Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Google translate? (Score 2) 103

First of all, this: (YouTube)

Second of all:

"Of course you can, just stylometric identification and back home in order to prevent another language is automatically translated prose?" -- (Haitian Creole -> Azerbaijani -> Slovenian -> English ...)

"Not even the same language at home and another stylometric can automatically translated into prose?" -- ( ... Irish -> Hebrew -> Czech -> English ...)

"Not even in the same language and prose automatically translated differently stylometric?" -- ( ... Japanese -> Turkish -> Hmong -> English.)

"However, different stylometric automatically translated prose, and the same language is not it?" -- (... Urdu -> Filipino -> Latin -> English ...)

Depending on who you ask, you seem to have a different "answer" to your question.

Comment Re:Krebs is a scam. (Score 1) 187

Damn if it wasn't several days ago I'd say mod parent up.

The whole part about publicly/semi-publicly (might as well be the same thing in many situations, and oh look there was Krebs himself sitting in the balcony) soliciting blackmail funds really is stupid when you put it plainly.

I was more floored by the fact that Krebs was allowed to tamper with the heroin that was delivered and take those pictures. I can't imagine a single sheriff's department anywhere in America that would find that Kosher. Funny, Krebs' article didn't mention charges of Tampering with evidence. Or, if real drugs were spilled by Krebs while waiting for the Sheriff to arrive, funny no mention of reprimands for Pollution.

If the heroin wasn't even real, Krebs wouldn't have any reason to include that detail in his story. Which, also coincidentally, is tidied up by the Sheriff's missing Herion Durg Testre Kit.

"Hi I'm the Sheriff. What's that? Got Heroin? Hold on! I'll zoom right on out there and NOT BRING MY HERION DURG TESTRE KIT."


Lolz. I wonder how much of the entire story is true, at this point...

[[ NARRATOR: Eyenot disappeared into Cluesforum and was never heard from, again. ]]

Comment Re:Tell Google to turn off Google monitoring (Score 1) 923

And I have to wonder who decides these things.

If you're looking for "processor", Google decides you are also explicitly searching for "motherboard". If you're looking for "broken" Google also explicitly searches for "repair".

Then there's Google explicitly adding in search terms with an assumption might have mis-spelled something. I dunno when they started that but it annoyed the hell out of me on my cell phone the other day. Instead of the usual "did you mean this? I'm searching for this. Click here to search for what you actually asked me to," what it did was search for what I asked and *also* for what it thought I meant, both terms, explicitly.

Comment Re:Power? (Score 1) 526

... ... ... that response is plain and straightforward. Nowhere did you attempt to relate a sense of irony or use sarcasm to express smug indifference. "I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul."

Yeah that would be the natural response to the hypothetical Angry Boss.

I would say something along the lines of "I thought the OS was going to do that. Somebody should have told me that people were installing an OS on 8 cores that wasn't ready to automatically hand out work to all 8 cores."

What I can't stand about the core trend is ... well, two things:

1) One core is slower than the computer I bought second hand in 1998. This does not instill me with a great deal of confidence in the motherboard's ultimate ability to get "R" done.

2) Manufacturers and retailers no longer care if you know how fast your computer really is or really can be. "It's an i5".

"How fast is that?"

"... ... uh ... ... uhhhh ... it's faster than the i3."

"Where did i4 go?"

"MANAGER!!! ... you can talk to my manager. I have to help another customer. SECURITY!!! ... don't worry that's not about you. ... um, see ya."

Comment Re:"Future" as future? (Score 1) 187

At any rate, when Pentti wasn't gaining popularity, he just figured that he was scaring too many people. After all would you agree with a plan to save the world if it involved your slaughter?

So he increased the number of people (probably Finlanders) he would need to include in the great plan of green fascism, and then by ratio increased the number of "large mammals of this size which the planet can safely sustain".

So now Pentti is a fan of 500 million instead of only 2 million people. That itself is a pretty major indictment against most of his math and his planning. But his planning for green fascism isn't interesting. What's interesting is his insight into things such as the state of mind and the spiritual torture of a person who actually cares about the planet and the ecology foremost before concerns about civilization and progress.

Comment Re:"Future" as future? (Score 1) 187

I disagree that parent should have been modded as a troll.

To me, Linkola's numbers don't make sense. Why would he write in 1992 that the planet can sustain only 2 million human beings, and now 20 years later his claim is that the Earth can sustain 500 million? The answer is simple: Linkola isn't actually calculating for the whole planet.

