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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Anybody read "Nuclear War: A Scenario"? (Score 1) 72

You're welcome.

In case I wasn't entirely clear before, I was pissed off about things like (again, SPOILERS abound):

USA has been hit by nukes, and the gov't is in total chaos. In response, Russia refuses multiple calls from the acting gov't (both before and after American missiles fly) because the appointment of a new President hasn't happened yet. What?

A nuke is incoming to the USA's east coast, but the fictitious president keeps on delaying leaving for a secure location. What?

The fictitious Russian president knows that there's a substantial chance that his country will not be destroyed if he doesn't launch on warning, and can still destroy the USA even if he's wrong about where the missiles are heading - his subs, and their "dead man's switch" system ensure this - so he launches on warning, thus insuring the destruction of his country. WHAT?

The Secret Service loses the fictitious American president, because their EMP shielded vehicle doesn't shield from EMP. WHAT?

I mean, you have to accept that the entire scenario starts with North Korea launching strikes for no reason at all, assuming that China doesn't have some say over such an action, and Dear Leader knowing that doing such a thing is suicidal. WOT.

Let's hope that the screenplay is better than the book - it really had me on the seat of my pants, until it went totally stupid.

Comment Re:Anybody read "Nuclear War: A Scenario"? (Score 2) 72

I did read the book, and I found Jacobsen's scenario to be problematic for several reasons (spoilers inbound):

  • The USA's handling of the conflict was a comedy of errors beyond what was believable. They actually lose the president, and then they spend crucial time arguing about protocol afterwards.
  • There was no good reason why the USA's missiles had to fly over Russia. Jacobsen herself makes it clear that the sub fleet would have more than sufficed to reduce all of North Korea to cinder.
  • Russia's steadfast refusal to pick up the phone, despite desperate attempts by the USA to explain things and defuse the situation. I'm guessing that flying nukes might make it more likely that someone would have thought to pick up the phone, even just for shits and giggles.
  • The Russian president had a choice of either launching on warning, or launching on impact. This was important because the Russian president knew that Russia's detection technology was unreliable, so he couldn't be certain what the target of the missiles was.
  • If Russia launched on warning, it'd mean certain destruction, but would allow retaliatory destruction of the USA several times over. No best case here.
  • If Russia would have waited for impact, the worst case would still be certain destruction, and would "only" allow retaliatory destruction of the USA without overkill. Best case would have been Russia being largely unscathed, and would have been the actual result.
  • Despite this logic, the Russian president inexplicably launches on warning, for some use-it-or-lose-it logical fallacy that no one would have engaged in at that point. It seemed like Jacobsen just wanted to cut to the end.
  • What Jacobsen should have gone with was that China would have taken umbrage at their territory being irradiated and damaged in the overkill strike on North Korea, and lobbed something back at the USA, thus further escalating toward total destruction. More believable, if that was her goal.
  • Again, more reasonable would have been a more limited, but still horrible scenario, given North Korea's incitement of nuclear war.

Jacobsen's book started strong, but became weak and silly in the end. There was a lot of interesting info in the details of things, such as how the USA's interceptor technology is problematic, or the state of the art of Russia's threat detection systems. Not sure how true either is, but I'll accept them at face value.

Comment The Death of the New (Score 1) 13

Get ready to be flooded with regurgitated hamburger content; it will soon be deemed commercially economically unpalatable to create anything that's actually new.

Wonder why Hollywood is so hooked on basing everything on existing IP? Sequels, prequels, etc? Sora will be the AI that they replace the meat objects with, much as Uber/Lyft/UPS/DoorDash/etc. want to replace the meat objects behind the wheel.

Comment It's about the discovery, Q* and AGI (Score 1) 179

Recall that there were rumors that OpenAI had either achieved, or had breakthroughs relating to AGI, back when Altman was fired:

https://www.reuters.com/techno...

Musk is using a lawsuit to do a few things at once, I think, and it'll be obvious whether he's achieved his goals depending upon how the case shakes out.

I predict that they'll settle to avoid discovery; Musk will be made aware of their AGI progress, and X.ai will receive the same access to OpenAI's tech as Microsoft. No benefit to humanity.

I hope I'm wrong, and we all find out if AGI is truly on the horizon, all OpenAI's stuff is open sourced, etc. Not holding my breath.

Comment Only priority should be more users (Score 1) 55

Firefox is nearing irrelevance given its "marketshare" - it's in the low single digits, between Edge and Opera. Not great. See: https://gs.statcounter.com/bro...

More and more websites are simply just Chrome compatible, and everything else can screw off. This isn't going to change unless Firefox returns to the double digits.

Comment Re:Pause and out (Score 1) 227

You inspired me to do the same. However, you cannot on Firefox. Even spoofing the user agent identification doesn't work - you just get a broken page. This should say a lot about the current state of things.

So yeah, i fired up Chromium just to put the pause on. Time to see if I can get my shit from Walmart and Target instead.

Slashdot Top Deals

Air pollution is really making us pay through the nose.

Working...