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: Not a real problem (Score 2, Informative) 386

by mafian911 (#33897954) Attached to: Devs Grapple With 100+ Versions of Android
Hey all. I don't really see a problem with the fragmentation. I developed Cubes, a game that largely depends on device hardware and capabilities. I have over 36k active users, and the only real complaint I get is that it runs a little choppy on some of the underpowered models. The real trick is the same for PC: Don't code to specific hardware. Poll the system for capabilities. Implement logic for resizing/rearranging the UI. Android is not meant to be like iOS, where the hardware is strictly controlled. Android is successful because it can target hundreds of device profiles. Because of that, you have to write your apps a little smarter.

Comment: Re:I'm confused... (Score 2, Interesting) 335

by mafian911 (#33072488) Attached to: Android Data Stealing App Downloaded By Millions
I don't think this post is flamebait. Ok, well, "dumb" is harsh, but I do think the iPhone is targeted toward people who really just don't know any better. That's why the phone is so easy to use, bc hell, a baby can figure it out.

Android allows you to do more, but at the cost of a little extra complexity. I think an average user can handle it, I know a lot of people with average intelligence that have no problem with it. It's the users that aren't so smart that may have a hard time with it. Those users may want to consider an iPhone.

Comment: Re:Real Graph (Score 1) 584

by mafian911 (#31678602) Attached to: How Smart Are You?
Agreed. Intelligence is almost impossible to represent as a single factor. There are many types of tasks that individuals can perform either poorly or very well. There are high level analytical tasks and minimization/maximization problems, and there are low level tasks like arithmetic ability and spatial reasoning. With all the ways one brain can excel over another in certain situations, it would be very hard to classify one person as "smart" or "stupid" (unless they suck at all of them ;)

Comment: Re:I'd like to learn Psychology (Score 1) 515

by mafian911 (#31576514) Attached to: Of the options below, I'd most like to learn more ...
1) Perform extremely accurate real time image recognition

2) Attach recognized objects into deeper concepts, filled with meaning that can be used in thoughtful conversation

3) Wonder what/who they are, where they came from, and explore these concepts

4) Form complex bonds with others like itself, emulating kinship, loyalty, jealously, betrayal, etc

5) Hope and dream

Comment: Re:I'd like to learn Psychology (Score 1) 515

by mafian911 (#31576438) Attached to: Of the options below, I'd most like to learn more ...
If I had mod points, they would be yours. This is very insightful.

Imagine being born deaf, blind, unable to smell, taste or feel. No stimuli, whatsoever.

What would it like to be a brain in a machine, fed with zero stimuli? Or stimuli that makes no sense? Could you even form a "self"? How could you even believe you exist?

I read in a study that used rat neurons to "train" a robot to dodge walls. I remember reading that any cell culture that had been given too much time to develop before being used for the robot was worthless. The neurons, without any stimuli, were in an "unusable" state. Perhaps jokingly, the authors referred to them as "insane".

Clearly, with zero stimuli, the brain would become useless. Making trivial connections everywhere, with no heuristic to determine the most valuable connections. That brain would absolutely be worthless for psychological study.

Comment: Re:even better than jetlev (Score 1) 303

by mafian911 (#31427180) Attached to: The World's First Commercially Available Jetpack
You're right. That looks way more fun, and much less intimidating. How is it $175k though? Did I calculate that currency conversion right? I mean, it seems like the technology isn't incredibly sophisticated... just a high power water hose. Im surprised its more than 2x expensive than the jetpack in the article.

Be sociable. Speak to the person next to you in the unemployment line tomorrow.