As you may recall, after the whole Thailand flood, either for real or imaginary (for profit), there was a shortage of drives, and the prices doubled, then tripled. It would be VERY hard for any company to not cheat a bit in the binning process when the profit is triple what they used to make.
If the price tripled, then the profit (price - cost) probably increased by far more than that.
We can invent mathematical theories that come close to describing a multiverse where such an event is possible, but we have no proof that those theories are actually correct.
Science doesn't care one bit about proof that something is actually correct. Science is about prediction, not proof.
In short, such a "law of nature" is as much a human invention as a story of an extradimensional intelligence that likes to create sentient creatures in his spare time. For the purpose of satisfying the human desire to know everything, both are sufficient tales.
Science doesn't deal in tales for satisfying the human desire to know everything. It deals in prediction, which is what makes science better at making motors and computers than religion.
If such beliefs do not conflict with empirical evidence, then what is your SCIENTIFIC basis for discounting them or declaring them antithetical to science? At worst, they show wishful thinking.
Faith and wishful thinking are the opposite of the scientific method. Try using faith instead of an independently verifiable double-blind study, and see if your paper gets published. Religion asks you to suspend the usual scientific skepticism for a certain set of beliefs. Fortunately, people are very good at compartmentalizing so this doesn't result in the horrors some people would expect.
It is just as reasonable to say that a God created our universe as it is to say that another universe deformed and spawned our dimensions.
Just out of curiosity, what sort of premises lead you to assign an equal estimated probability for a universe to be created by an otherwise hidden powerful sentient being, as a law of nature? And more importantly, how would you make verifiable predictions concerning how the world would look like if it were created by a powerful sentient being as compared to by a law of nature? Finally, if you can make verifiable predictions of the actions of a mysterious sentient being, why bother including the sentient being in the theory since you could just include the rules on how it would act instead?
If they do this simple and obvious thing, the homeopathic industry in the US will vanish over night,
Not really -- it will just be diluted until not a single homeopathy vendor remains, but the market will retain the essence of the original vendors and the effect will be even more potent.
Sure you can. Free speech protects the speaker from prosecution based on beliefs or opinions, but does not free the speaker from accountability.
That's nice in theory, but in the real world but the only protection people have against prosecution for what they said is anonymity. Try offending a mob boss, saying something your local police department really doesn't like, printing cartoons of a prophet, etc, and see if your government's protections for free speech save you from being persecuted for what you said.
there's often an inverse correlation between perceived politeness and competence. Perhaps people understand at some deeper level that people who are polite often don't get results, or don't tell it like it is.
That's probably because rude incompetent assholes tend to get fired much more quickly than rude competent assholes.
There's no such thing as a free lunch. - Various Economists and Heinlein
Sure there is. Served every day at the local food kitchen. You don't have to be poor or anything -- no strings attached. And the quality is better than your average restaurant (on account of most restaurants get a huge "I hate waiting" penalty).
I have an email username "nobody" at one of my own domains that I use for things that I don't want connected to me. It's a perfectly functional normal email account just like the ones I actually use, it just happens to be named "nobody".
When I was forced to sign up for a Facebook account for a development project that integrated with Facebook, I signed up using that email address. Facebook refused with a message that was tantamount to "ha ha no but really, what's your email address?" Fuckers, that IS a real fucking email address...
They don't want a *functioning* email address, they want an email address connected to you.
It's like claiming that a hundred year old man is stronger than a baby. That may be true now, but not for long. Slashdot's got a cancer and it will only get worse.
As for older stories, I'd rather have older stories if they are better quality. It's not like anyone comes to Slashdot for the latest news either.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not afraid of a giant forest fire, but I'm terrified of drones.
The Presidential Candidate With a Plan To Run the US On 100% Clean Energy
They misspelled non-candidate.
I'd rather have Undo beta.
That feature is still in beta.
As you may recall, after the whole Thailand flood, either for real or imaginary (for profit), there was a shortage of drives, and the prices doubled, then tripled. It would be VERY hard for any company to not cheat a bit in the binning process when the profit is triple what they used to make.
If the price tripled, then the profit (price - cost) probably increased by far more than that.
TIL that if I want to know something, I can just ask this praxis guy who will look it up for me.
It's important to clarify obscure terminology that wouldn't be recognized by a large portion of the Slashdot members.
