Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Not a good thing.... (Score 1) 124 124

some sophisticated thieves have laptops equipped with a radio transmitter" and use brute force attacks to find the correct and unique code of a car's key fob.

Thanks for the info. This definitely seems like poor design rather than a broken concept though. I'd like to see them brute force a 2048 bit RSA key. Wireless authentication protocols have the ability to be just as secure as anything else.

Comment: Re:Not embeddable devices, smartphones (or watches (Score 1) 124 124

Actually, I think over the next few years for many of us our phones will migrate onto our wrists

And this is the problem with the culture at Google these days. Ever since all employees started using macbooks and they only hired 20 something's with thick frame glasses and "nerd" t-shirts they've been on a steady decline into the toilet. This geek tech culture is a serious blight. You people are ruining a once magnificent company. Oh ya... And get off my lawn.

Comment: Re:Not a good thing.... (Score 1) 124 124

I'm not sure about this claim. Whether it's a traditional key or a proximity key it still falls in the "something you have" category of security. And while I admit I don't know exactly how the proximity keys work I do know that if they use an rsa handshake then they're certainly more secure, than a laser cut key.

Comment: Re:deterministic? (Score 1) 367 367

It's unfortunate that true randomness cannot exist in the physical world as we know it. Even the roll of a die is a deterministic equation. No matter how complex you make a program you can't make it "feel". That is a required component of sentience. Perhaps "feeling" is an illusion? If so, then nothing and no one is sentient. The creation on a true AI requires us to resolve countless paradox of the physical world that we don't even truly understand yet. Ultimately it will be the philosophers and physicists that give us the answers to developing one, if it's even possible.

+ - The Internet Of Things Is The Password Killer We've Been Waiting For->

jfruh writes: You can't enter a password into an Apple Watch; the software doesn't allow it, and the UI would make doing so difficult even if it did. As we enter the brave new world of wearable and embeddable devices and omnipresent 'headless' computers, we may be seeing the end of the password as we know it. What will replace? Well, as anyone who's ever unlocked car door just by reaching for its handle with a key in their pocket knows, the answer may be the embeddable devices themselves.
Link to Original Source

+ - 5 Reasons to Use Mono for Linux Development-> 1 1

Nerval's Lobster writes: In the eleven years since Mono first appeared, the Linux community has regarded it with suspicion. Because Mono is basically a free, open-source implementation of Microsoft’s .NET framework, some developers feared that Microsoft would eventually launch a patent war that could harm many in the open-source community. But there are some good reasons for using Mono, developer David Bolton argues in a new blog posting (Dice link). Chief among them is MonoDevelop, which he claims is an excellent IDE; it's cross-platform abilities; and its utility as a game-development platform. That might not ease everybody's concerns (and some people really don't like how Xamarin has basically commercialized Mono as an iOS/Android development platform), but it's maybe enough for some people to take another look at the platform.
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Smart? (Score 1) 367 367

Sentience implies the ability to "feel". It relies on certain unprovable truths like the existence of free will. If you don't believe in any of this, that's fine. There's no reason a computer can't be as deterministically complex as the human brain. That, however, is not the same thing as being sentient.

Comment: Re:Smart? (Score 1) 367 367

You don't have to study software for very long to learn that there is no such thing as a true random number generator. This is why all programs dealing with randomness are called pseudo random number generators. There are many PRNG's that can give the appearance of randomness, but it's impossible to ever be truly random.

This is the crux of the problem with trying to label a machine as sentient. Sentience applies to the ability to "feel"... beyond the ability to merely reason. It incorporates paradox like free will and choice. If you're of the opinion that neither free will or choice exists then you might believe the human brain is merely a series of electrical impulses and chemical reactions. You believe in the deterministic mind, not the sentient one. Could a computer be as deterministically complex as a human being? I don't see why not. But that is a far cry from declaring it sentient, unless you want to downgrade the definition of sentience to "deterministically complex".

It is fundamentally impossible for a purely deterministic machine to achieve sentience in the true spirit of the term. This is compounded by the fact that the term itself is surrounded in paradox and a lack of complete understanding of our physical world.

+ - This Is What Happens When A State Seriously Invests In Clean Energy-> 2 2

mspohr writes: "Solar farms are blooming across California’s deserts, wind turbines are climbing the Sierra, photovoltaic roofs are shimmering over suburbs, and Teslas are the Silicon Valley elite’s new ride. A clean energy rush is transforming the Golden State so quickly that nearly a quarter of its electricity now comes from renewable sources, and new facilities, especially solar, are coming online at a rapid rate. Last year, California became the first state to get more than 5 percent of its electricity from the sun."
This is a big turnaround:
"It’s difficult to remember that just 15 years earlier the state was experiencing an energy meltdown. Electricity prices skyrocketed, supply crashed and blackouts rolled, due mainly to a disastrous deregulation attempt and unscrupulous market manipulation. "

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Smart? (Score 1) 367 367

Yes. Sentience. Don't make the typical mistake of assuming you understand something just because you've labelled it. We don't know what sentience is, merely that it (probably) exists. In this way it's similar to the concepts of "energy", electro-magnetism, or the big bang. We can observe them, but we don't fully understand them.

The answer to creating a sentient being of our own won't be found in the computer science department. There's still major milestones to hit in biology, philosophy, and perhaps even spirituality.

Comment: Smart? (Score 1) 367 367

A lot of well-educated and smart people, including Bill Gates and Stephen Hawking, have stated they are fearful about the dangers that sentient Artificial Intelligence (AI) poses to humanity.

They aren't that smart if they think machines could ever be sentient. Machines are deterministic. They do what you tell them to. We might be able to make extremely complex machines that give the general appearance of sentience, but they will still only ever be deterministic.

Anyone with enough insight and humility knows there's still an extremely large piece of the puzzle missing in our understanding of life. And you need to understand how something works before you can create it.

Humanity has the stars in its future, and that future is too important to be lost under the burden of juvenile folly and ignorant superstition. - Isaac Asimov