Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



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

Comment Self-driving cars doesn't need pinpoint GPS data. (Score 5, Informative) 134

If it was the case we would be in deep trouble considering the typical error in GPS. That is the reason why other sensors like LIDAR and cameras are also used. GPS is for having a general clue where you are, and 1,5 m accuracy would be plenty for that.

Slashdot editing...

Comment Re:Lots of bad assumptions here. (Score 1) 1145

If Mr ans Ms Smith are jobless, just as the rest of your neighborhood they might a) have no need for somebody else moving their lawn and b) might also have no money to pay other people doing stuff they could do themselves.

It is far fetched to state there is or even will be enough work for everybody. Most jobs, if not all can be automated. And the threshold, where it is worth to do so is falling continuously. How many people are required in farming today, how many people are actually working in a factory today, how many accountants are needed today, how many people are needed to service a computer today? With self-checkout lines in supermarkets and replacing of people for computers even in fast food chains, where do you think this will end? Clearly most if not all blue collar work can be automated. Not all of those people will qualify for white collar work (otherwise they would do this work already, i guess). And actually not even white collar work might be safe in the long run, seeing the current rise of expert systems. So it comes down to: who owns the machines is getting money, the rest would have no income. And it's not far fetched to say, that only VERY few will be the owners of the machines, probably the people who are already rich today, or their children. In my view it is, and will be even more so, necessary to distribute wealth in society. It's not even about injustice. Just think about it: Who would buy stuff from the rich robot owners, if everybody has essentially no money at all?

Society and even capitalism live from wealth being spread.

Comment Re:Power for businesses (Score 1) 103

First it means he can code (or hack) really small things. It's not an indication he would fare well in big, long-living projects.

Please take also into consideration, that coding is one of the smaller tasks a programmer does. Most is reading, reasoning, planning as well as learning. It does not help if you have the fastest guy in Lisp if he can't learn new things as fast as it's needed.

I am student, worked in projects, that existed for many years and had for the most part more than 15 coders simultaneously and take part in CodeJam and TopCoder competitions. Big projects and speed coding require totally different sets of skills.

Learning by the book is only part of it. With only learning by the book, you will get the so called "self-taught programmers" which I would keep out at all costs. What one really need to improve is constructive criticism by experts or at least people better than oneself. Anything else is just an echo chamber.

Comment Re:Similar issues in other fields, not a perfect f (Score 2) 118

I also had this problem. And when I asked an PhD student about a thing that seems suspicious in his papers experiment setup he admitted that it's actually not as great as described.

Another big problem is research in development processes like Scrum, XP, Waterfall etc.. I argued quite a bit with my professor as all the experiments cited where like "take a bunch of students and let them work on a toy project, which never has changing requirements and is tiny in code size." Well this of course can't be used to make any conclusions of real software projects with real programmers, yet the results where generalized. This is just bad science. And we should call people out for it and definitely not publish this stuff. A better but still wrong approach was getting real programmers and let them work for _one_ day. This is outright ridiculous. What would be the result of this? The problems in software projects arise after _months_ not hours. Also people need time to get used to a style of working, which will at least take a couple of days.

Even worse the professor was really in awe with this experiment, as somebody actually used real developers. When I talked with him about this flaw he just waived his hands telling me, then no real experiment could be conducted. This is actually right, but what he meant was actually: this is better than nothing. I strongly disagree.

Comment Re:I would be too (Score 1) 285

Also allow me to remark, that working overtime also is not necessarily a sign of professionalism, maybe even a sign of absence. I know how many hours I can work, before I am mentally exhausted and will introduce more errors / damage then benefit. As a professional thus I will insist staying below this threshold for the better of my employer and myself.

Comment Re:I would be too (Score 1) 285

A contract is two-sided. If one sides wishes to divert from the agreed-on terms I am sure the other side will be open for honest renegotiation so everything stays fair.

Also working overtime is a sign of bad planning, which might be the workers or his managers fault. Either the worker agreed on deadlines he should not have accepted or the manager tried to put too much work on the worker. Yet it should have been noticed early enough and the time / work could have been renegotiated. This of course requires professionalism of both sides: Don't try to hide your errors and give a early enough notice, and listening to employers and accepting that errors _are_ happing, if you are told or not.

Slashdot Top Deals

If bankers can count, how come they have eight windows and only four tellers?

Working...