Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Evolving Standards (Score 1) 711

Your probably right, but the problem could easily be solved by adding illegal photos to the mix. If the examiner correctly classifies all the test cases, then their classification of the image being tested is probably accurate, if not, then their interpretation differs from legal precedent and their conclusion can be disregarded.

This seams like the way to go IMO.

Comment Re:Cheating AI (Score 1) 378

I would agree - to a degree. To me, an AI should be as smart as possible (even if superhumanly so - if I wanted a human opponent, I'd go to a gaming club), but should do so on no more information than a human player would have

As much as I agree, I'm confident that developers don't just give their AI's Omniscient features because they think players will prefer them that way. Mirroring how a human controls their character is usually just too computationally expensive to be viable. It's orders of magnitude simpler to just start with an AI that knows everything, then add enough human like defects to make it beatable. With that said, if these defects are added tactfully and aren't too buggy, the resulting AI's can be nearly as realistic as AI's that only have access to information a player would have, while not requiring all the computation.

For instance, say a player ambushes an AI from behind. It's alot simpler to just make an AI occasionally shoot wildly instead of turning straight to the player then it is to have them approximate their enemy's location via sound and turn in the direction the AI deemes most likely to result in their fov crossing the threat, before shooting for its last few seconds of life at whatever its reflexive observation decides is most likely to be the threat.

Comment Re:Practical implications? (Score 2, Informative) 242

Of course I didn't read TFA, but it doesn't sound like this exploit has shown up in any malware yet. At this point the potential for attack has just been demonstrated.

A cording to some other commenters, the exploit code must run in ring 0, so you already have to be rooted for it to work. In a nutshell, this vulnerability can't be used to infect your OS in the first place, but it can potentially make detection and removal near impossible.

Comment Re:Denver uninstalled their cameras (Score 1) 740

Where do you think that money comes from? Without insurance, individuals run the risk of incurring damages that exceed what they can afford, but insured individuals still have to pay significantly more on average, since the money for all the "flesh-and-blood rig" repair still comes from the insured, just not directly, and with a large dividend taken off for the insurer.

Comment Re:Side effect (Score 1) 740

If I hadn't already posted I'd mod you up.

This seams so obvious, at very least fine money should be pooled nationally and distributed according to safety statistics or something like that.

The only result of giving fine money to cities is pressure to give out as many tickets as possible, even safety has become a secondary to this.

Comment Re:Denver uninstalled their cameras (Score 0) 740

I am all for EVERYONE having auto insurance. I don't want you rear ending me and destroying my car and possibly hurting me and my family and then have to pay for everything myself because you are a jobless bum.

In turn, I would also like to know I can rear end you and not loose my house and retirement account paying for your bills.

There's no such thing as a free lunch. All insurance does is provide you with an extended payment plan (with terrific overhead) to pay for the accident's you may, or may not have. This makes some sense for liability insurance, since drivers don't really have a choice of who they get hit by. But statistically, most drivers would be better off skipping any extra insurance and using some of the money to keep an emergency fund from which to pay for unforeseen repairs.

Comment Re:Patent sucks (Score 1) 196

I don't think that's really the the point. The patent system isn't about making inventors money, its about providing them a monetary incentive for invention. As long as the potential for profit is there to be chased it doesn't really matter who gets it (within reason of course).

Comment Re:Windows Users Beware... (Score 1) 685

If I go onto a Disney children's forum and post nothing but swear words, and Disney deletes it, is that censorship too?

Yes, that's exactly what it is.

In such a case, it would probably be reasonable, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still the obstruction of ones speech by another, whether you agree with the speaker has nothing to do with it.

Comment Re:Three options (Score 1) 1032

Do you have a reliable source for that?

Last year our neighbors cat had kittens, one of which my family ended up with. When we got her, she wasn't old enough to stand. Even with a bowl of food always available in the corner, and canned food from time to time, she kills mice on a regular basis.

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't hit the keys so hard, it hurts.

Working...