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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment A Different Recent Experience (Score 1) 109

Scene: a queue of customers in a shop. Customer at the head of the queue with a total of $19.10, hands the cashier a $20 note to pay. There is no till just an electronic card reader and a cash drawer.

A frown appears on the cashier's face as the sudden realization that skills learned in their "advanced" maths class will now be called on after years of neglect. They reach for the calculator only to remember that the batteries died this morning and nobody has had a chance to replace them. Concentrating hard finally an epiphany - $19 is just $1 less than $20 so they quickly hand the customer a dollar.

But no, the customer hands it back saying this is too much change. Panic sets in as the cashier realizes that they had forgotten the decimal place! How can they be expected to do university-level maths? They don't have a maths degree! Faint wisps of steam rise from their ears as mathematical machinery deep in their brain rumbles into action straining against the buildup of forgotten Tiktok videos and What's App messages. Finally, seemingly from nowhere comes the answer - it's 90 cents! With a flash of relief the cashier opens the cash draw only to be confronted with 25, 10 and 5 cent coins and a new seemingly impossible puzzle of how to choose the right coins to make up 90 cents....

My takeaway is that given the wonerful level fo maths education we now seem to have, sadly even cash transactions require working technology today.

Comment Re:This is why (Score 4, Informative) 49

The argument against SMS is way overblown. For it to work an attacker would not only have to gain access to your account details but also spoof your phone on the phone network. Possible? Yes, likely? Unless a nation state is after you - no.

Actually, it's a pretty common strategy for breaking into the accounts of celebrities. It usually involves convincing someone who works for one of the phone companies that you've gotten a new phone, i.e. they already have enough personal info from you to impersonate you to the phone company. And then after that, all your accounts fall like a house of cards.

Comment Re:Only 20% for human doctors (Score 1) 56

I only skimmed the article, but am I the only person who thinks that, if we had a situation or field of diagnosis where doctors were only getting it right 20% of the time, we would throw some research/education/analysis at it? Because 20% correct (or 80% incorrect) seems kinda concerning and I would think would lead to a lot of brouhaha or lawsuits? Maybe it's just me.

I'm assuming this is based on edge cases, e.g. medical images where cancer was just barely starting to appear, situations where lupus is mistaken for rheumatoid arthritis, etc., in which case the human rate of correct diagnosis could indeed be very low, precisely because they were chosen from cases where humans had made mistakes before.

If that is the case, then the question becomes whether the model is over-trained on these edge cases and would generate false positives, would miss obvious diagnoses, etc.

Comment Re:Amazon (Score 1) 55

You're arguing with someone who's given you millions of dollars over decades about a single 2-dollar missing component on a massive order they made? You're insane. They're just going to go elsewhere. It's not even worth the time on the phone call to argue it.

You're assuming companies don't understand that. What you're missing is that the companies that do this tend to be the companies that have their customers over a barrel. You have a choice in where to buy random stuff online. You don't have much choice in airlines. Only a few companies go to both of the airports that you need to fly between. They can screw you as much as they want, and unless you're prepared to lawyer up, you're gonna accept whatever they give you and like it, or you're not gonna fly, because they're all approximately equally horrible.

Ultimately, the reason for bad customer service is that the customer has no power. Short of a class action, you're not going to change their behavior, and they usually write their contracts to make class actions hard. And governments are thoroughly in the pockets of these big corporations, so they're not going to do anything about the problems, either. And there's no competition, because a few big companies have cornered the market, in part because of high cost of entering the market, which in turn, is often because of high regulatory burden. But those regulations are essential for preventing other problems, e.g. safety issues, so removing the regulations won't help, either.

The right fix is to separate the customer-facing organization from the safety-critical organization. Have a few companies that own fleets of airplanes, and a hundred companies that rent planes from those companies and fly them and sell tickets. With that organizational model, all of these problems go away, because the customer-facing orgs have a low barrier to entry, so you'll tend to end up with companies competing to provide the best service at the best price, with some focusing on higher-tier service, and come focusing on lower prices, but everybody knowing that if they screw up, you'll go with one of a hundred other companies. And you'll get a higher diversity of routes, and you'll have aggregators combining routes from multiple airlines, etc.

Unfortunately, we won't see this, because regulators aren't interested in breaking up oligopolies these days.

Comment Re:Makes sense. (Score 1) 35

Yeah, I once looked into them and got sticker shock :P That said, the prices are coming down. The research seems to continue to show that they're safe for humans (although from the data I've seen I doubt they're safe for houseplants; their cuticle is much thinner than our skin). But for us... it can't penetrate dead skin, and while the outer layers of our eyes are alive, the cells there are constantly being shed and replaced.

Slashdot Top Deals

Almost anything derogatory you could say about today's software design would be accurate. -- K.E. Iverson

Working...