Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: My favorite (Score 1) 211 211

My personal favorite: Random "Sleep(10);" inserted in the code to "fix" race conditions... In my experience, there is about 10% of SW engineers that are actually good at what they do, 80% that basically suck, and at the opposite end of the spectrum, the remaining 10% are basically borderline retarded.

Comment: Latency (Score 1) 239 239

I wonder what kind of latency they're getting for the controls. Seems like you'd want roundtrip latency to be under 50ms, which best case with speed of light transmission, line-of-sight controls and infinite transmission rate would correspond roughly to a limit of 4000 miles away for the operator... (probably much less in practice since you'd need to account for the time to send visual feedback presumably as a compressed video stream)

Comment: Re:good summary (Score 1) 337 337

There is no recursion because the context is undefinable, "Who created the creator" is a question without meaning, you might as well ask "when purple the creator",

Huh? Sounds like a faith-based argument to me -> it's a slippery slope from that to talking snakes :)

Comment: Re:good summary (Score 1) 337 337

So here's what I say: Consciousness cannot arise from an abstract function. Or any kind of function or mathematics or set of commands, or algorythm.

'consciousness' is an inherently **human** characteristic...the perception of it is entirely dependent upon humans

That's a pretty bold statement. My position is that the laws that govern the universe (whatever they may be), do lead to consciousness (since we're here and conscious). And I do believe that these laws (again whatever they may be) are ultimately themselves an abstract construct that form our reality (but the only difference between abstract and reality is that "physical reality" is equivalent to "perceived abstract")

I guess it ultimately depends on the definition of 'consciousness'. I see it more as the simple definition (ala Julian Jaynes), of 'capable of introspection', eg: we're not always conscious when awake. At some point this is really purely a philosophical matter: none of it makes a difference in how we live our lives, but I somehow find the abstract very satisfying as it solves the question of "why is there something rather than nothing" without resorting to the anthropomorphic principle.

Max Tegmark recently published a book on the Mathematical Universe, which is along the same lines, though I like to differentiate "abstract" from "mathematical" (as the latter seems like an unnecessary restriction)

Comment: Re:good summary (Score 1) 337 337

My problem with the simulation argument is that you then have to explain the existence of a separate universe in which the simulation is running, so it's doesn't really explain anything (recursive logic), in a way similar to monotheistic religions (A lot of it seems like wishful thinking on the part of software engineers). The interesting part about the general abstract function concept is that the universe would automatically *have* to "exist" if it is possible for consciousness to arise from an abstract function, as the function's existence is perceived by itself.

Comment: Re:good summary (Score 1) 337 337

It may all just be an abstract function (no real "creation" event per say), in which case the only reason it's not perceived as abstract as say the Mandelbrot fractal is because of consciousness being part of the function (real from the point of view of the conscious entities in the function). In a sense, the universe was abstract until we became conscious, which funnily enough seemed to have occurred about 4000 years ago (you would think that religious folks would jump on something like this, but no, they seem to prefer sticking with their talking snakes story)

Comment: Depends if you care about the end result (Score 1) 356 356

My experience is that any project is as good as the best member of the team, eg: 100 monkeys will not produce something higher quality than a single monkey, but throw a single smart dude in the mix and things will look a lot different, though the smart dude may get tired of doing all the work of 100 monkeys and may develop an attitude (he might need more than a few extra bananas to stick around)

Comment: Re:Decoding is simple (Score 1) 141 141

How to compress the content *with good quality within a limited computation time* is the real challenge (otherwise, yes, you can just take a MPEG-2 encoder and stick a HEVC CABAC syntax at the end and you have a valid HEVC bitstream with good perf but crappy compression efficiency compared to H.264)

As of next Thursday, UNIX will be flushed in favor of TOPS-10. Please update your programs.

Working...