Linkola is only interested in Finland and the future of the possibility of a lifestyle of doing nothing but fishing for a living, plain and simple. He is a firm believer in a traditional lifestyle that he sees disappearing. To him, there is no person who doesn't fish for a living that is important. You should read his words on the deaths of Polish children in World War 2, "do we need endless copies of little pig-tailed Polish children? What have we actually lost in World War 2?" And so on.

So what Linkola obviously did (obvious, to me) is to judge for himself how many Finnish fisherman can exist in Finland with complete and total autonomy and some sufficient number of women as concubines or whatever. And then he multiplied the number by the number of Finland-size units of land could be found around the planet and called it a day.

Of course his ideas were unpopular, he was labeled a kook and wasn't listened to by anyone but two types:

1) Die-hard "Green" activists
2) People who see the subtle truths he's expressing

The fact is, the world *won't* sustain so many people for very long. Already a growing number of people are living drier and drier lifestyles with less and less water to drink and the forests are quickly receding. Pentti isn't making that up, nor is he making up the horror of overfishing and the world's decimated fish and ocean mammal populations. Pentti isn't making up pollution.

And, too, Pentti isn't making up egotism and the basic fundamental fact that, no, there is no justification for being alive on Earth. He skips the part that you don't need justification to be here and to be happy, but he does make it clear that he doesn't care either way. As far as he's concerned, the life of the planet is more important than the human will to seek comforts and experiences that will destroy the planet's life.

I think you would be quite challenged, frankly, to prove that civilization is *not* for naught.

Prove somehow that civilization isn't just a fancy form of insanity, or that it has some kind of intrinsic value.

Prove that civilization isn't just one form of rust existing on top of another "form of rust".

Comment "Future" as future? (Score 1, Interesting) 187

Every civilization with written records has existed for less than 5,000 years; it seems optimistic to hope that the current one will last for 10,000 more ...

I have a few quotes to share about that.

"Not for the first time I felt myself confronted by the dizzying possibility that an entire episode in the story of mankind might have been forgotten." -- Graham Hancock

"In short, we appear to be approaching the end of the line. We cannot expand; we seem unable to intensify production without wreaking further havoc, and the planet is fast becoming a wasteland." -- James Serpell, In the Company of Animals: A Study of Human-Animal Relationships

"Evolution has developed (or the Creator created, as you will) millions of species of organisms on the globe. They all have their own culture, business life, love life, joys and sorrows. The swelling mountain, at this moment already of three hundred billion kilos of human flesh, is suffocating all these sisters and brothers underneath it - and choking itself only among the last. What is the ratio of matters and meanings, what is the ratio of mishaps?

Yet a little detail: what is the part of someone who is a friend of nature? Does he first suffer the tragedy of his own species in his mind, and then a tragedy a million times larger?" -- Pentti Linkiola, The World's End Knows No Mercy

âoeThe coming years will prove increasingly cynical and cruel. People will definitely not slip into oblivion while hugging each other. The final stages in the life of humanity will be marked by the monstrous war of all against all: the amount of suffering will be maximal.â â Pentti Linkola, Can Life Prevail?

"To date, the hunting way of life has been the most successful and persistent adaptation man has ever achieved. Nor does this evaluation exclude the present precarious existence under the threat of nuclear annihilation and the population explosion. It is still an open question whether man will be able to survive the exceedingly complex and unstable ecological conditions he has created for himself. If he fails in this task, interplanetary archaeologists of the future will classify our planet as one in which a very long and stable period of small-scale hunting and gathering was followed by an apparently instantaneous efflorescence of technology and society leading rapidly to extinction." -- Lee and Devore, Man the Hunter

Comment Not so dumb? (Score 1) 526

Numerous commentators here have successfully pointed out in numerous ways that there's nothing inherently "dumb" with producing eight-core machines.

Among the mentioned:

* Numerous VMs working together to perform complex network tasks

* Eight lawnmowers getting eight times as much grass cut in the same time -- not competing in car races

I think what's obvious is that the comment made by Qualcomm may have been silly and perhaps even meant to be childish.

Are we really to believe that they held a meeting, shared lunch, ate yogurt, called it a day, relaxed their ties and blouses and said:

"So, after all's said and done, let's just tell Taiwan that eight cores are TOOOOPIIITTTHHH! BUH HUH DUH!!!"

The concept is so utterly ridiculous I have to wonder what the perceived "angle" is, or what possible advantage could be gained by the comment.

Will the average Wal-Mart and Best Buy shoppers somehow get wind of these comments and make well-informed decisions to go with cell phones and computers containing Qualcomm architecture?

