Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Robotics

Foxconn Replacing Workers With Robots 526

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the human-workers-sent-to-protein-bank dept.
redletterdave (2493036) writes The largest private employer in all of China and one of the biggest supply chain manufacturers in the world, Foxconn announced it will soon start using robots to help assemble devices at its several sprawling factories across China. Apple, one of Foxconn's biggest partners to help assemble its iPhones, iPads, will be the first company to use the new service. Foxconn said its new "Foxbots" will cost roughly $20,000 to $25,000 to make, but individually be able to build an average of 30,000 devices. According to Foxconn CEO Terry Gou, the company will deploy 10,000 robots to its factories before expanding the rollout any further. He said the robots are currently in their "final testing phase."
AI

Was Turing Test Legitimately Beaten, Or Just Cleverly Tricked? 309

Posted by timothy
from the in-this-case-please-distinguish dept.
beaker_72 (1845996) writes "On Sunday we saw a story that the Turing Test had finally been passed. The same story was picked up by most of the mainstream media and reported all over the place over the weekend and yesterday. However, today we see an article in TechDirt telling us that in fact the original press release was just a load of hype. So who's right? Have researchers at a well established university managed to beat this test for the first time, or should we believe TechDirt who have pointed out some aspects of the story which, if true, are pretty damning?" Kevin Warwick gives the bot a thumbs up, but the TechDirt piece takes heavy issue with Warwick himself on this front.

Comment: Re:~45yrs of buffer overflows... (Score 2) 127

by soccerisgod (#47163187) Attached to: GnuTLS Flaw Leaves Many Linux Users Open To Attacks

It's a problem because it requires programmers to concern themselves with low-level tedious details that the compiler could handle for them

So basically your statement can be reduced to is "If you're lazy and stupid, don't use C". I'm fine with that. But I'd like to add that if you're lazy and stupid, don't program at all, become a manager.

Comment: Re:~45yrs of buffer overflows... (Score 2) 127

by soccerisgod (#47162723) Attached to: GnuTLS Flaw Leaves Many Linux Users Open To Attacks

C is especially bad because the language doesn't even have a way to talk about the size of an array. When you pass an array to a function, all size info is lost. This sucks.

How is that a problem? Pass the size in a separate variable. Put the array in a struct and add a member for the size. Or add a function to your struct that returns the size. Whatever. The possibilities are there. If you don't use them because programming in C is less cushy than in other languages, the fault is entirely yours. There is nothing in C preventing you from writing proper code. You just have to do it, with the understanding that it will be more work. But it's hardly impossible.

Comment: Re:Basic programming principles what? (Score 1) 127

by soccerisgod (#47162703) Attached to: GnuTLS Flaw Leaves Many Linux Users Open To Attacks

That's exactly the problem. If you think to add features first, security later you have already made a fundamental mistake. Writing secure code is not a matter of adding extra checking later. It means writing good, proper code right from the start. One of the most obvious consequences of that is not to use functions like sprintf at all, but use substitutes that allow and in fact demand proper length checking.

My $0.05: Of course managers never see a business case for adding security checking later. There is no obvious way it will make the company more money, so something "more important" will take precedent. But on the other hand, not writing secure code right from the start also means the programmer is not making a habit of writing good code. It shows a serious problem with their attitude toward their own work. That is not to say that there won't still be mistakes made, but a lot of them can be prevented right from the start.

backups: always in season, never out of style.

Working...