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


Forgot your password?

Comment: you are all idiots (Score 1) 324

by Dr Max (#48871697) Attached to: What Will Google Glass 2.0 Need To Actually Succeed?
We don't really care about the camera, other than its drama all the news people can carry on about. Its the form factor that is the problem; having one stupid little lens in the corner of your eye that you can fit barely any information on it is useless. Give us holodeck like AR/VR (dual see through lenses) and people wont care about the camera, just like they don't care that your smartphone has a camera on it, because of all the awesome stuff you can do with it.

Comment: Singularity (Score 1) 71

by Dr Max (#47479341) Attached to: Interviews: Ask Dr. Andy Chun About Artificial Intelligence
Do you belive we will make an artificial intelligence that can do everything a human can do, including learning new tasks it wasn't specifically programed to do? If so how long do you think it will take, and what do you think is the mechanism that will be used (eg nerual network programing, albeit on custom chips)?

Comment: Re:Anyone who... (Score 1) 117

not necessarily stupid, but gullible and trusting of people/businesses in certain positions (they figure they must be good if they got to where they did, and if they wern't, some one good and pure would stop them). How many people command much more respect in many more areas than they deserve, just because they have been in some blockbuster movies; in the last american elections statistical people figured out if geroge clooney made a speach in california, 60% of women over a certain age would change their vote for him (in whatever direction was wanted).

Comment: Re:If... (Score 1) 117

it may look like that when they consistently say that the US is evil, but it actully just turns out to be a coincidence, and most of what america does is evil. If they spent 10% of the trillions they spend on killing people and controlling people, on actully helping people, then a lot less people would hate them.

Comment: Re:Standalone? (Score 1) 56

by Dr Max (#47428373) Attached to: The Future of Wearables: Standalone, Unobtrusive, and Everywhere
nice work completely missing the point, then making up your own to support your own notions. You would make a good politition. The phone works just as well the phone on my old smartphone (maybe even easier as i can l link my hands behind my head to take a call) wearing it upside down is no issue because it just as easy to use, and its saphire screen dosn't scratch. It tells me the time much better than my smartphone did (and its better than a bunch of watches, because its readable in any light, even if i do have to press a button). Sure it might not suit you if you are writing 50 plus messages, want to play all the apps, and watch movies, but i have many devices that do all of that stuff, much better than a smart phone will. Its hard for me because i'm so far ahead of the curve; and by that i don't mean i bought the first iphone, i mean i bought a smartphone 8 years before the iphone came out (which is possibly why i'm bored with them now), the same time you lot were all saying "my nokia 5110 is the greatest because it lasts all week and can play snake". So i don't think i will convice you now, but in 5 years time when you look down at your standalone smart watch phone please think of me (and keep an open mind when i'm having my optic nerve hacked).

Comment: Re:Standalone? (Score 1) 56

by Dr Max (#47421975) Attached to: The Future of Wearables: Standalone, Unobtrusive, and Everywhere
i've got a standalone smart watch phone (omate true smart). i get almost 2 days of use, but i'm not a heavy user (i would get 3-4 out of smart phone). Works fine as a phone, although i have it upside down so i can easily put it to me ear. typing can be a little tricky sometimes, but the flesky keyboard helps out a lot. i enjoy not having to remember my phone or have it jumping around in my pocket.

Comment: Re:Memory is non-lossy? Research suggests otherwis (Score 1) 426

by Dr Max (#46956285) Attached to: Mathematical Model Suggests That Human Consciousness Is Noncomputable
"You probably have thousands of different individual memories of your phone number and address." that doesn't sound like an efficient way to remember few digits. Surely it just reassurers the original memory or a makes a stronger new replacement memory.

Comment: Re:Memories do decay (Score 1) 426

by Dr Max (#46956143) Attached to: Mathematical Model Suggests That Human Consciousness Is Noncomputable
some of your first memories might be fairly complete, especially if you use parts of those memories, to remember memories further in the future. Like if you lived in the same house for quite a while when a child, you aren't going to make new memories of the same house repeatedly, just anything special that happened in it along the way. like how your vision uses past images to fill in the gaps of what your not actively looking at but is still in your field of view.

Comment: Re:Ghost in the machine? (Score 1) 426

by Dr Max (#46955723) Attached to: Mathematical Model Suggests That Human Consciousness Is Noncomputable
They are using a completely different model of memory than what we use, its not a gap they have shown, its an entirely different and broken system (at that scale). It's like trying to simulate the universe with an earth central theory, then claiming its impossible when it doesn't work out. "elaborate version of the 19th century mechanical turk until we get more physical insights", like only remembering small details, that you can use to figure out the rest of the details, within a tolerated error margin (completely different to computer data compression, but requires problem solving).

"The pyramid is opening!" "Which one?" "The one with the ever-widening hole in it!" -- The Firesign Theatre