Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Obviously AI is superior to any human judgement (Score 1) 192

An AI can't make mistakes, and only ignorant Luddites with severe paranoia issues would retard process and a better world without human error and the terrible death tolls that follow when doctors are texting or drunk or ... Oh wait. That's self-driving cars. Only SDCs are perfect, I guess, though one would think SD AI doctors would be far better than humans, given the premise of SDCs. If you trust an AI to drive a car, you should trust it to diagnose your cancer. Mistakes on either's part will kill you.

Comment For me, never worked (Score 1) 291

I've tried pairing my phone to Ford cars, and it never works. It pairs, but then: zilch. It thinks it's a music player of some sort. Phone doesn't function through the car. I always carry - YES - a 3.5 audio cable and connect the phone through the headphone jack to hear music. Even THAT fails and I have to reboot the system to make it work. This among many other common failures of simple gadgets make me laugh to see self-driving cars - we are no where near ready for that level of complexity. In the real world, these toys crash constantly.

Comment Re:Microsoft... (Score 1) 291

Odd. The same comments they made could be applied to self-driving cars, which will certainly be far more buggy than the infotainment screen. Only the SDCs could actually kill you. Why people think the music player would naturally be a piece of useless crap code while the car will be an AI marvel far better than human drivers... explain this to me...

Now for the comments about paranoia, stupidity, Ludditism...

Comment Re: As it should be (Score 1) 230

This is going to be a bloody lesson in hubris. Not that believers will look. SD cars already have been in plenty of accidents; it's just our rules for finding fault were written with humans in mind. The car that hits another car is almost always at fault, per human rules, and the SDs are being hit, so therefore no "mistakes" are tallied. Further investigation would be made by the SD car company, which is biased to not find error. The problem is robots can drive so stupidly that a normal human will hit the SDC, and suck up the blame. The real stats are being fudged.

Comment Re:Stupid (Score 1) 1042

Just because there's a rate of improvement now doesn't mean it won't taper off and eventually flatten in the future.

Just like the Tower of Babel: They wanted to reach the heavens, and for the first few hundred feet or so, they made excellent progress, but they just couldn't continue at the same pace

Comment Re:Why is it a problem? (Score 1) 192

It's not the registration that is the problem -- it's the contract that the FAA forces upon you when you register.

Section 336 clearly states that the FAA may make no new rules to control model aircraft so they've been clever as a fox. The FAA has no way to make new rules to control these craft so they conjured up a contract and called it "registration". In order to register you must agree to the terms of the contract which include restrictions that were not previously present -- such as not flying over 400 feet AGL etc. Once you've registered, you have agreed to that contract and breaching it (such as flying over 400 feet AGL) exposes you to legal action for breach of the contract. So, the FAA have created new rules by stealth in the form of this binding contract.

It's a crock and has been done solely to sidestep the decree of Congress. Nasty work!

Even nastier is how little has been done to highlight this fact. Thank goodness *someone* is taking them to court over this dirty dealing.

Comment Re: Worst of both worlds (Score 1) 192

The problem is that the FAA (and other regulators around the world) have chosen to penalize the genuine hobbyist for the acts of the idiots. This is totally uncalled for and unfair. Imagine if, every time some dick-head decided to break the speed limit, *every* responsible driver was penalised as a result. That's the situation we have here with drones.

The regulators can't even define what a drone is accurately or consistently so instead of making even the smallest effort (such as differentiating between craft that have onboard GPS and an autonomous or semi-autonomous capability -- such as auto-land, return to home etc) they consider everything that flies without a pilot to be a drone.

This is just laziness on the part of regulators and gross unfairness towards the responsible members of a hobby that has for decades proven itself to be safe and family-friendly.

Ultimately, we have a bunch of suits who fly desks telling the rest of us (some like myself who've been flying model aircraft for over 50 years) under threat of severe fines and/or imprisonment, what's safe and what's not. Ludicrous!

Comment ..what happens when they don't ship it overseas (Score 1) 166

I live in a small town in a typical modern fascist dictatorship with an illusion of freedom in the northern of the fascist union (EU). The local newspapers announced that a new Recycling Plant(TM) would be opening in our little town. This was apparently huge local news because start-up that employed more than five people.

The news articles detailed how this Recycling Plant(TM) would Recycle old mobile phones and computer equipment.

The CEO explained: There are small amounts of gold and other metals in all electronics. We will burn the electronics we receive up to slightly above the melting points for the metals we are interested in (primarily gold?) and harvest them.

I still wonder how the word "recycle" could possibly apply.

Here are some figures to consider: 1000 kilograms of cell phones can yield around 280 grams of gold, around 140 grams of platinum and palladium, and 140 kilograms of copper. That means that there is a lot of "stuff" that's just burned and not recycled.

The local "recycling" plant didn't make it. They lasted less than a year before going under.

Comment JAMA study authors don't even lift (Score 2) 210

If you want to look better then there's one proven solution which works and has proven itself throughout the centuries since ancient Greece: Lifting weights. Can some "tracker" on your arm measure how much you lift? No, obviously not. These idiotic devices also supposedly track your calorie intake. If you lift and reduce your intake then you won't gain muscle and look like a skeleton. In summery, these devices are useless and those who buy them are wasting money they should be spending on gym memberships and protein rich food. Fatties should get off their asses and lift, not waste money on idiotic technology.

Slashdot Top Deals

Mediocrity finds safety in standardization. -- Frederick Crane