Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Calculate you before you (Score 1) 279

by ememisya (#49328793) Attached to: Steve Wozniak Now Afraid of AI Too, Just Like Elon Musk
Take a look at few AI examples out today on binary processing, like ( It's almost comprehensible because the truth is, we don't even have the computing power to calculate all possible chess moves on that game alone today. So if I was to try and process what you might say next before you saying based on all available data about you, I still wouldn't have the processing power to make sense of all of it. You can have a human being venture a guess, and even they would have a few mistakes, which brings me to the point. If fourier processing can indeed calculate exponentially faster, it has the potential to surpass even the human brain, which wastes a lot of cycles on things like staying alive. This is very scary because a global leader could simply force decisions on people based on their data and none would be the wiser. You can argue with a human, and they'll get tired, a computer won't. It would be the most disruptive technology of the era if indeed it can be realized and improved. Seeing as how IBM and the like are calling for the end of the silicon era, this will be a sight to see.

Comment: Re:How can voters 'approve' of secret programs? (Score 2) 57

by ememisya (#49291737) Attached to: UK's GCHQ Admits To Using Vulnerabilities To Hack Target Systems
Well, I think you should complain to your local government about your government spying on you... So yea... I personally believe Abraham Lincoln had a great quote when he said, "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time." That is the post-Snowden era. But the million dollar question is, "Who can do what about it?" and the answer is obvious, it's here to stay because no one person can do anything about it. The technical reason is one of liability. When something bad happens, you don't want to hear, "Sorry, the data was encrypted.", or "We didn't collect everything because of privacy or constitutional reasons." A technical person told me, "We don't care about what porn you watch, it's just not what we do." But it is also interesting that a person out there does know what type of porn you watch, and again if one was to specifically categorize porn DNS not to be monitored, that's what all the hackers would use knowing it's not being monitored, that's the argument there. Another thing is, there is no monetary incentive on the side of privacy it would seem. There is a ton of money to be made from data of people. So that's where the world stands right now. Government's argument would be, "We've been watching you this whole time, it's just that you didn't know it, so shut up, forget about it, and we can go back to way things were." Concerned citizen argument is, "The authors of the government promised that it would work to make it impossible to have a system in which all your actions are recorded without your knowledge." It's pretty similar to stalking. Only time will tell.

Comment: Who profits? (Score 0) 123

by ememisya (#49253581) Attached to: Mass Surveillance: Can We Blame It All On the Government?
If I could have the data of just the blood pressure and/or body temperature of all living things in an area, I could get a pretty good idea of who's scared, who's calm, real-time. The entirety of data Google owns is enough to replay a collective personality just by the relation of data structures. Training unique characteristics of images with associated words for example gives way to Google image recognition. What does it take to transcribe audio? We already have that in just about every car now. Information + Processing + Communication = Profit.

TL;DR Everyone who conducts mass surveillance, profits. It's Facebook when Zuckerberg does it, Google when Schmidt, I suppose mass surveillance when the goverment does it. Price ranges, required consent, justification and equipment vary.

Comment: Consistency (Score 1) 162

by ememisya (#49127833) Attached to: Should a Service Robot Bring an Alcoholic a Drink?
If yes, then really there are no problems. Worst case scenario, some guy gets super drunk and drives, and runs somebody over. Is he/or-anyone going to blame the robot for continuing to serve this person drinks? They would be retarded because that's like blaming the bottle opener for the reason why you're drunk.

If no, then we probably should also make sure the audio is clipped, and the car of the person automatically gets out of the drive thru line, if a morbidly obese person orders at McDonald's.

We can make the world safer!

Comment: Re:It's a vast field.... (Score 1) 809

by ememisya (#49050545) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Portion of Developers Are Bad At What They Do?
It is indeed a vast field, and yes nobody knows everything I'm pretty sure, but there is a base line I think which should be learned. I think every programmer must know all security concepts (including encryption), assembly, hardware, and C as a baseline. Yes the detailed knowledge about it pretty much obsolete practically, but what are you going to do when things break? Albeit things look very similar at most levels of abstraction (there are always loops and conditions), but you can't assume your libraries or frameworks will work perfectly, even the best people make mistakes.

On a bad day, I'd much rather have a programmer who can tell me, x package, or x component we are depending on has an issue, and this is how we fix it, than a programmer who says, "Well, that's not Java, I don't know". Consider another scenario where a person might not know why to use a statement vs. a prepared statement. This of course will be perfectly fine if you're running a closed source shop and have your own framework and language in place, but then you're hiring logisticians not programmers.

Basically a programmer is not allowed to say, "I don't know", only "I'm not sure yet".

Comment: Re:Entering? Cyborgs? (Score 1) 49

by ememisya (#48934573) Attached to: Brain Implants Get Brainier
Right, but as this technology progresses and individual neurons can be targeted for activation, it's going to raise some concerns. Such as security. You thought your cellphone had terrible security, imagine getting brain hacked.

- Hi, my computer is not working, and I have a sudden urge to wire all my saving into an offshore account.
- Did you click on that attachment we warned you about earlier today?
... silence ...
- I no click attachment...
- *sigh* I'll be right down, Steve call security until we reinstall Sharon's original brain OS.

If you can't understand it, it is intuitively obvious.