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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:News? (Score 1) 67

It's just way less common than bird ingestion.

Hopefully, this case only happens on the ground. :-)

Hence why it is less common. Rabbits: Ground only. Birds: mostly below 500 feet (*).

* Some birds can fly at up to 37,000 feet during their migration. Technically, I suppose, so can a rabbit, so long as it is onboard an aircraft.

Comment Re:News? (Score 2) 67

The month before that a 737 caught fire after sucking a rabbit into an engine.

A rabbit? How the F does that happen? I hope it was, somehow, the rabbit that was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

First, someone had to place the rabbit onto the giant trebuchet...

But seriously, the engines are pretty close to the ground, so anything on the runway tends to get sucked into the engines. Apparently, this isn't even all that rare, happening four times last year alone. It's just way less common than bird ingestion.

Comment Re:WSJ source? (Score 2) 80

Video capture is a double edged sword. On the one hand it would certainly help with accident investigations in some instances. On the other it may make pilots act differently if they know they are being filmed, and that's not always a good thing.

There are also concerns about the video leaking out. Audio recordings from black boxes leak sometimes, which is often traumatic for the people involved, such as the families of people who died. It's also bad for pilots because of the above mentioned behavioural changes if they think they are being recorded all the time and that recording may become public.

Mentor Pilot covered it in more detail: https://youtu.be/tOmfrmGGuEA

Comment Re:Word missing (Score 1) 12

And the list concept concerns me. Are these lists appealable? If not, then they're abusable.

Also, the line between "AI generated" and "non-AI generated" is ever more fuzzy. AI is used for upscaling. AI is used in cameras to enhance images taken. AI is used to make the sort of minor edits that are done the world over in Photoshop. Etc. There's also the fact that this is done with image fingerprinting, which is fuzzy, so then any images that have minor modifications done with AI which get added to the list will get the raw images flagged as well. The thing people want to stop is "fake images", and in particular, "fake images that mislead about the topic at hand". But then that's not "AI" that's the problem in specific, that's image fakery in general (AI just makes it faster / easier).

And re: fingerprinting, take for example, the famous case of the content-spam creator who took a photo of a woodcarving of a German Shepard, flipped it horizontally, ran it through an AI engine to make trivial tweaks to the image, and then listed it as his own. I'd think any decent fingerprinting software would catch both versions. And if it's not flexible enough to catch that, then I have to wonder how useful it is at all, since images constantly change as they move around the internet, even accidentally, let alone deliberately.

Slashdot Top Deals

The person who's taking you to lunch has no intention of paying.

Working...