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

 



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

Comment So the farmer is merely renting the tractor? (Score 2) 639

The world's largest tractor maker, John Deere, in fact, says that people who purchase tractors don't really own them and instead they are getting an "implied license for the life of the vehicle to operate the vehicle."

If this is true, then why does the manufacturer not have an obligation to repair the tractor for free?

Comment Re:DOS was terrible (Score 2) 211

Single user and no security what-so-ever. IBM should have used the 68000 combined with a proper OS.

Yeah, that's what I said when the IBM 5150 PC was announced in 1981 with an 8/16-bit 8088 CPU running a rebranded Quick & Dirty Operating System:

"Too little, too late".

I was not aware yet that a brand name may be worth a lot more than technical specifications.

Comment Re:Sinking Ship (Score 1) 146

There is only one way the UK can really achieve those age verification and website rating plans: by disconnecting their island from the world's internet cables and shooting all telecom satellites from the sky above them, so that Brits can only to connect to local servers which fall under British jurisdiction.

Brinternexit.

Comment Re: It's a liability issue (Score 1) 451

"No, the basic premise of the movie (robots turning against their makers) is the complete opposite of Asimov's books."

I think you should read more of the actual books. The idea of the robots protecting humanity by removing control from them was covered in the latter caves of steel novels.

Then watch the film again, they didn't turn against, they took over control.

I have read the books. Seeing the movie once was enough.

I the later books, the robots did not "take over control" from the humans. They did however manipulate humanity from behind the scenes into a future where mankind would not need robots any more.

R. Giskard and R. Daneel Olivaw added the zeroth law of robots, which is protecting humanity as such. Since that is an infraction on the firs law, which is about protecting individual humans, accepting this new law disables R. Giskard. R. Daneel Olivaw evolves into something different than a robot, since over the centuries his positronic brain gets replaced by a biological brain.

The events in the movie are not related to that in any way.

Comment Re: It's a liability issue (Score 1) 451

The movie is based on a script which is in no way related to Asimov's book. Marketing slapped the Asimov brand on it and a couple of scenes which refer to Asimov's stories were added at that point.

Smith's movie actually incorporates several themes and ideas from the original book.

No, the basic premise of the movie (robots turning against their makers) is the complete opposite of Asimov's books.

"I, Robot" is a collection of short stories. As "Golden Age" scifi it's top-of-the-line, but it's pretty outdated so any one story from it would make a pretty horrible movie.

Like most AI and robot movies, it is a variation on Frankenstein, and as such not very original. A movie in the spirit of Asimov's stories would be a lot more refreshing.

Slashdot Top Deals

Entropy requires no maintenance. -- Markoff Chaney

Working...