Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - 6 month subscription of Pandora One at 46% off. ×

Comment Shackleton circus (Score 0) 174

"Somebody has decided to create this cut-down, using only the sections of The Gathering Clouds that discuss the difficulties faced, not the positive ways they were addressed and overcome - which are also covered in this and other featurettes."

When BANA books its annual shindig at a charming convention center catered by the Willy Wonka Chocolate Corporation with an entertainment package featuring a human volleyball act by the Ethiopian Cirque du Soleil, I too would probably look more at the original decision making than the food-oriented heroics induced.

BANA = Bulimia Anorexia Nervosa Association

I can see it now.

Some enterprising greeter saves the day by equipping the Shin Dig Hall entrance booth with 300 complimentary pairs of silicone oven mitts (frantically relabelled to read "size 3/4/5" with just minutes to spare) and zap straps snug enough to keep them secured to bony wrists until the evening's festivities run to conclusion.

Forever afterwards, the meeting is recalled as the "Silicone Shackleton Saliva Circus".

Comment Re:Re-what? (Score 1) 139

Slashdot is one of the few paces that routinely publishes "summaries" that are 100% content-free. I always marvel at how they do it- you'd think that a stray bit of info would find its way into the summary by chance once in a while but that doesn't seem to be the case here.

It wasn't always like this. Slashdot seems to wield a universal bike shed field only instead of everything tasting like chicken everything tastes like bike shed. Useless summary is the universal chicken sauce of click to view.

Comment meet a lick-bait Milquetoast of metaphor selection (Score 1) 103

Isn't it just perfect to compare the leading top coder to the world's most recognizable figure from team sports?

He first began freaking people out in second grade, at age 8, when he took second place in a major Belarusian coding competition.

So how about Nadia Comaneci?

Comaneci came in 13th in her first Romanian National Championships in 1969, at the age of just 8.

Well, if we eliminate Nadia (either because we can't properly spell her surname on Slashdot, or because none of the 8-digit UIDs know who the fuck she is) then who are we left with, from an individual sport?

I don't think Tiger was ever accused of being perma-virgin material (ditto for Nadal). Pancho Gonzales seems a bit too troubled, but (despite being an elite athlete) he did share the tournaments general disregard for healthy living:

Pancho had no idea how to live or take care of himself. He was a hamburger-and-hot-dog guy to start with and had no concept of diet in training... On the court Gorgo would swig Cokes through a match... Also Gorgo was a pretty heavy cigarette smoker. He had terrible sleeping habits made even worse by the reality of a tour.

So I'm going to have to go with Rod Laver, the most impressive specimen most people who use the internet have barely heard of.

Laver was very quick and had a strong left forearm.

(I tried to add the 'c' onto 'lick' but /.'s subject length limit prevented me from doing so.)

Comment Re:That's OK (Score 2) 85

I was thinking I might read this book. Then I looked up the authors (you left out National Post columnist Andrew Coyne). I still might read this book, though a freshly Windexed critical lens.

I only had to read a few of his pieces on supply management (which I know something about) to discover that Coyne has a few things clear in his head.

Basically, he's a class act with the framing effect.

I won't bore people with the gospel according to Daniel Kahneman. Instead we'll ignore the eminent literature and just cut to the chase.

Here's how it works in practice. You start talking about "the consumer" (embedded in hot-button phrases such as "if politician X really cared about the consumer"—magic tricks always work best with a flourish of misdirection) and everyone automatically puts on their "good consumer" face, which for carnivores, is bringing home the bacon at the best possible price. Seriously, no-one wants to be left off Santa Claus's "good consumer" list. So it's immediately clear that Canadian consumers want American prices, right?

How about we start the conversation differently?

Who here kicks their dog? Who here would use an electric cattle prod to cut another $0.02 of the price of sirloin steak? This time the reaction is a little different—no-one wants to make Santa's permanent record under "cruelty to animals".

So where's the conflict? The conflict here is that these are the same fucking people.

Call them a consumer, they want a low price. Mention the dog beater down the street, then they give a shit about animal welfare, even if it hits them in the pocket book (to a degree).

The Canadian system is pretty much the worst system for achieving the lowest possible price. The American system is pretty much the worst system for achieving animal welfare and certain other controls over the quality of the food supply. (Mention listeria or ebola and you'll quickly discover that all the same people want to make yet a third Santa Claus list—just so long as we're on whatever list Santa is presently examining, it's all good).

The American system isn't even a "free" market by how the average person images any kind of "free" thing anywhere actually works.

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Chickens

Before anyone dumps me on their mental list of the short moment, I found the following equally interesting:

Greg Page on Food, Agriculture, and Cargill

It's a complex world out there. Even Harper deserves a critic with two eyes.

Comment Re:Gotta love neural networks! (Score 5, Insightful) 95

so the question is, how can we get computers to know which branches are ok to prune, and which aren't?

Sigh. The reason that humans experts are no longer competitive is because human experts prune where Deep Ply fears to trust static analysis. Pitted against a relentless algorithm which resists intuitive pruning, grand-master human pruning leaks a full pawn or two per game.

It's damn amazing how well grand-master level pruning actually works, but don't mistake this for flawless chess. Beautiful? Maybe. Flawless? Not even close.

