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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:My Question (Score 3, Insightful) 175

Yup. Basically you have a child who was socialized to believe that as long as he felt he was right, his actions are justified and would not carry consequences. Even if he is morally right with his belief that this information SHOULD be free (not saying he is), he either has to comply with the laws or be willing to suffer the consequences to sand up for his beliefs.

Aaron is not a hero. Faced with adversity, he took the coward's way out.

Comment Re:A strange game.... (Score 3, Insightful) 597

Why is that? Right now, North Korea is a nice bargaining chip for China. The US doesn't want a direct conflict with China so cannot directly attack North Korea. When the time is right, China will reign in North Korea (for a time) in exchange for some concessions from the US. It is a poker game with an element of risk, but North Korea is a high face card in China's hand.

Comment Re:We could start by ending the double standard. . (Score 4, Informative) 564

1) What you say is not true. Anonymous targets folks they disagree with.
2) One can define "actively messing with other people" however they want. A jihadist would use the exact same term to describe what they do.
2) Even if what you said were entirely true, what you are describing is "vigilantism". In the movies this is great. In the real world you end up with a might makes right society. You and the jihadist are in complete agreement that this is acceptable.

Comment Re:Simply put.. (Score 1) 328

Where did you get that I said that finite time has anything to do with NP? I simply corrected his assertion that the game could not be solved in finite time. I even said that the time solved with today's technology would be greater than the lifespan of the universe but finite. So, not sure why you are taking issue with my post.

Comment Re:Some possibilities.... (Score 3, Interesting) 328

The computer is there to be abused :) I am very interested in the process of improving at chess and what causes people to plateau. So, I've taken to a number of strategies to evaluate effectiveness. Ultimately, to improve, I found that one must truly understand what one does not understand. This sounds superficial or even tautological, but it isn't. Too often players chalk losses up to a "random blunder" or not having memorized an opening enough. The reality is that our minds have a very small set of "rules" we use to select moves.

During these sessions I actually wrote down my candidate moves for each move, and then wrote a rationale for why I chose the move. Often, one can make the right move for the wrong reasons and the other way around as well. By understanding thinking patterns, i can later identify mistakes and enlist stronger players in reviewing my games. It is effective, but very very very time consuming and energy consuming.

Fortunately, the computer is a patient partner. The downside is it cannot offer truly insightful commentary to help a human player. For that you need a mentor, or at the minimum a peer to assist.

Slashdot Top Deals

New systems generate new problems.