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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Or.... (Score 5, Interesting) 118

by JanneM (#49772627) Attached to: Leaked Document Shows Europe Would Fight UK Plans To Block Porn

You follow the local accepted customs, whether you think they are ridiculous or not.

Let's take a parallel situation: In some countries, such as Australia I believe, you wear your shoes indoor. In some countries, such as Japan or my native Sweden, you always take them off.

If you come to either country, would you find it acceptable to basically say "In Australia we always wear our shoes indoor. If you want to take them off, no issue. Why should I be forced to take them off?". Then proceed to try to walk in wearing your outdoor shoes? Would you be surprised if you were (politely in Japan, not so politely in Sweden) thrown out as a result?

Comment: Re:"Easy to read" is non-sense (Score 1) 409

by shutdown -p now (#49770393) Attached to: The Reason For Java's Staying Power: It's Easy To Read

I disagree. "Lisp syntax" is almost a misnomer, as there's so little of it. Pretty much the only thing you're guaranteed is that () are for grouping, and spaces are separators (and even that is not necessarily true in CL). Everything beyond that is up to the DSL in question, and people can and do get overly "creative" with the syntax such that it's not simple or obvious to read at all.

Comment: Re:Funny, that spin... (Score 1) 386

by LateArthurDent (#49767811) Attached to: What AI Experts Think About the Existential Risk of AI

Question: What role do people who think that AI research is dangerous hold in the field of AI research?

Answer: None...because regardless of their qualifications, they wouldn't further the progress of something they think is a very, very bad idea.

Asking AI experts whether or not they think AI research is a bad idea subjects your responses to a massive selection bias.

Yes. Nobody who worked in the Manhattan Project had any reservations whatsoever about building the atomic bomb, right?

Experts work in fields they're not 100% comfortable with all the time. The actual physicists that worked on the bomb understood exactly what the dangers were. The people looking at it from the outside are the ones coming up with the bogus dangers. You hear things like, "the scientists in the Manhattan project were so irresponsible they thought the first bomb test could ignite the atmosphere, but went ahead with it anyway." No, the scientists working on it thought of that possibility, performed calculations the definitely proved it wasn't anywhere near a possibility and then moved on with it. People outside the field are the ones that go, "The LHC could create a black hole that will destroy us all!" The scientists working on know the Earth is struck with more powerful cosmic rays than the LHC can produce regularly, so there's no danger.

It's just that they don't work in the field of AI, so therefore they must not have any inkling whatsoever as to what they're talking about.

Which is a 100% true statement. They're very smart people, but they don't know what they're talking about in regards to AI research, and are coming up with bogus threats that most AI experts agree aren't actually a possibility.

Comment: Re:Java vs. C# amuses me (Score 1) 409

by shutdown -p now (#49757271) Attached to: The Reason For Java's Staying Power: It's Easy To Read

Java anon classes aren't quite the same because of the lack of "var" or similar - so you can implement interface members or override base class members, but you cannot introduce new members that can then be referenced outside of that object.

OTOH, C# anon classes don't support base types...

Comment: Re:It's not that great (Score 1) 409

by shutdown -p now (#49754567) Attached to: The Reason For Java's Staying Power: It's Easy To Read

I'm not necessarily saying that begin..end is better, just that it's an obvious alternative. Personally, I don't mind {}, though I think that it's really redundant, and the proper way is to treat everything as an expression, in which case semicolon becomes a sequence operator (i.e. "a;b" means "evaluate a, then throw the result away and evaluate b" - like comma in C), and you just use parens to group things where needed.

Comment: Re: Yes & the sheer amount of existing code/f (Score 1) 409

by shutdown -p now (#49753297) Attached to: The Reason For Java's Staying Power: It's Easy To Read

Yes, but you have a very narrow view, here. If I change the name of 'x' in the class, I have to change it /everywhere/, unless the language has a way for me to say "by the way, if someone assigns to 'x', really assign to 'y' instead.

And how is this different from setX?

Comment: Re:I don't know why people still say Java is slow. (Score 1) 380

by etinin (#49750511) Attached to: How Java Changed Programming Forever
Well, I used to think that too. In old times I'd agree 100% with you. I'm not gonna defend VB6, that was just a joke. But nowadays, javascript can run a lot faster than many compiled languages. You see things like Node.js which show that javascript engines have been insanely optimized, largely due to the languages (over)use on the internet. On my other post, I mentioned that Google made a demo using Dart (which is just a language which transcompiles to javascript, like CoffeeScript or TypeScript), rendering entire frames in 1.2ms. I am as much as baffled as you, but Google has found it easier to have low latency APIs for well-written JavaScript than with some Dalvik optimization.
My good advice is: it's hard for people with a compiled language background, including me, to accept that, but JS is very good for many things which we couldn't dream of 5 years ago, encroaching even C territory.

"For the man who has everything... Penicillin." -- F. Borquin