Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Obama Administration Argues For Backdoors In Personal Electronics

blueg3 Re:Before the digital age ... (424 comments)

Before the digital age, they seized physical documents, which were usually trivial to access (with a warrant) and decipher.

8 hours ago
top

iOS Trojan Targets Hong Kong Protestors

blueg3 Re:Attention Slashdot Editors (60 comments)

It doesn't just require a jailbreak. It also requires the user to install the software.

8 hours ago
top

David Cameron Says Brits Should Be Taught Imperial Measures

blueg3 Re:Idiot (799 comments)

I think it also tends to be much faster, for the same reason. Add ingredient, zero, add ingredient, zero, etc. You can tear through measuring a complicated set of ingredients in no time.

I tend to use grams unless the recipe actually specifies weight in US customary or if there is some particular motivation for using lb/oz. (Brewing supplies here, for example, are all sold by the pound or ounce, so it's useful to stick with those units.

9 hours ago
top

David Cameron Says Brits Should Be Taught Imperial Measures

blueg3 Re:Idiot (799 comments)

Right. This is specifying the recipe by weight, though. It's just specifying it by relative weights, using a very convenient custom unit system.

9 hours ago
top

David Cameron Says Brits Should Be Taught Imperial Measures

blueg3 Re:Size of a cup (799 comments)

Weren't "words with multiple meanings" like "mile" exactly what crashed that Mars lander?

The Mars Climate Orbiter was never intended to land, but it did.

And no. It had nothing to do with words with multiple meanings. Nobody in the US in engineering (or science, really) should be confused about what pound-seconds are. (This is despite the fact that both "pound" and "second" have multiple definitions.) What crashed the Mars Climate Orbiter is that the spec for a piece of software required that it produce results with one unit, and it instead produced results with a second unit. That's going to be a problem, regardless of whether the incorrect unit it produces is kN-s, dyn-s, lbf-s, cm-g/s, or kg-km/hr. (And if you think that scientists and engineers who use metric always use the SI base unit, you clearly don't do science or engineering.)

9 hours ago
top

David Cameron Says Brits Should Be Taught Imperial Measures

blueg3 Re:Size of a cup (799 comments)

Now you're misstating the precision of the measurement and using units that aren't necessarily marked on the measuring devices. (Dry-measure cups are not often not graduated.)

The ambiguity doesn't really exist. People are either being intentionally difficult or users of the metric system are too stupid to handle words with multiple meanings.

12 hours ago
top

David Cameron Says Brits Should Be Taught Imperial Measures

blueg3 Re:Idiot (799 comments)

Note that they are actually measuring by weight, using a custom unit system.

yesterday
top

David Cameron Says Brits Should Be Taught Imperial Measures

blueg3 Re:Idiot (799 comments)

Basically, no, the kitchen is exactly the place I want metric measurement

You are confusing two issues: metric vs. US customary units, and measurement by volume vs. by mass.

I assure you that both metric and US customary unit systems have units for volume and mass, so you can measure either way using either system. It's also the case that neither unit system specifies how one is to measure ingredients in the kitchen.

It is European convention to measure many kitchen dry ingredients by weight. It is, unfortunately, US convention to measure many dry ingredients by volume. This is okay, even convenient, for some things where the real quantity doesn't particularly matter. (While cherry tomatoes will vary, you could probably use twice as much or half as much without any trouble.) For precision measurements, you need to use weight. This is what's used by professional cooks in the US already and is becoming increasingly common in cookbooks.

Incidentally, if you buy your butter in sticks, it's easy to measure a cup of butter. Otherwise, it's convenient to post a list of standard densities for things like butter.

yesterday
top

David Cameron Says Brits Should Be Taught Imperial Measures

blueg3 Re:Idiot (799 comments)

While cup is a standard and precise unit of measurement, there are lots of materials in cooking you should not measure by volume (whether that volume is in cups or mL).

yesterday
top

David Cameron Says Brits Should Be Taught Imperial Measures

blueg3 Re:Size of a cup (799 comments)

I can see when my coffee cup is full and I could fill it with water to get 1 cup.

This is equivocation. The word "cup" denotes both a standardized unit of measure (volume) in the US customary units and also an object for holding and consuming liquids. They have only a historical relationship to one another.

Whenever the word "cup" is used in the context of measurement, it means the unit of measure.

yesterday
top

David Cameron Says Brits Should Be Taught Imperial Measures

blueg3 Re:Idiot (799 comments)

In the US, "cup" is a capacity measurement, just like fluid ounces. You don't measure with any sort of arbitrary cup, you do it with a calibrated measuring cup (which is generally marked in fl oz and mL as well). You could use any graduated container, though. I like beakers.

Same goes for teaspoons and tablespoons, which are volume measurements that are only historically linked to any of the spoons one might eat with.

The one European cooking convention that's actually useful here is using weight for dry measure instead of volume. Most dry-measure materials pack well (like flour) or have nonstandardized grain sizes (like salt), so you cannot make a precise measurement by volume. We're converting, though -- most good cookbooks will list both. (Professional cookbooks will only list weight.) People on TV will generally tell you to stop measuring by volume. Etc.

yesterday
top

Microsoft Announces Windows 10

blueg3 Re:OMFG, stupid (634 comments)

Chemical potential energy.

yesterday
top

Scientists Seen As Competent But Not Trusted By Americans

blueg3 Re:Fucked both ways (451 comments)

If they don't believe the science, then by the very definition they are not scientifically literate.

