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 Re:Of course (Score 2) 332

Agreed. Very few people (police included) wake up and say "I want to be a jerk today, escalate lots of situations, get complaints filed against me, and be in a bad mood all day 'cos I didn't abuse someone enough."

Once they see being reasonable, and taking the professional stance, works as well or better than abusing the other person, they internalize the new behavior pretty fast. They probably go home feeling more professional and happier, camera or no camera.

Comment Re:Greedy (Score 2) 102

People are starving while Gate$ hoards 78 billion dollars in cash. That makes sense.

Somewhere, a computer has { BillGates: 78,000,000,000 }. So what?

Interest rates are effectively zero right now. Hoarding is obviously not a way to make money, nor does it impact anyone's ability to borrow money and be productive.

Hoarding corn, or gold, or Titan-X graphics cards, or elephants, or opera singers would be a dick move. Hoarding money is pretty value neutral.

Comment Re:Not surprising (Score 4, Interesting) 165

Bitcoin as an idea is very interesting but, in actual function, it's a scam. I wanted to learn more about it a year ago and so bought some mining ASICs. It doesn't take long before you realize that your magic money printing device was sold to you at a cost that means you will invariably lose money. Which makes sense. If I have a magic money printing device, why the hell would I sell it to you instead of running it myself?

Um, because of reality? In this case, cost of capital:

If I can make a machine for $900 that generates $100/year forever, I get an 11% return on capital.
If I can sell it for $1000, I get an immediate return of $100, and can build another machine and repeat the process. At one per day, I make $36,500 in my first year.

If the risk free interest rate is around 3%, the second plan is worth 10x as much as the first plan.

Comment Re:Rushing things to market that can KILL YOU (Score 1) 379

IF we are talking about probabilities.... Why on earth did you put guns on your list. Gun deaths are pretty rare overall, even with the weekly tallies from places like Chicago... I believe you are more likely to drown than get shot...

Well, in the USA, fatalities due to traffic and guns are about equal (around 30K/year, or 2 per state per day.) Note guns is 1/3 homicide and 2/3 suicide.

Comment Re:Stranger Danger! (Score 1) 211

Be fearful! There might be strangers sleeping somewhere in a property near you.

I bet the hotels are lobbying for this. Airbnb is one thing that is pushing the cost of visiting New York down.

We're fearful because we live in shared doorman apartment buildings. We usually keep our apartments unlocked 24 hrs

And that's a very idiotic thing to do, regardless of the trust you have on your neighbors. This is specially true if you live in a big city. Convenient or not, you are just asking for a Darwin award. Wise the fuck up and learn to lock your doors before a tragedy hits you.

Thanks for explaining how we in zip code 10023 are behaving idiotically. I'm sure your low-crime, high-education, high-income community that dwells on Darwin awards and cowers behind their locked doors can teach us how to build a nice society.

Comment Re:Stranger Danger! (Score 4, Informative) 211

Be fearful! There might be strangers sleeping somewhere in a property near you.

I bet the hotels are lobbying for this. Airbnb is one thing that is pushing the cost of visiting New York down.

We're fearful because we live in shared doorman apartment buildings. We usually keep our apartments unlocked 24 hrs (for our own convenience, and because we know and trust our neighbors, and because old buildings have quirks like single elevators that jam and so you hop through someone's front door to get to the back door elevator bank.)

We'd like to keep that and not have to switch to living in a hotel-like environment.

Comment Re:Please report this. (Score 2) 361

It's likely also a violation of First Amendment freedom-of-speech.

No, the 1st amendment only applies to the government restricting your speech.

Doesn't that encompass the notion that you can't force folks to say what you want them to say?

Private contracts can say all sorts of things, including "if you say X, penalty Y applies." If you're a company employee, or a sponsored athlete, you probably don't want to say X. In general, however, a judge is not going to like compelled speech, especially if it is due to a bullshit "we reserve the right to amend the terms of this agreement" change.

Comment Re:Rural has to be solved to go mainstream (Score 2) 381

Everyone that keeps saying that the autonomous cars are just around the corner all live in big cities. To get to the point they work without a steering wheel (aka manual mode) these companies have to solve for rural driving. Until the cars can reliably drive up a back woods, rocky, single lane mountain road they are worthless.

70+% of Americans live in cities or suburbs. And they produce almost all the GDP. So it's hardly "worthless" if driverless cars have a problem with places that people rarely need to be.

Comment Re:Yes... Vwery interesting... (Score 2) 830

What kind of simulation would give up empirical evidence of its simulationness?

1. Due to limited computational resources, the simulated universe would be granular or "quantum".
2. To limit computation, reality would be held in a fuzzy probabilistic "superposition" state until it is actually observed, similar to how virtual reality skips the generation of hidden polygons.

Both of these are actually true in our universe, ergo, we are a simulation.

3. It would also need an upper bound on how fast information can be transferred, again to limit the amount of computation at any point in space-time. Oh, our universe has that too.

Comment Re:Win a game... (Score 2) 117

This is the first time a machine beat human using a very similar way as people's thinking.

Despite the name "neural network", there is nothing "very similar" between the way AlphaGo works and brains work.

That seems correct. AlphaGo is playing go at a level beyond that of humans. The take home point seems to be that brains aren't really competitive and are probably a dead-end technology.

Slashdot Top Deals

For large values of one, one equals two, for small values of two.