Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:In the US. (Score 1) 869 869

It takes like 40 minutes to charge a Tesla 80% of the way. That's a stop-off at KFC to eat while you use the charger in the car park.

You would really stop 3 times at KFC during a 1000km travel? I mean, It's not a joke about Americans, but...

Plus, there is no charger in the car park right now, and there won't be before sufficient numbers of ecars are on the road. But they won't be that many ecars on the road before you can charge them in the car park. Chicken and egg problem, you see.

Comment In the US. (Score 4, Insightful) 869 869

Again, this works in the US with big suburbs where everyone has a parking lot with an electric outlet. In other countries (like good old Europe), where most people live in apartments and there is just no way you can plug your car at night, it doesn't work. It is just impossible until you can refill your car in 5 minutes like with gasoline...

Oh, and many Europeans travel 1000+km on a single streak with their cars on holidays. Again, if the cars you want to sell have to wait 2 times 4 hours to refill in such travel, you're not going to sell many of them.

Ecars are good for commuters that live in houses. There are not many of them outside the US.

Comment init system (Score 4, Interesting) 383 383

There wasn't a decent unix-like kernel, you wrote one which ultimately became the most used.

There wasn't a decent version control software, you wrote one which ultimately became the most love.

Do you think we already have a decent init system, or do you have plan to write one that will ultimately settle the world on that hot topic?

Comment Re:smart people, including Bill Gates (Score 1) 367 367

The real problem is that the leisure society we all dream about isn't compatible with 7+ billion people. Why? Because the earth is too small to account for all resources exploitation necessary to perform these luxury automations.

Malthusian Nonsense. You could fit the entire world's population in New Zealand.
http://www.fastcoexist.com/301...

Do you understand the concept of "resources"? Of course the earth is large enough to have 7 billions biped mammals roughly 6 feet high. Densely compacted, it could even fit in less than that. Sustaining their energy consumption is a completely different story.

You should check that video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

How much space do you think it takes to allow you to change your phone every 4 months or to take the plane to see your mom on holidays? Do you still think the earth is big enough to sustain the energy requirement of 7 billion people living in the leisure society?

Comment Re:smart people, including Bill Gates (Score 1) 367 367

No, I'm suggesting, on a rather well-established basis, that computation alone is insufficient. This is all assuming that the mind is a product of the brain. Whatever the brain does to cause consciousness, it can not be by mere computation alone.

I don't know why you find this so troubling.

Please define consciousness. And please don't define it as "something that cannot be computed" as it would be defeating your point.

If your definition is "the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world", then you have to prove it is not computable. Is a cat conscious? A cat doesn't recognize itself in the mirror, so is it aware of itself? If the cat is not conscious, what is the mathematical difference between the brain of a cat and ours, where is the thing that make them not equivalent (in computation theory)? If the cat is conscious, is a lizard conscious then? And after the lizard, a worm, etc. All of these are examples of increasingly complex computation machines.

You are just a machine, get over it, it doesn't take away the beauty of what you can do with your mind.

Comment Re:smart people, including Bill Gates (Score 4, Insightful) 367 367

This is just a painful transition. Once all the unnecessary people died and failed to reproduce, there will the leisure society we are all dreaming about.

The real problem is that the leisure society we all dream about isn't compatible with 7+ billion people. Why? Because the earth is too small to account for all resources exploitation necessary to perform these luxury automations.

So it's either that: we continue world population growth in an industrial age, or we have a massive reduction in world population to sustain the leisure age. While everyone agrees to "have the machines doing the work for us and that all humans would enjoy more leisure time", you have to accept that the price to pay is birth control (voluntary, regulated or forced by unemployment and starvation).

Comment Nothing new (Score 2) 94 94

Such cheat have been used for years in the field. Before ImageNet, there was the Pascal VOC challenge with about the same rules, and I'm pretty sure all winners were optimizing the hyperparameters their submission on the test dataset.

Seriously, as long as computer vision benchmark are based on a single train/test split, there will be such abuses. If there were several splits with meaningful statistics computed on it, I would be less worried by the overfitting you get by optimizing the hyperparameters.

But hey, you're never gonna make it to CVPR without tunning your method so as to fool reviewers that it performs much better than the state of the art. 0.1% for a good idea, 99.9% for engineering tricks.

Economics is extremely useful as a form of employment for economists. -- John Kenneth Galbraith

Working...