pretty darn impressive to me. Where I live a good 30 percent of drivers are too old to be behind the wheel and another 10 percent are functional alcoholics. Share the road with south Florida drivers long enough and you'll be begging for autopilot.

Comment Re:"Beg the question" (Score 1) 179

An example of "translatese" for the phrase:

"An appeal of the principles" or an appeal of the premises". Neither of these are real English but just stand as word for word translations of the Latin while preserving word class and case. Hence why a non-literal translation like "begging the question" is far superior: translations don't have to show that you know Latin grammar perfectly, unless you're doing them for an undergraduate course.

Comment Re:"Beg the question" (Score 2) 179

"It's called "begging the question" because the one who makes the fallacy petitions the opponent to accept the premise that's in question."

Where do you people get these etymologies from?

It's called "begging the question" because that's just the translation of the Latin, "petitio principii". The word "beg" has had more than one usage and certainly the word "question" still has more than one usage. So where does this story about it referring to petitioning some opponent even come from? It's unnecessary. "Begging the question" is plainly just a perfectly fine translation of "petitio principii". If you tried to make a very literal translation you would just end up with Latin-English "translatese".

Comment Re:Like an opinion article (Score 1) 381

"Starvation mode" has been shown to be a myth. It comes down to basic math, calories in vs. calories out.

If you eat less and work out more, you lose weight. You do the opposite, you gain.

There's no way for the body to "magically" get fat when eating less. That violates the laws of thermodynamics. Sure, the rate of how quickly you gain or lose weight may change (e.g., when you eat less or change your macros to consume less sugar, you may find yourself being more lethargic in the short term until you get used to it, and so you will burn fewer calories). Or, as you lose weight, you need fewer calories (because there isn't as much of you to support).

But a calorie is a calorie and reducing ~3500 calories results in about 1lb of weight loss. Is it exactly 3500? No. Why? Because there are so many other variables at play. But is it closer to 3500 than, say, 500 or 10,000? You bet.

Comment Re:The real reason? (Score 1) 381

"as the GP explained, carb rich foods will cause your body to store the extra energy as fat."

The "explanation" he gives is straight from Taubes. Taubes' insulin-carbohydrate theory is a fringe theory among obesity scientists. Increases in caloric consumption can be adequately explained by the increases in the reward value of available food. That is, food is in general more palatable, more calorically dense, less toxic, and more easily accessed than in the past. What is known about the food reward systems in the brain allows this to be completely adequate for explaining why we eat so much such that obesity levels are increasing. Taubes' theory about insulin action is just completely unnecessary for explaining anything, and it has problems on its own. So the vast majority of researchers see no need for it.

" if you are hungry, you should eat, and if you are not, you should not eat."

How is this claim at all a scientific fact? How do you prove such a claim? It seems to me whether you should eat or not completely depends on your goals. If your goals don't align with eating at some time, then don't eat. If your goals don't align with fasting at some time, then don't fast.

Comment Re:In other news, water gets things wet... (Score 2, Insightful) 639

It clear to anyone with any objectivity that conservative ideas get obscured, hidden, or simply misrepresented on a daily basis...

It's also clear to anyone with any objectivity that conservative ideas have their own billionaire-funded media outlets to promote and distribute right wing propaganda as news. I totally understand any group that wants to screen out the right wing noise machine. You are entitled to your own opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts.

While you're at it explain how Rush Limbaugh has been able to stay on the air for so long with nothing but music playing during commercial breaks.

Comment Re:Warning: Healthy At Every Size supporter (Score 1) 381

What you're saying is not correct.

First of all this, this study does not confirm that "dieting and increasing exercise is not effective for some people". No where does it say that. It looked at a large number of obese people who did not receive bariatric surgery and tabulated the number and percentage of them that became normal weight. It doesn't say what percentage of them actually conformed to a diet and exercise regimen on which weight loss down to a normal weight would be predicted. It may be that the number who conformed were the exact number that became normal weight (1 in 124 for women and 1 in 210 for men). Indeed, if the population of obese people were at all likely to conform to effective weight loss regimens, then it is unlikely they would have become obese in the first place. So the result is not surprising.

Second of all, official HAES principles are posted online. Number 4 is "Promote flexible, individualized eating based on hunger, satiety, nutritional needs, and pleasure, rather than any externally regulated eating plan focused on weight control."

No where does this say it is just against "binge diets". It's against any diet that is intended for weight loss, or weight gain, or weight maintenance even; any "weight control". Mainstream, scientifically-based dietitians, nutrition scientists and medical doctors advise diets for weight control all the time. The standard treatment for anorexia nervosa is to first and foremost enforce a diet which brings weight back up to healthy levels. The standard treatment for an obese woman showing Pseudotumor cerebri is to lose weight. Etc.

For HAES to reject these practices is pseudoscientific.

Comment Re:And the election was handed to Hillary Clinton (Score 1) 605

She just lost another primary state.

She stopped campaigning in that state and spending any money to oppose Bernie Sanders and still got 48% of the vote. There's no reason for her to spend time or money running against Bernie Sanders.

By November Hillary will be a quivering mass of regret.

Then you don't know Hillary Clinton. You're also underestimating the monstrous negatives for Donald Trump and the end of what was formerly known as the Republican party. You're also underestimating the number of Republicans who will vote for Clinton. The only thing Sanders supporters are really good at is marginalizing themselves.

Hillary Clinton's people are not going to take shit the way the Obama administration did. The Republicans are going to be wishing for the good old days of president Obama right about February.

Slashdot Top Deals

We cannot command nature except by obeying her. -- Sir Francis Bacon