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


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Nostalgia (Score 1) 345

Definitely nostalgia. I've flown in 747s and other than the fact that they are impressively large, they are no more pleasant to fly in that any other large plane I've been in, particularly if you are in the middle seat in the 5 seat row.

I agree, but the newer ones, even the 747-400 (I think) don't have the five seat row anymore, they've made it a four seat row and it's considerably more comfortable for the difference.

They aren't going away for a while yet. I would be very surprised if some weren't still in service for passenger flights 10-15 years from now. Eventually we'll go to something else but it won't be tomorrow.

Sure, but they won't be nearly as common as they used to be. I mainly fly Air New Zealand now between Auckland and Los Angeles (being the only airline that still offers a direct route) and they've replaced all their 747s on that route with 777s, so I highly doubt I'll get to fly in one again myself.

Comment I'm gonna miss the 747 (Score 2) 345

Growing up I would go on an occasional flight with my parents, but because they were always short-haul local flights they were on a 737 or DC10 or similar. The 747 was always that huge plane I saw at the airport with that iconic top deck and I always wanted to fly in one.

Later I did finally get the opportunity to fly in a 747, and you might say that cattle-class is cattle class no matter what airplane you're flying in, but I always enjoyed flying in a 747 more than other aircraft, probably just for the nostalgia factor.

I do understand why the plane is going into retirement. Airlines don't want them anymore, they are too heavy and use more fuel than more modern planes and the large passenger capacity means that the airline has to fill more seats to make a profit on a flight, hence the reason that the slightly smaller 777 is more popular with airlines for long haul nowadays, and the big plane sales are going to the more modern airbus A380 and 787s now.

That said, I will always have a bit of a place in my heart for the 747 and will miss having the opportunity to fly in them.

Comment Re:Hmm... (Score 1) 1094

This is why you do a minimum wage increase, because it affects a pay increase for the vast majority of workers across the board, not just a few select people.

The cost to businesses should be made up by the increased sales that they get due to the higher spending power of the population in general.

When minimum wage goes up it is customary to increase the wages proportionately for your higher-paid workers as well, not to do so is akin to a pay cut for them. So this will have a positive affect on the majority of higher-paid workers, not just minimum wage earners.

Comment Re:Hmm... (Score 4, Informative) 1094

Except that there's other factors in play as well. A minimum wage increase will give the bottom 60+% of workers more spending power, this increased spending will boost the income of local shops which will help to improve the local economy.

This is economics 101, for an economy to work people have to spend money, the more money that people spend the better the economy works. Increasing the spending power of the vast majority of local residents is a very good thing for the local economy.

Comment Re:Not sure there's a case (Score 1) 257

I think there would only be a case if someone signed a legally binding non-disclosure agreement prior to sharing the secrets that got published and then only against the person who signed the agreement (whether that be the publisher or someone else who leaked them). If no such agreement was signed then I don't think there's any recourse possible. Of course IANAL and this is just speculation.

Comment They thought this would work? (Score 2, Insightful) 93

So let me get this straight. At the start of the game the computer calls all bets and then it lets the other players train it and change their strategy to take advantage of that training? And they thought this would beat a seasoned professional poker player?

This is basically a beginning poker player (fresh blood) but who is more consistent. A pro will absolutely clobber it.

Comment Re:Yes. What do you lose? But talk to lawyer first (Score 5, Informative) 734

I'm a US citizen living abroad with a dual-citizen son. I can tell you that there are advantages and disadvantages. The benefits are that they can travel freely to the US and live and work in the US without having to obtain a green card. Also they can travel on either of their pasports largely depending on which country they travel to and they will qualify to receive assistance from any US consulate or embassy when overseas. They will be legally entitled to vote in any federal elections in the US when they turn 18, although if they have never actually lived in the US in practice they can't because no state will allow them to register to vote in that particular state.

The disadvantages are that when they start working they will always have to file a tax return in the US, regardless of where they actually live. For the most part they will receive an exemption for US taxes for any income they receive while working overseas with the exception of self-employment income, if they are legally self-employed then they will have to pay self-employment tax in the US in addition to any tax they pay overseas (some, but not all foreign countries have a self-employment double-tax agreement with the US, though which mitigates this). For me to avoid this tax I had to form a foreign corporation and work for that corporation so I'm not legally self-employed.

Another disadvantage is that they will be required to register for the US selective service when they turn 18 (the draft). There has not actually been a draft since the Vietnam war, though, so this is not likely to become an issue, but it is certainly something to consider.

As stated by the parent they can always renounce citizenship later and avoid the tax and selective service issues, but this is expensive (about $2500USD).

Also speaking of expense, having to file two tax returns means additional accountants fees and additional paperwork, especially if the country you live in has a different tax year than the US (which is very common). Having to maintain two passports is another extra cost as well, but not very expensive when you spread the fees out over the life of the passport.

All of the above said, I made an informed decision to register my own son as a US citizen and I do agree that the benefits outweigh the down sides, but it's certainly not a "nothing to loose" situation, there are downsides and it pays to make an informed decision with full knowledge of them.

Comment Re:Rock paper scissors (Score 1) 340

The poker bot, as with any poker player will have a strategy and play a certain way under certain circumstances. The way to oppose it is to learn how the bot plays under those circumstances, exploit it to learn what is in the bot's hand in the initial betting rounds (pre-flop, flop and turn) and then use your river bet to make the bot react in a way that is favourable to you. The above is actually rather simplified, but even a "perfect" bot cannot play optimal poker against a foe that alters his game to take advantage of the bot's strategy.

The above, of course is made on the information in the parent article that the bot plays a "static fixed strategy" and it makes its decision based on a complex table. This means that the bot will never vary its game to try to fool the opponent into making the wrong decision, it will always make the "perfect" decision as determined by the table.

So yes, I do believe this bot can be beaten. It is likely little better than if it were to make it's decision based on calculating the odds of it having a winning hand.

The computer scientists who created the bot admit they are not poker players, this in itself is telling.

The bomb will never go off. I speak as an expert in explosives. -- Admiral William Leahy, U.S. Atomic Bomb Project