Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Prep for the CompTIA A+ certification exam. Save 95% on the CompTIA IT Certification Bundle ×

Comment Re:Core code in C/C++. UI code in Obj-C, Swift, Ja (Score 1) 72

Perhaps you're dense or something because I wasn't referring to writing business logic or network applications. I was referring specifically to what games have to do to avoid GCs in Java. The context is extremely clear. And yes I've developed lots of Java software.

Comment Re:3D... (Score 1) 81

A high res is probably most useful for VR. I have a fairly high DPI OnePlus phone and when I plop it in a cardboard headset I not only see the pixels, I can see between the pixels. 4K means 2K to each eye and is probably dense enough to overcome the effect in VR. I wouldn't be surprised if Sony has other plans for the disply than just a phone. Maybe it'll end up in VR headsets.

In every day use in a phone however it's a waste of time and probably just taxes the phone far more than necessary for minimal difference to the end user experience.

Comment I can think of only one use for this (Score 1) 81

4K might be useful if you were using Google Cardboard where pixels get magnified quite significantly. Maybe that's what Sony ultimately intend to use the screen for in their PS4 VR headset.

Otherwise not so much. It just means the DPI goes into stupid territory and the phone OS ends up having to upscale apps to stop them looking like postage stamps.

Comment Re:Actually, it IS the software's fault (Score 1) 376

It is a good thing that that doesn't actually happen and you are just spouting FUD isn't it?

It's not FUD, it's a realistic appreciation of the intractable problems that self drive cars are faced with and hardly likely to solve in an acceptable way in all circumstances. If you think that's FUD I suggest you look at the history of AI, speech recognition, handwriting recognition, robotics etc. and all the false promises made for those technologies and how far we have to go even today.

Comment Re:I doubt it (Score 1) 52

The only place you might see vehicles in the forseeable future that legally permit drunk / impaired passengers is on closed circuit tracks - airport transfers and such like where the car doesn't even have a wheel. There are far many situations on the open road where a self drive car would screw up or require a human to takeover to seriously contemplate it being legal there any time soon.

Comment Re:I doubt it (Score 1) 52

Golf courses, parks, it doesn't make a damned bit of difference. Compared to an open road it is a trivial problem and hardly transferable. And yes carts can follow predefined route even in open spaces - arrange the map as a hierarchical series of graphs that allow a cart to calculate a route from one node / graph to another. Doesn't matter if the path a is windy or not, doesn't matter if it's a fairway or a road.

Comment Re:Not normal driving. (Score 1) 376

Look up what intractable means. I could program a perfect cross-the-broken-lights algorithm that would utterly fail if one of the other vehicles was not autonomous, or was a bus, or if there was a lane out, or if there was a cop in the road directing traffic, or if there is a crazy person directing traffic, or if there is an emergency vehicle coming, or if one direction has natural right of way, or if the conditions are icy, or if the cross roads has some peculiar filter lanes, or if there were people waiting to cross, or, or, or. And that even assumes the car has a way of figuring the lights are out in the first place, as opposed to only being turned on during certain hours of the day, or obscured by snow or whatever.

That's the problem and it's not just a case of "if you can't figure out these problems". The problems are intractable.

Comment I doubt it (Score 3, Insightful) 52

Driving on a golf course is a relatively trivial problem to solve compared to driving on a road. Low speed, predefined routes, predictable conditions. Aside from putting some sensors on the cart to stop it running into something or someone, some basic navigation functionality and what to do in low power / fault scenarios it doesn't have a huge amount of complexity to worry about.

A more pertinent question is why is this being done at all. Are people so fat and lazy that they can't even drive a golf cart now?

Comment Re:Not normal driving. (Score 1) 376

It's not just drivers. Sharing the road requires cooperation with drivers, cyclist, pedestrians, traffic cops, workmen and anybody else you may have cause to interact with during a drive. How does a self drive car interact with any of them?

A human can wave the pedestrian across the road at a junction - the self drive car will either sit there like an ass or plough through even if it's obvious to a human drive to yield.

If humans encounter a set of crossroad lights that are out they'll tend to order and arrange passage across the lights in an orderly fashion based on who arrive first and so on. If a cop is there, they'll obey the cop's signals. The autonomous car would just sit their like an ass or nudge out into the junction regardless of the consequences.

At the very least autonomous cars need an unimpaired human to extricate them from situations like this. This puts paid to some of the nonsense that people associate with self drive vehicles - no they're not going to drive somebody home who is asleep / drunk, no they're not going to park themselves down the road and come back when called. It's too easy for them to be confused and too easy for them to be griefed.

Comment Re:Actually, it IS the software's fault (Score 1) 376

Or SAFE and incredibly dumb. e.g. continuously hitting the brakes or crawling because the sensor is confused by snow or leaves. Aside from being annoying to the passenger it might cause other motorists to take greater risks by overtaking my brain-damaged vehicle.

Comment Re:Actually, it IS the software's fault (Score 1) 376

And the chances are it will be programmed in a way that is dangerous. It's not hard to conjure up scenarios where a car could do something incredibly dumb that puts the occupant or somebody else in danger. e.g. autonomous vehicles might be programmed to stop when there is an obstacle in the way which will put passengers at an increased risk of being robbed because its far easier to make an autonomous vehicle stop than one with a driver.

Comment Re:Core code in C/C++. UI code in Obj-C, Swift, Ja (Score 1) 72

Not in the cases you mentioned earlier, high performance numerics and games. I've worked in both areas. To be fair I am assuming you are not including casual video games.

The general advice for writing games in Java is avoid creating temporary objects - use long lived objects, don't create objects in the scope of a loop, avoid for-each mechanisms (temporary iterators), reuse buffers and arrays, store as much state in values and buffers instead of objects and only release during transitions (game over, new level) etc.

Everything to reduce the duration and frequency of GCs in the middle of the action. Java GC works fine in general but it's very disruptive for the game world to freeze for a split second in a game because of it.

A right is not what someone gives you; it's what no one can take from you. -- Ramsey Clark