That's a tautology, then. It's strictly true that, if you define "the scientifically literate world" as "places that [believe] climate change science", then all of the scientifically literate world believes* climate change science.

It seems you are confusing "deciding which steps to take to counter the issue" and "deny the issue exists while keeping on making it worse".

I'm not looking at all at how any particular state is taking steps (or not) to address climate change. That's highly variable and also is very sensitive to what you count as "taking steps". But I'm not concerned with that.

I was looking only at to what extent the population of a nation agrees with some of the most basic scientific facts about climate change.

By that definition, large chunks of the developed world, the US included, sits around 50%. There's another big cluster around 60-65%.

2 days ago
top

Scientists Seen As Competent But Not Trusted By Americans

blueg3 Re:Fucked both ways (451 comments)

Which I guess doesn't include countries like the Netherlands or the UK.

2 days ago
top

Scientists Seen As Competent But Not Trusted By Americans

blueg3 Re:Fucked both ways (451 comments)

Are you implying that the rest of the world, except for the US, is on board with current climate-change science? Because that's certainly not true.

2 days ago
top

Users Report Warping of Apple's iPhone 6 Plus

blueg3 Re:Not just iPhone (421 comments)

Do you mean things like: potassium, sodium, magnesium, calcium, and strontium?

No, things like molybdenum, tantalum, lanthanum, and platinum.

Also hydrogen, boron, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, fluorine, neon, silicon, phosphorous, sulfur, chlorine, argon, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel, copper, zinc, arsenic, bromine, krypton, silver, tin, iodine, xenon, gold, mercury, lead, bismuth, astatine, radon.

In current usage and also in the Latin names for the elements, both -ium and -um are used frequently as endings for metallic elements.

about a week ago
top

NY Magistrate: Legal Papers Can Be Served Via Facebook

blueg3 Re:how do you prove service? (185 comments)

does not have return receipt functionality

No, just subpoena-able usage logs.

about two weeks ago
top

Study Finds Link Between Artificial Sweeteners and Glucose Intolerance

blueg3 Re:Does HFCS count? (294 comments)

High Fructose corn syrup is called HIGH fructose because it contains a higher concentration of fructose

Higher than what?

I'll answer that for you. It's called high-fructose corn syrup because it has more fructose than the preexisting product "corn syrup" (from which it is made). Corn syrup is all glucose (and water), made by hydrolyzing corn starch. High-fructose corn syrup is made by using an isomerase enzyme to convert glucose to fructose.

Meanwhile, fructose in sucrose is bound to glucose at 50 to 50 mix which must be broken in the body through the use of a(n) enzyme(s).

This is true, and there are probably subtle metabolic effects between sucrose and a mixture of glucose and fructose. However, sucrose is not "sugar later". While it needs to be hydrolyzed into monosaccharides, that's a fast process. "Sugar later" is more like starch, which is a glucose chain that actually takes some time to digest.

On top of that, fructose which occurs naturally tends to be bound to fiber, i.e. indigestible cellulose.

Bound to? Not necessarily. "In the presence of?" Sure, often, but that's the difference between natural foods and processed foods. Soda is flavored sugar water without any of the other products that normally come along with sugar -- regardless of whether you make it with beet sugar, cane sugar, high-fructose corn syrup, or honey.

That's like saying salted almonds occur naturally.

High-fructose corn syrup is a 1:1 solution of glucose and fructose (except for the 80-20 kind). You'll find 1:1 solutions of glucose and fructose in honey, figs, and grapes (yes, along with a bevy of non-sugar chemicals). It's corn starch that's processed by enzymes into sugars that you find everywhere in the natural world. Chemically speaking, there's nothing strange, sinister, or synthetic about it.

about two weeks ago
top

Study Finds Link Between Artificial Sweeteners and Glucose Intolerance

blueg3 Re:Does HFCS count? (294 comments)

It is a natural sugar, but is ~300 times sweetener than sucrose.

It's not a sugar, it's a non-sugar sweetener. Chemically, it's a glycoside, rather than a sugar.

about two weeks ago
top

Study Finds Link Between Artificial Sweeteners and Glucose Intolerance

blueg3 Re:Does HFCS count? (294 comments)

It's real sugar. Here, they're making the distinction between "natural sugars" -- substances that are chemically sugars -- and "artificial sweeteners" -- sweet substances that contain no sugar compounds. (Artificial sweeteners might include some sugars, if they're indigestable. All of them have some feature that make them zero or low calorie -- like being extremely sweet per weight.)

HFCS is a ~50/50 mix of glucose and fructose. Both of those occur naturally. HFCS can be produced by natural means, even: corn starch plus the right enzymes. It's very close to the sugar composition of honey (minus the maltose) and is the same as invert sugar (hydrolyzed sucrose).

It's bad to eat a lot of it, but there's absolutely nothing interesting chemically about HFCS.

about two weeks ago

Submissions

blueg3 hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

blueg3 has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?