Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:this is trash (Score 1) 72

Maybe the song in question is good; maybe it isn't - that's up to the listener.

You, human, have your own opinions on what you call music; be it inspirational, rock, country, new age, or whatever. Your mind was 'trained' with years of what *you* find interesting or wonderful. You've listened to samples to derive your opinion on what you would create - if you created something. It might be nice, or awesome; It might be utter crap, too.

AI today requires "training" of that AI. It needs to be fed many, many samples (just as we humans are) and TFA mentions nothing about the samples this AI was fed; their genre, style, etc...

But whatever. The article doesn't mention the training program the AI underwent and how much. So, is it really that bad? It's obvious it's not completely random. But, yes, it's going to be a while before AI starts composing top 10 hits under any genre.

Comment Re:JAIL JAIL JAIL (Score 1) 236

Where did the parent advocate having the government monitor code check-ins or ensure software quality? All he advocated was having criminal penalties for insecure software, which actually sounds like a good idea to me, provided people are able to pass the blame to their bosses and thus avoid all liability (if you fear for your job because your boss ordered you to do something insecure, then your boss should go to jail, not you. If your boss was just passing orders from his boss, his boss should go to jail, not him.).

Both bosses should go to jail. Depending on the situation it's called collusion and/or conspiracy.

Comment Re:So how fast is it...? (Score 2) 142

No, no. Not at all. I was simply suggesting that maybe their point wasn't to get statistics out; but, rather, obtain eyeballs.

I think you're totally spot on - what a wasted opportunity and inferior article. They made a claim without substantiating it at any length.

Oh, and sorry if I offended you. That certainly wasn't my intent. The whole thing is humorous to me.

Comment Re:Ridiculous. (Score 5, Insightful) 914

Exactly. This is simply inhumane. Regardless of the otrocities commited by the convicted, we cannot, as a society, debase ourselves by resorting to torture of the mind, body, or soul.

The department of corrections is supposed to be "correcting" human behaviour, not damaging it. Too much of that happens in prisons as it is. Now this doctor wants to exacerbate that?

Whatever organization that she received her doctorate from should revoke it immediately!

Comment Fox News? (Score 5, Insightful) 166

Is that you? To reiterate another poster's comment, this is just some dude's blog entry.

Seriously? WTF with the headline, Timothy? Is /. Into sensationalist, eye-grabbing headlines now? How about maybe only showing comments 5 at a time while you're at it? That should garner some ad revenue. That title is *very* misleading.

Comment Re:inconsiderate... (Score 1) 234

True story.

I taught my small, 20lb dog to not crap in the house, too. We always walk up a hill so he can crap in the field behind the house. He doesn't like to crap on short grass, either.

One day, on vacation in Kansas City, KS, we walked out of the hotel for a morning walk. We walked across the street (near a highway). We walked and walked and he wouldn't do his business. Finally, he semi-squated in front of a small, manucured bush and promptly deposited a turd on top of it.

Triumphantly, I left it there. Hey. At least no one would *step* on it!

Comment Re:Can't replicate (Score 1) 135

Ah, cool. Good to know! Thanks for the update. I hadn't considered the immediacy of the locking mechanism.

As far as I can tell, this "bug" is bullshit. The worst that happens is that someone sees what apps you were running, the screens are greyed out if you "exploit" this successfully.

Try again, Apple haters.

Agreed! I thought about this while driving. Haters gotta hate. :P

Comment Re:Can't replicate (Score 1) 135

KABOOM! I read some of the other posts. You DO have to double-tap the home button in really fast succession.

So, scratch my previous post.

I was able to replicate this WITHOUT having the 'Passcode Lock' enabled with a single home button tap.

I was also ABLE to replicate this WITH 'Passcode Lock' enabled with a double-tap of the home button. However, I was unable to access any of the open applications from the multi-tasking screen.

Comment Re:Can't replicate (Score 1) 135

I was able to replicate this with caveats.

I was able to replicate this WITHOUT having the 'Passcode Lock' enabled.

I was UNABLE to replicate this WITH 'Passcode Lock' enabled.

I've now restarted an iPad Mini and am STILL UNABLE to replicate with the 'Passcode Lock' enabled.

I'm not sure what the problem with this feature is. Sure, they've 'bypassed' the swipe to unlock screen; but, the user has specifically poked and prodded this iPad Mini in what, I assume, is an extremely unlikely situation. By itself I'm not so sure this is such a major problem. If it had gotten around the 'Passcode Lock' then yeah; but, it doesn't seem to.

Slashdot Top Deals

What is worth doing is worth the trouble of asking somebody to do.