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


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: Google is largely moderated now (Score -1, Flamebait) 76

by flakas (#39970349) Attached to: First Amendment Protection For Search Results?
As people often note Google has a large problem with spam results, but saying that the search results are selected with honest algorithm made by engineers is just lying. Google now employes thousands of people who's job is to check search queries and the results they get. They either moderate down the sites they don't like or completely remove them. This already makes Google heavily biased, and on top of that their algorithms highly favor their own sites.

Of course, while the paper is published by "independent" source, Google has commissioned it for less than honest purposes:

Google commissioned the paper, presumably to help ward off calls for government regulation of its search results.

As noted previously, Google has come under TONS of scrutiny from different governments and several U.S. government agencies. They have used their monopoly to illegally promote their own other services, all hidden behind the old "but it is just our algorithms at works!".

As Google is maintaining strict editorial process of the search queries, I think it would be good to hold them to responsibilities for them too. Google has shown that they can remove content from their service. Just like newspapers aren't allowed to show illegal things, Google should not be either. If Google has a problem with this, they need to stop manually deciding what's good for people and use an algorithm that is actually fair and isn't biased.

Comment: Re:New features (Score 4, Interesting) 437

by flakas (#39969685) Attached to: Objective-C Comes of Age

Sad sad day. Objective-C sucks! C# rocks!

In many ways this is true, but then again, they aren't the same kind of languages. I absolutely love C# syntax and the easy readability of the code. .NET libraries are also wonderful, and in general I would rather use C# than Objective-C because of this.

But Objective-C is closer to C and C++ than C#. I would however hope that Apple brings something like C# to OS X and iOS. I would start developing with them right away.

Computer Science is merely the post-Turing decline in formal systems theory.