We can invent mathematical theories that come close to describing a multiverse where such an event is possible, but we have no proof that those theories are actually correct.
Science doesn't care one bit about proof that something is actually correct. Science is about prediction, not proof.
In short, such a "law of nature" is as much a human invention as a story of an extradimensional intelligence that likes to create sentient creatures in his spare time. For the purpose of satisfying the human desire to know everything, both are sufficient tales.
Science doesn't deal in tales for satisfying the human desire to know everything. It deals in prediction, which is what makes science better at making motors and computers than religion.
It's kind of like this: http://ih0.redbubble.net/image...
If such beliefs do not conflict with empirical evidence, then what is your SCIENTIFIC basis for discounting them or declaring them antithetical to science? At worst, they show wishful thinking.
Faith and wishful thinking are the opposite of the scientific method. Try using faith instead of an independently verifiable double-blind study, and see if your paper gets published. Religion asks you to suspend the usual scientific skepticism for a certain set of beliefs. Fortunately, people are very good at compartmentalizing so this doesn't result in the horrors some people would expect.
It is just as reasonable to say that a God created our universe as it is to say that another universe deformed and spawned our dimensions.
Just out of curiosity, what sort of premises lead you to assign an equal estimated probability for a universe to be created by an otherwise hidden powerful sentient being, as a law of nature? And more importantly, how would you make verifiable predictions concerning how the world would look like if it were created by a powerful sentient being as compared to by a law of nature? Finally, if you can make verifiable predictions of the actions of a mysterious sentient being, why bother including the sentient being in the theory since you could just include the rules on how it would act instead?
If they do this simple and obvious thing, the homeopathic industry in the US will vanish over night,
Not really -- it will just be diluted until not a single homeopathy vendor remains, but the market will retain the essence of the original vendors and the effect will be even more potent.
After all that effort Apple made promoting Swift, this is how she treats them?
Those are the servers hosting Slashdot's new "share" button. No one's ever clicked on it.
Without anonymity, you can't have free speech.
Sure you can. Free speech protects the speaker from prosecution based on beliefs or opinions, but does not free the speaker from accountability.
That's nice in theory, but in the real world but the only protection people have against prosecution for what they said is anonymity. Try offending a mob boss, saying something your local police department really doesn't like, printing cartoons of a prophet, etc, and see if your government's protections for free speech save you from being persecuted for what you said.
38% increased risk of cardiovascular event.
there's often an inverse correlation between perceived politeness and competence. Perhaps people understand at some deeper level that people who are polite often don't get results, or don't tell it like it is.
That's probably because rude incompetent assholes tend to get fired much more quickly than rude competent assholes.
There's no such thing as a free lunch. - Various Economists and Heinlein
Sure there is. Served every day at the local food kitchen. You don't have to be poor or anything -- no strings attached. And the quality is better than your average restaurant (on account of most restaurants get a huge "I hate waiting" penalty).
I have an email username "nobody" at one of my own domains that I use for things that I don't want connected to me. It's a perfectly functional normal email account just like the ones I actually use, it just happens to be named "nobody".
When I was forced to sign up for a Facebook account for a development project that integrated with Facebook, I signed up using that email address. Facebook refused with a message that was tantamount to "ha ha no but really, what's your email address?" Fuckers, that IS a real fucking email address...
They don't want a *functioning* email address, they want an email address connected to you.
Who the fuck cares about Facebook?
Hey! Don't badmouth my self-updating list of contacts.
Do you have a little nag icon on your taskbar that says, "Get Windows 10"?
We have been making progress towards a much better world. The problem is that it doesn't leave room for doomsayers and scaremongers
Also doesn't leave room for millions of other species.
Their announcement says the miracle cure consists of ginseng grown from fertilizer and rare earth elements.
They misspelled "bullet".
These mice wanted to get some tail, so they struggled more to free their tail.
It's like claiming that a hundred year old man is stronger than a baby. That may be true now, but not for long. Slashdot's got a cancer and it will only get worse.
As for older stories, I'd rather have older stories if they are better quality. It's not like anyone comes to Slashdot for the latest news either.
Now to convince the boss that I can save him some money on health insurance...
On a totally unrelated note, who would like to share their thoughts on that new button?
Yeah, Slashdot is not completely dead yet but I already made a soylentnews account so I go there when /. has been particularly bad.