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


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:I was skeptical about VR (Score 1) 151

Okay, so you're doing level design, say for a shooter. Gears of War. You've got to take cover behind stuff so as not to get annihilated. How do you design that stuff? If you make it too tall you've got some portion of the population that can't see over it, make it too short and you've got people bending at the waist to duck.

Exactly the same fucking way that you design it now.

You think a VR headset knows how tall you are? No. Your in-game avatar and your real height are entirely completely totally and intentionally utterly fucking disconnected.

I can enter a VR game as a 2 year old girl in nappies or as a 20 metre tall dinosaur. I don't have to actually shit myself or eat tall trees in real life to do this.

Comment Re:The owner should be liable (Score 1) 237

Regardless of whom the law holds responsible, this is going to be an actuarial nightmare for the insurance company. A manufacturer might have a stellar track record for decades, then one day a security update introduces a bug that causes a lot of crashes. How can the insurance companies take account of that in their pricing?

Comment It doesn't like going through walls though (Score 1) 63

Or anything solid really. If you have line-of-sight it works pretty well but get anything in the way, and you can have serious issues. I tried it for wireless HDMI and it wasn't able to maintain a solid signal over about 25 feet because there was an interior wall in between the transmitter and receiver.

Comment Re:s/drug trials/climate change/g (Score 1) 313

The purpose of peer review is to identify incorrect theories and throw them out.

Not even that much, really. You can't generally detect an incorrect theory in a paper you're reviewing.

Basically peer review can only ensure that the authors have done their homework, are aware of all the other relevant literature, explain themselves clearly, thought of obvious problems and alternative explanations, and don't invoke any logical fallacies.

In practice a lot of it gets dedicated to a grad student who can't even do that much.

Comment Re:Won't happen. Sorry, there is no AI ever ... (Score 1) 327

... that can turn the harebrained buzzword/bullshit-laden confused and convoluted descriptions ("specs") of my marketing crew into a working product.

I just deliver a "Hello, World!" program, and when they say "WTF?" I say "Sure, it's got some bugs in it, but I got it out ahead of schedule!"

Comment Re:Coding requirements (Score 1) 327

Using AI to convert specs to code has been an active research area for a long time. But to essentially echo your point, specs that are specific enough to allow this are about the same complexity and require about the same amount of detail as writing the program.

And in my limited industry experience, we worked more as hacks than as spec implementers anyway. Typically we wrote what someone asked for, then waited for them to come back and say that wasn't really what they wanted. Iterate until you move to the next job.

Comment Re:Juvenile psychosis only (Score 1) 240

context : random conversation about risky behaviour
me: yeah, it might kill me. Shrug.
friend: you don't care that the cats might starve if you're dead?
me: they wont starve, they can eat me

The cleaner would find whatever's left of me inside of a week, then the cats will be taken care of anyway. Who the hell cares about being eaten by a cat after they've died?

Slashdot Top Deals

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (6) Them bats is smart; they use radar.