When it was still somewhat competitive between man and machine, the human chess players would think they were pressing an overwhelming advantage, only to discover themselves mired in tiny, unanticipated tactical disadvantages move after move after move after move. "The damn thing keeps finding these fiddling resources!" If you weren't careful, you could easily lose from what had initially appeared to be a won position (and it probably would have been, against a human opponent blind to all those fiddling resources).

The trick for the competitive chess programmer was to achieve the right balance in the static evaluator so that tangible material gains didn't consistently outweigh less tangible advantage of tempo. Matthew Lai in his paper does not seem to grasp this essential trajectory of computer chess. He seems to think it's remarkable that his Oldsmobile displays more rigidity on the impact sled than the lunar lander, when it's pretty clear to everyone else involved that no Oldsmobile ever made was going to win the space race. The ply-based chess engines had their static evaluators hand-tuned by experts over many decades within a space gram clock-cycle budget.

Until he actually defeats all these programs on existing commodity hardware at existing tournament time controls, he's comparing watermelons to kiln-dried coconut flakes.

It's the same problem with new technology. It isn't enough to merely be better in some personally favoured dimension of merit. Your immature new thing has to be better enough to actually pass the mature old thing on its own terms.

Got a better substrate than silicon? Yeah? What's your defect density cranking out 10,000 wafers per month? Oh, you haven't actually developed all that quality-control infrastructure yet, but you figure you can do it at half the price once you work out the final kink from your strained bullerene crystal lattice?

Awesome progress, pal, but I think I'll invest my own Bitcoin elsewhere.

For the record, I've long believed that the trade-off moving from depth to sophistication wouldn't prove particularly steep (for the right sophistication). But any gradient that's a net loss (no matter how small) provides pretty much no immediate competitive incentive for anyone to invest any real effort hoeing that row.

The great thing about neural networks is that they don't actually require much real effort. The machine itself does most of the work in 72 hours. And then what have you got? A RISC chip that never actually kills x86 (because those idiots were busy touting microcosmic instruction set efficiency long after the real game had shifted to streamlining the cache hierarchy, where's there's no low-hanging ideological shortcut to help you overcome the first-mover fat-payroll advantage).

I have seen something else under the sun: The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but sunk cost and legacy happen to them all.

Comment Re:Same reason we're looking for earth-like life (Score 2) 275

This is inordinately difficult, and yet it represents a gap of at most a few SQ points.

Thanks for embedding a bright red hand print on my forehead. You do know that the difference between ice and water is only a few degrees Celsius? We've barely established that cetaceans even have an oral culture with anything in common with pre-historical human oral culture.

For all we know, the phase change to a symbolic written culture just might be the largest singular catastrophe in the standard SQ sequence.

Why why why does this field attract so many extrapolation retards?

Comment Re:I interviewed for a job they not paying mileage (Score 2) 241

How is that practical if the spouse works on the other side of town?

Until we get all the way to xaria law (sharia law for Christians) staying with your current spouse employed on the wrong side of town also counts as a personal preference.

So many things can be fixed once we complete the sharing economy transition to Uber Madison.

Comment the tell-all mood bracelet (Score 1) 34

but do not address possible unsuitable uses, such as for the purposes of employment assessment or insurance premiums

When the day comes that such a thing is invented by sociologists there will surely be a scope-creep coda to the tune of "more research needed" within the vast sphere of human malfeasance.

Just what we need is a technological literature brimming with amateur hand-wringing and armchair ethics. I'd just love to read what Shockley might have written about his invention in the last paragraph of the last page if given a greenish-yellow editorial light to paint the future.

While we're at it, how about some moral footnotes from Fritz Haber?

On 2 May 1915, following an argument with Haber, Clara Immerwahr committed suicide in their garden by shooting herself in the heart with his service revolver.

A sad end, but a fine act of ethical commentary by the first woman to be awarded a doctorate in chemistry in Germany. To think what we might have learned if only she'd been wearing a mood bracelet.

Comment Re:YAY (Score 1) 266

There is NO correlation between one's major, and one's social life.

Source, please? That's a hell of a claim.

There have been numerous studies showing that there are strong correlations between certain MBTI types and certain majors; I'm not saying MBTI is a proxy for "social life", but at least introversion/extroversion play into types of interaction in social life.

Comment Re:She was lucky (Score 1) 139

Usually when presented with this information ...

"Information" is an awfully big word to apply to your chosen narrative tactic.

Rule 34a: if there's a thing, there's straw of the thing.

This can be broadly demonstrated with just two words: straw manginas.


Comment Re:Austrian Machine (Score 4, Informative) 157

A school, I might add, that couldn't even COMPREHEND THE EXISTENCE of stagflation

What do you mean? Keynes modeled stagflation; he didn't use that term, but it's clear that Keynes, and those who studied his work, were aware of the effect of a supply shock on an economy.

The issue with Keynesian policy and stagflation is, given two problems with conflicting resolutions, how do you address both of them?

We now know that tackling them one at a time works. First you address inflation, then you address stagnation. This isn't a weakness of Keynesian theory -- it's validation.

Honesty is for the most part less profitable than dishonesty. -- Plato