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


Forgot your password?

Comment Maybe never (Score 1) 263

I'm certain it's possible to meaningfully upload my consciousness. But that doesn't mean we're smart enough to do it.

Assume the smartest mind possible by the laws of physics has an IQ of 1000, and assume to make an artificial brain you need an IQ of 2000. Although there's a solution to the puzzle it's not a solution that will ever be found.

Comment Re:Article also misses a major point (Score 1) 263

The entire concept of uploading/duplicating is based on a deterministic view of the universe - one without quantum mechanics.

This viewpoint is false. Not only is quantum mechanics part of the universe, but the specific reactions involved in the brain require quantum mechanics.

There are QM reactions involved when I use an abacus, that doesn't mean calculators are impossible. Just because consciousness is weird and QM is weird doesn't mean consciousness is based on QM.

As such, the concept of a physical copy or uploading is nonsensical. It can not be done. The best we can do is make a poor copy - one that will NOT react the way the real you would.

The only way that's true is if our consciousness is based on some continuous sequence of quantum events... and even then I'm sure there's a way we could meaningfully transition or preserve state.

Comment Re:Umm (Score 1) 361

Unless they're directly buying votes, then that remains true. I'm not sure why we're equating advertising dollars with votes, because they aren't the same thing.

Take for example the Colorado state senate recall election a few years back: 11 times the amount of money was spent lobbying in favor of the incumbents as there was for the newcomers, yet the incumbents lost anyways.

Larry Lessig found this out the hard way, he assumed (very stupidly I might add) that he could just buy votes for his mayday campaign. Instead he found out that every candidate he spent money on that won was already likely to win anyways, and the rest lost.

The "vote buying" isn't that outlandish. There was a lot of talk 4 years ago about the "Sheldon Andelson primary" and how the Republican candidates became a lot more hawkish on Israel when in came up. He single-handedly kept Gingrich in the race for a while and probably swayed the Republican agenda as a result. But you don't even need vote buying, if you give a bunch of money to the candidate who sincerely agrees with you you'll end up with a legislator voting your way.

This is why I think the US needs a more parliamentary system with a powerful Speaker of the House.

It's easy for a billionaire or lobby group to push around a bunch of different legislators or districts at the low level. It's really hard to push around the party as a whole. The easiest way to stop billionaires from influencing the parties is to make the parties into single entities too big and powerful for billionaires to influence.

Comment Re:This is ridiculous (Score 1) 766

Hmm, so you state that I'm clearly a guy who hates men,

Why else would you call a misandrist term misogynist? Especially if the negative connotation of the term was invented by misandrists?

The negative connotation of the term was invented by guys calling eachother "bro" and engaging in misogynist behaviour which sometimes includes predatory sexual practices that can extend to rape.

That doesn't apply to everyone who considers themselves to be part of the "bro culture", nor is everyone who calls eachother part of the bro culture, not even close. But that problematic subset does exist and that is the association a lot of people make.

Comment Re:No shit sherlock .. (Score 1) 342

How is it you're allowed to criticize the author's opinions but the author isn't allowed to criticize Feynman's actions?

Because that's a complete non-sequitur, that's why.

How is it a non-sequitur? It's legitimate for the author to judge and criticize the morality Feynman's actions, just like it's legitimate for nickweller to criticize the author, for me to criticize nickweller, and you to criticize me.

And on the topic of consent it carries a lot less weight when it's predicated on a lie. While it's legally nowhere near rape it's still really greasy.

So, you're saying women who lie about their age should be charged with misdemeanors, rather than felonies? Interesting. Maybe let them off with probation in exchange for community service?

I answered your criticism in my post "While it's legally nowhere near rape it's still really greasy". Ie its not, nor should be illegal, but it's unethical. As for women lying about their age I'd say that's also unethical.

Comment Re:"..or what intermediate steps have to be taken. (Score 4, Insightful) 167

"..or what intermediate steps have to be taken.."

This is always a problem: incrementalist thinking, the idea that one can achieve the revolutionary through small intermediate steps with an evolutionary process.

But that's where revolutionary ideas come from. Progress is a long series of small intermediate steps and some of those steps turn out to be the revolutionary ones. That's why you get things like Alexander Graham Bell's "race" to the patent office, or Darwin finding out that Wallace had also discovered natural selection. Revolutionary ideas need a solid foundation of incremental discoveries.

But that's actually kind of off-topic for this story, we have all the revolutionary technology already, it's simply a matter of cost and will, and "incrementalist thinking" is a great way to make each of these easier.

This is very limited (and limiting) thinking, and people who think that way will never achieve anything truly revolutionary. If you think like this, you should probably get the hell out of the way of those of us who don't. We'll come back for you. Some day. Maybe.

I suspect you have it backwards. If you're only interested in the revolutionary you'll never get anywhere because you'll be missing all the intermediate steps. If you want to move forward start by doing all the incremental things, eventually you'll have done enough that the revolutionary is in sight.

