Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Wrong Starting Point (Score 1) 60

Yeah, I think they need to answer some basic questions first, like what do they see people using these phones for? If its goal is just to be able to play youtube, spotfy, etc, then whats the real point? Those are free either. Their approach with free operating systems made more sense, by focusing on free applications to replace the proprietary unix ones and someone came along and gave them a great kernel. Thats a thousand times more difficult now with phones. but ultimately phones or computers are a means to an end for most people. What is the end here?

Comment Re:All right, but is it any good? (Score 1) 34

I think that if they're actually generating feature length films, they'll probably be decent...well, not much worse than what they've been doing. Films are expensive not just to shoot, but also to make, so I expect there'll be lots of steps where "editorial judgement" is applied.

OTOH, I'm not a movie goer. I don't know the current quality. And Ed Wood is a level it's pretty hard to go below.

Comment Re:Bonus Data (Score 1) 46

No. The scam callers speak English. Perhaps not well, but it's English that they are speaking.

To repeat a point I made earlier, information is not knowledge. Knowledge may be either true or false (i.e. it's a signed quantity). Information is most densely contained in (at least apparently) random noise.

Comment Re:English dominates vs Tamil && Hindi (Score 1) 46

IIUC, the chinese ideograph system is common between all those languages, and therefore would count as one common language...until the computers started audio processing. (FWIW, it's my understanding that many of the Chinese ideographs even have approximately the same meaning in one of the Japanese writing systems.)

Comment Re:researchers call "mode amplification" (Score 2) 46

A point, but (and this is admittedly a quibble) I wouldn't call languages a "vast body of human knowledge". The data encoded within that language might qualify, but not the language itself. Unfortunately, without understanding the language there's no way of reasonably estimating the size of the contained "human knowledge" that isn't contained in sources already covered.

FWIW, I think treating "the internet" as a body of human knowledge is foolish. Parts of it are, but much of it is negative-knowledge (i.e. learning it makes you stupider). The internet *is* a body of human information...but some information is garbage.

Now I admit that, say, Tamil may contain encoded large amounts of history and large amounts of myth. Whether they are clearly enough separated to be called knowledge isn't something I can tell. (Actually, Tamil should contain much of the history of the development of math...but it's not clear to me that this would be readily distinguishable from the related myths even by a careful historian, much less by a current LLM.)

Slashdot Top Deals

"Lead us in a few words of silent prayer." -- Bill Peterson, former Houston Oiler football coach

Working...