"Yo honey don't buy the faggy brand that's all stupid. We like money! Buy the one that's made by the sexy people that call the other people stupid. Stupid, thtupid people!" *spit & drool while talking, etc.*

Will there be some contingency of "nerds" that reads the comments and just latches on with teeth-bared frenzy, bits and clings tenaciously to Chandrasekher's buttocks, frothing at the mouth and screaming (between clenched teeth full of buttock meat), "FFRRKKK MEDIATEK! FRK UUU! HRRRGGGHHH," eventually to develope a symbiotic parasitic relationship with Chandrasekher and become an extension of his buttocks (perhaps to one day be meat between the rabid teeth of some other nerd?)

That also seems highly unlikely. Even a quick perusal of the comments here at Slashdot reveals not only do numerous people conclude that Chandrasekher made asinine statements, but also that those who agree with Chandrasekher are putting thought behind their decisions and also don't resemble lampreys.

But anybody could have predicted that the more mindless masses would never be exposed to Chandrasekher's words and also that those who are exposed will put well-informed thought behind their interpretations of his statements.

Well, "anyone", but possibly except for Chandrasekher.

Hmm... could Chandrasekher just be ... *gulp* ... TOOPID?

Comment Re:Power? (Score 1) 526

but it wasn't my idea.

Good excuse when you're in the boss's office explaining why the application you coded isn't using all 8 of the customer's cores to operate faster.

Also make sure to tell him it's hard to use two lawnmowers at once, maybe you'll qualify for some kind disability.

Comment Re:Better Benchmarks (Score 1) 526

Exactly. And to make matters worse, those hours of research are forced on the discriminating user because PC manufacturers no longer advertise processor speeds or relative benchmarks, and massive/chain retailers have no clue what any of that means and typically prefer to hire people who don't care and don't want to hear it, because they want customers who are looking for "that sort of thing" to go elsewhere rather than take up floorspace sounding kooky and making the other customers look up and scratch their heads. ("Huh? Did he say something about numbers? I thought the computer just herp-derp'd the video-nets up to the HD audio Monster fibers.")

Comment Re:... and other logical fallacies (Score 1) 526

You can't take eight lawnmower engines, put them together and now claim you have an eight-cylinder Ferrari. It just doesn't make sense,

You're right, it doesn't make sense. But then who, if anyone, is making such claims? Or did you, perhaps, invent those claims

You can't just take one thing you're saying, and compare it to what somebody else is saying, and say they're wrong but you're right using entirely different words. Words don't have intrinsic value so you can't prove that you proved the other person wrong. Or are we all just expected to sit here and drool down our chins, and nod anxiously, while you two duke it out?

Comment Re:The Onion said it best (Score 2) 526

I spend $25 every three months on four 5-blade razor heads with a lubricating strip. If I spent the same money on disposable, single-blade razors that are a bag of 10 for $1, then I would have 250 single-blade razors every three months.

But in that three months' time, I would not get once single shave anywhere near as smooth and nick-free as I get with my 5-blade heads with the lubricating strip.

And the disposable really isn't worth keeping around for a second or third shave. Yes, I've been there: I've done that. It's a noticeably worse shave each time you re-use a disposable one-use razor. You might disagree with me, there. You might be smug and tree-hugging yourself to death over that one, but read on.

Instead of carrying around a slim, little blue box in my travel pack, I would be carrying around a big hefty bag of fucking two-hundred and fifty disposable razors. They don't "pack" that easily. If somebody wants to throw in a robotic arm that packs their shape for maximum quantum efficiency be my guest -- the razors will not take up the same tiny little space as the four individual 5-blade heads and will not be retrievable to their original dimensions.

And, whether you use them for 1 use or scrounge and save and use them for 10 uses and then tie them into your beetle-inhabited dreadlocks once they've split their last hair, the fact of the matter is you will still, eventually, no matter how you cut it, have to dispose of all 250 disposable razors.

And I, for the same amount of money, experienced much more joy with a much closer shave, heads that lasted much much longer, and threw away only four heads.

Now let's make an analogy to the processors.

Your suggestion is that for the cost of one quad-core computer, I might as well have spent my money on two hundred and fifty thermistors.

Or something like that. I really can't pay attention to the processor side of the argument because I'm too smug about my choice of razor heads.

Slashdot Top Deals

I judge a religion as being good or bad based on whether its adherents become better people as a result of practicing it. - Joe Mullally, computer salesman