Comment Re:This is ridiculous (Score 1) 766

I'd instantly get a mental image of the developers being a bunch of frat boys high-fiving calling each other bro.

So because you're clearly a misandrist (and assume "bro" denigrates men), "bro" is somehow misogynist instead?

I'm not even sure Orwell envisioned such a level of semantic contortion was possible.

Hmm, so you state that I'm clearly a guy who hates men, clearly you have the foundation of a solid argument.

Rather consider that people associate the word "bro" with a culture they perceive to be misogynist, maybe that's justified or maybe not, but it's an association that the developers of Brotli had no interest in and you have no interest in criticizing them for changing it.

Comment Re:This is ridiculous (Score 1) 766

Someone tells them that in North American culture that extension carries a connotation they didn't realize.

No, Mr. McManus completely invented a connotation that only complete idiots assume exists:

It comes of[sic] misogynistic and unprofessional due to the world it lives in.

If I saw an extension ".bro" there's a change I'd assume it was intentional (or at least they were aware of it) and I'd instantly get a mental image of the developers being a bunch of frat boys high-fiving calling each other bro.

Now it probably wouldn't be a strong association and maybe it wouldn't happen at all.

But it's still an issue, and if your software project has an issue that is easily fixed then you should fix it.

Comment Re:No shit sherlock .. (Score 1) 342

"when he was a young, boyish looking professor at Cornell, Feynman used to pretend to be a student so he could ask undergraduate women out .. Feynman .. trying to get women in bars to sleep with him .. documented affairs with two married women"

Have these fragile flowers ever thought of saying no to sexual advances. What Feynman does/did with his dick - as long as it's between consenting adults - is nobody's business except his.

How is it you're allowed to criticize the author's opinions but the author isn't allowed to criticize Feynman's actions?

And on the topic of consent it carries a lot less weight when it's predicated on a lie. While it's legally nowhere near rape it's still really greasy.

Comment Re:Academia is willing to protect total dicks (Score 1) 342

That is the main problem with sexual harassement. Once a sexual harassement case appear, the consequences of being wrong will be terrible in either case:
1/ either you let a sexual harasser free.
2/ or you destroy the life of an innocent.

Neither of these options are preferable. And because it is so hard to get evidence of these, it often ends in "he said/she said". So everyone wants to tiptoe around it.

I've been wondering about the idea of changing how we deal with sexual crimes. I think there's a lot of women who don't report things because they're worried about the degree of consequences to the man, or of the process they'll be put through when trying to report and get charges filed.

For sexual harassment or assault women I wonder if women could have the option of making a report, having an investigation done, informing the defendant of the accusation, and then having the whole thing sit on the shelf.

Nothing happens that the defendant doesn't want to happen.... unless the defendant ends up reported again. Then all his (or her) past victims are notified that there's a new offense and they have a chance to pursue charges again or at least act as a character witness in the new trial.

Now two things happen. First the predator is warned and will hopefully stop after the first report. Second, if they do continue it's easier to find the ones who are actually guilty.

Comment This is ridiculous (Score 0, Troll) 766

Some programmers suggest a particular extension.

Someone tells them that in North American culture that extension carries a connotation they didn't realize.

The original programmers don't want this connotation so they decide on a different extension.

OMG SJWs are ruining everything!!!!

Is the anti-SJW crowd really this thin skinned?

Comment Dear Internet commentors (Score 0) 766

Get a friggin clue.

Bro is a male youth subculture of "conventional guys' guys" who spend time partying in ways similar to each other. Although the popular image of bro lifestyle is associated with sports apparel and fraternities, it lacks a consistent definition.

I'm a guy and I don't want to be considered a "bro" or hang around with "bros", so why would you needlessly associate your software project with a subculture that a lot of people (including possibly yourself) don't really like? I don't think this wasn't even a joke as you imply since it seems like the creators weren't even aware of the connotation.

Sure not everyone is going to make the association but it's pretty trivial to change at this point in the game.

Comment Why the lack of interest? (Score 1) 218

I read the article but I wasn't quite certain why people weren't interested.

It sounds like it was too much work to maintain and implement, but it sounded like a lot of their implementation simply wasn't being used by anyone. Is it just the fact that LSB isn't as necessary/useful as people thought it would? I feel like most projects end up checking against Debian or RHEL and most distros adopt one of those as a sort of informal standard.

Comment It's all in the wording (Score 1) 479

"It's the decision of a couple of software engineers, not the board members."

He said it was their decision, as in they took the initiative to make it happen. He doesn't say they were the only ones in the know nor that they approved it. For all we know these "couple of software engineers" could be mid to high level managers who go approval from the board before working with hardware to make the change.

The opossum is a very sophisticated animal. It doesn't even get up until 5 or 6 PM.