Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: Is a lame Seth Rogen flick worth dying for? (Score 1) 190

by ceoyoyo (#48637723) Attached to: Hackers' Shutdown of 'The Interview' Confirms Coding Is a Superpower

I'm curious what the reaction in the US would be if someone made a major motion picture about the sitting American president being assassinated. Not a film about actual events, or about a fictional president, but the actual one.

Making terrorist threats is certainly wrong, but I strongly suspect there's more than a little hypocrisy in the current "free speech, free speech!" reaction.

Comment: Re: Huh? (Score 1) 190

by ceoyoyo (#48637665) Attached to: Hackers' Shutdown of 'The Interview' Confirms Coding Is a Superpower

In order for you to drive a car, someone had to have the skills to make it. In order for sony to get hacked, someone had to have the skills to discover the vulnerability and write something to exploit it.

So assuming hacking sony is the result of wielding a superpower, who has that superpower? The jokers who pressed a button or the people who made the button and the thing it activated? I agree with the article, it's the coders, even if it was used indirectly, like tricking superman into doing something.

Comment: Re: This is worse than mythology. (Score 1) 240

by ceoyoyo (#48637449) Attached to: The Dominant Life Form In the Cosmos Is Probably Superintelligent Robots

That's not what AI is. It's one possibility, not necessarily the best one. Simulating neurons on digital computers has has given the best results so far, but only because we've got lots of digital computers around. Likely the best approach will be dedicated hardware that will probably work nothing like what we think of as a computer.

So when we build AIs that are not subject to our biological limitations, will they compete with us? Will someone weaponize them? It seems like a good possibility. Of course, lots of other things also have those possibilities. And maybe by the time we have hard AI we'll also have removed some our own biological limitations.

Comment: Re:More important: how is this happening? (Score 2) 69

by radtea (#48628139) Attached to: Terrestrial Gamma Ray Bursts Very Common

The distinction between X-Rays and gamma rays is not the way how they are produced but the energy level.

As others have pointed out, this is false. Here's a simple guide to the complex language of electromagnetic radiation:

1) If it was produced by an atomic process it's an x-ray, no matter what the energy.

2) If it was produced by a nuclear process, it's a gamma-ray, no matter what the energy

3) If the source is neither atomic nor nuclear, or unknown, it's field-dependent and circumstance dependent. I tend to think of bremstrahlung as gamma radiation unless I'm talking about x-ray sources for imaging or medical treatment. This is a purely cultural difference, with the terms "x-ray" and "gamma ray" being understood as interchangeable by practitioners, but with one or the other being preferred depending on context. Annihilation radiation is called gamma or x-ray depending on the field as well.

With regard to the EM radiation from storms, there are multiple possible origins. It's pretty easy to create neutrons from high-energy plasmas, as in the Farnsworth Fusor. Subsequent capture of those neutrons on nuclei will produce "true" gamma rays. On the other hand, various purely EM processes could be producing x-rays as well. So the EM radiation from storms could well be a mix of both nuclear and atomic processes. Call 'em gammas or x-rays, and don't make a big deal of it.

Comment: Are You Joking? (Score 3, Interesting) 180

by eldavojohn (#48625017) Attached to: US Links North Korea To Sony Hacking

> It is not known how the US government has determined that North Korea is the culprit

Of course it's known. The same way they established that Iraq had chemical weapons. The method is known as "because we say so".

Are you joking? I thought it was well established that there were chemical weapons in Iraq we just only found weapons designed by us, built by Europeans in factories in Iraq. And therefore the US didn't trumpet their achievements. In the case of Iraqi chemical weapons, the US established that Iraq had chemical weapons not because they said so but because Western countries had all the receipts.

Comment: Re: This is not the problem (Score 1) 650

by ceoyoyo (#48620239) Attached to: Economists Say Newest AI Technology Destroys More Jobs Than It Creates

Look around. The majority of jobs now are bullshit jobs. The sign of a successful modern economy is an overwhelmingly large service sector.

This has been going on a long time. Machines do most of the real work for us but we've bought into the fantasy that we all need to work 40+ hours so most of us are engaged in things like trying to sell each other stuff, handing each other stuff or throwing darts at a board to pick stocks for other people.

Comment: Re: giant sucking sounds (Score 1) 650

by ceoyoyo (#48619575) Attached to: Economists Say Newest AI Technology Destroys More Jobs Than It Creates

It's faded from the front page because it's now so routine nobody cares. iPhoto is free and does decent facial recognition. Facebook runs it on everything. My phone can take natural language spoken queries and respond with reasonable answers much of the time.

I worked on AI fifteen years ago and that was the stuff of dreams. Now you can have it in your pocket for a couple hundred bucks.

Comment: They don't need no steenking warrants (Score 1) 163

by fyngyrz (#48614769) Attached to: Verizon "End-to-End" Encrypted Calling Includes Law Enforcement Backdoor

Hysteria, eh? Well, let's just drag a few facts out. Here we go:

o Straight-up misconduct

o Botched paramilitary police raid data

o Judge, jury and executioners in blue: The death penalty -- without a court

o Warrants "not required" data

o Seizure of property without warrants details

o $2.02 billion dollars in cash and property seizures for/in which no indictment was ever filed

o Other illegal horrors

Just a little information -- what we know -- showing our government at work, cavreader. Now, I don't know how you will characterize this information, but I know how I do: Directly and unequivocally indicative of a systemic breakdown of respect, regard, and understanding of liberty and justice that extends broadly across all areas of law enforcement.

Now, you want to talk nonsense about legal protections in a system where the vast majority of defendants are pressured into plea bargains against a completely uneven scale full of extra charges, almost certain financial ruin, threats of extended incarceration, and outright lies from the police and prosecutor, where the police don't have to defend anything in court -- and which can be, and at times have been, followed up by ex post facto laws increasing punishment after conviction -- fine. But don't expect me to take you seriously, because you obviously don't have even the slightest idea what you're talking about.

Comment: Re:Who are you defending against? (Score 1) 163

by fyngyrz (#48614225) Attached to: Verizon "End-to-End" Encrypted Calling Includes Law Enforcement Backdoor

In this context a legitimate law enforcement reason means a warrant would indeed be needed.

Are you mad? They don't even insist on warrants when they can't meet the requirements of the 4th amendment, preferring to focus cluelessly upon the word "unreasonable" and ignoring the litany of probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation that were put there to explicitly define what "reasonable" is. They just break your door down, and shoot you -- and your pets.

And you think a law that doesn't even say a warrant is required will somehow stumble in its application on needing them?

I don't think you understand how the justice system works here. Or perhaps you're not from here.

Chemist who falls in acid is absorbed in work.