Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



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

Comment Possible (Score 2) 143

First, I'm sure there's lots of Open Source being used in Google's implementation - just not where we can see.

There is a speech recognizer from CMU that might be a good starting point. I haven't heard about plain-language software, though. There is additional rocket science to be done. Not insurmountable given things we've already done.

Training with millions of people? Actually, that's the part that community development is good at.

Comment Re:Not sure you have a lot of options? (Score 2) 186

Every time someone voluntarily went to a Windows 10 PC (even though there are alternatives), they have a horror story about it

Hyperbole = bollocks. My partner and I are on W10, it's heaps better than W7 or W8*, and we have no horror stories. Almost everything I use auto-saves, apps reload on reboot, and I have enough discipline to save Notepad files or Sql Manager queries if I want to keep them.

So you admit you take steps to guard yourself against purposeful OS actions and yet you claim that is merely an annoyance or less?

Comment Re:Not sure you have a lot of options? (Score 2) 186

Yes, a computer should be getting updates if it ever connects to a network independent of whether or not it had internet connectivity. In this case, it is the other hosts on the network that create the risk.

Completely false. The only updates you need are specifically for the network stack and any applications that access the network. The rest are generally useless to you and may create problems. For instance, a bare XP from 2001 machine connected to a network behind a solid firewall and only running a text only mail client is relatively safe, as far as that system can ever be considered safe. It would not be any safer than a fully patched system running the same software under the same conditions.

Comment Re:'Batch Tuesday'? (Score 2) 186

Why does anyone worried about privacy, security, or really "owning" their computer run windows anymore? It's time to accept that windows is no longer a consumer OS, it is a subscription service that allows you access to things you think you own, only as long as you pay the piper (that subscription payment will be coming, just wait for it).

To answer the question: If you want a AAA game platform, just buy your $5K game console and be done with it. Yes, like any console, it can do more, but at what cost?

Comment Re: It's OK to Not Tolerate Inteolerance (Score 1) 611

If you surveyed how many citizens would support law against hate speech, it would probably be a significant number. And prospective citizens as well. So I don't think the problem with your proposal has anything to do with people in favor of shari'a law. It would not work with plain Judeo-Christian European European-descended folks.

Comment Re:So basically... (Score 1) 611

I've met Godwin and he'd be horrified that you are trying to shield Trump by invoking his name. The world doesn't need an automatic method to suppress discussion of atrocities, and Mike never meant what he said to be one. In fact, this is a quote of Mike directly:

If you're thoughtful about it and show some real awareness of history, go ahead and refer to Hitler or Nazis when you talk about Trump. Or any other politician.

Comment Re:It's OK to Not Tolerate Inteolerance (Score 1) 611

Your next move, should you choose to make it, is to decry that if we actually had standards for citizenship (like every other goddamn country on Earth) we'd have to kick out all existing citizens that don't meet those standards, which is ludicrous. No one handles birthright citizenship the same way they handle citizenship through naturalization, and the lack of options for stateless citizens makes that idea cruel and untenable.

With all due respect, you're talking to yourself now. I wasn't thinking of this point at all.

Comment Re:It's OK to Not Tolerate Inteolerance (Score 1) 611

The actual statement is "support and defend the constitution and laws of the United States". Now, obviously, you personally do not approve of every law, nor could anyone even know them all. If you swear "true faith and allegiance" to them you are swearing to follow and uphold the law, not to refrain from opposing it in a peaceful political manner as is supported by that very text. The only way as a citizen that you could actually break the first amendment would be if you were in a government position, because it's directed toward congress rather than the people. So, the typical prospective citizen can swear allegiance to that amendment with complete confidence that they will never be in a position for that to matter.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Ada is PL/I trying to be Smalltalk. -- Codoso diBlini

Working...