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. ×

Comment Re:DNA testing is inherently racist (Score 2) 226

DNA testing is inherently racist, as genetic traits are heritable and are associated with your ethnic/genetic background.

Genetic variability between any two individuals of the very same tribe dwarfs ethnicity. This is why judging individuals on a genetic basis by their tribe/race is illogical and also why your argument doesn't hold up.

I would agree for different reasons allowing this is a bad idea. Chance of these schemes ever being deemed socially acceptable in my estimation is 0... Probably also quite useless given people in many ways that matter are more or less products of their environments rather than genetics.

Comment Re:Economic malthusianism (Score 1) 880

People have been spouting this prophecy for more than 300 years, and its never come true.

I've always hated these arguments because they hide behind default historically safe assumptions are not merit based. The history of this and mechanisms are very much useful and worth understanding. Yet there was never a time in those 300 years when dead labor was able to close the loop by taking over the work of living labor and do it better than humans. This most certainly will cease to be the case well into the next 300 years.

Currently NONE of the above is in play nor will it be anytime soon. First world job loss is currently a function of increasingly friction free capital movement enabled by technology, trade deals and telepresence coupled with corporations chasing cheap labor to the ends of the earth. It isn't about machines "taking over"... but this isn't forever.

Despite incredible technological advancement, more people are employed now than in any point in history.

Imagine that... more people are also alive now than in any point in history.

Some people mightl lose out in the short term, but in the long term, the number of jobs only grows.

No. Availability of reserve labor has always been market driven.

Bottom line .. eventually when dead labor is smarter/cheaper/faster/better than humans the reserve labor force is ultimately screwed.

Comment Providing aid and comfort to Hitler (Score 1) 611

While all of us believe in the ideas of free speech

Everyone says this... few actually mean it.

and open platforms, we draw a line here. We agree that people shouldnâ(TM)t be fired for their political views, but
this isnâ(TM)t a disagreement on tax policy, this is advocating hatred and violence

Giving more power to someone whose ascension and behavior strike fear into so many people is unacceptable

Roughly half the voting country will be advocating hatred, violence and giving power to Trump when they go to the polls and vote Trump in the next few weeks including roughly 3 million who gave him money.

Doesn't that blow your mind? How do you sleep at night knowing close to half the country is a basket of ***ist ***phobe advocates of hatred and violence?

How can you not be constantly "triggered" knowing half the country actively supports Trump by voting for and advocating for him? You must be "terrified" beyond words. It must make you physically ill. How can you "feel safe"?

Comment Re:Déjà vu (Score 1) 51

Insightful from Carmack. There's been a history of failed attempts in technology to "game change" focusing on the single human sense of vision.
More recently it was 3D TV's and movie theatres which, in hindsight, enjoyed what Carmack describes as "coasting on novelty".

There have been a number of attempts at 3D shopping, 3D meeting spaces, 3D websites over the years and they all failed in my opinion because like video calling they were just gimmicks that were unable to offer any usable value. VR Facebook I assume will meet a similar fate. If people wanted to interact with each other in a space that (is)looks real they have the option of doing that already.

I think VR itself is different. It isn't 3DTV .. I see the sentiment everywhere by what I assume are people who mostly have never tried VR or only used some cardboard contraption with plastic lens and word VR scribbled on side in magic marker.

The difference between VR and 3DTV is fundamentally with VR you are transported to another place and sort of believe you are there. With 3DTV you are just looking at a screen - a 3D screen with things that pop out and have depth yet still just a screen.

Software currently sucks, displays have a long way to go yet in terms of at least experiences and games VR isn't just another gimmick with no or marginal value. It isn't an incremental improvement like Color TV, HDTV or 3D TV... In my opinion it is a "game changer" tons of fun and frankly amazing. Until you try VR (smartphones don't count) you won't understand.

Nobody watches 3DTV and says "holy shit" the effect is marginally neat and then you forget about it... everyone who has tried our VR gear is like OMFG and wants one for themselves.

Comment Re:Mobile VR is best VR (Score 1) 51

Mobile games fit the VR model much better than traditional PC or Console based games.

The only thing that makes a mobile game a mobile game is touch screen rather than controller interface.

Mobile games are short, gimmicky and disposable. The UI is already stripped down to a minimum, they're meant to be played for short periods, good for a giggle, and then you move on.

Not interested in wasting time with low quality.

As much fun as it is to physically stand up and crouch down in a VR cover-based-shooter, it's significantly less responsive than just pressing a button. Did I stand up high enough? Too high? I'm tall, and now it won't register me crouching. Same with reloading, walking, talking, or anything else you might do in a game. Pressing a button is much easier and more reliable than trying to hump my PS/Vive/Wii-motes on something to simulate an action.

Head and controllers are tracked in 6DOF. Not vomit inducing 3DOF currently dominating smartphones. The system knows exactly what your position is in space. If your taking cover you would be able to see for yourself whether your crouched down enough. If you sit on the floor in RL your sitting on the floor in VR. You input physical height for calibration when setting up the VR display and center when starting software to set references.

Vive/Touch controllers are tracked in the same way as HMD. Controller movement is tracked in 3 space with physical buttons.

"Traditional" games are also meant to be played for longer periods, which can be anything from nausea inducing to downright painful in VR, as you must strap 2+ pounds of plastic, glass, and wires to your face.

Everyone is different. Find it easy to forget it on. PC VR is lighter, higher quality, less vomit inducing and more comfortable than mobile. Most nausea comes from 3DOF limitations of smartphones.

Comment Smartphone VR = too early to market (Score 1) 51

Smartphone GPUs are not powerful enough and not power efficient enough to drive a VR display at acceptable quality for mass appeal period. All low level "tricks" and hardware hacking in the world are not going to do much to change this basic equation.

Nor do I see where there is sufficient R&D budgets to push technology hard enough to make it happen in the near term just for the sake of VR.

Comment Re:As long as they're still allowed to use data... (Score 3) 149

I am not sure I agree. If the data says that $minority group is more violent then $non-minority, it may be statically true for a given set of statistics but we all (should) know that correlation is not causation and it may be that $minority group on average lives in a more dangerous place. Higher insurance rates for $minority group members would be racist, but charging higher rates for people (with out regard to race) living in a dangerous place would not be racist.

Causation is irrelevant in terms of insurance. The only thing that matters is accurately modeling risk. An algorithm doesn't have to know the reasons why kids are more likely to smash up their parents cars. It is only relevant that kids smash up their parents cars.

Comment Judging individuals based on group attributes (Score 3) 149

The problem Google is describing isn't limited to a subset of arbitrary tribal factors society deems to be off limits.

Entire reason for existence of these systems is making prejudiced decisions about individuals based on statistical evidence.

You can spend all day filtering out things that will get you sued or attract bad press but this doesn't address core fact these systems are intended to make prejudiced judgments about individuals based on statistical experience and evidence.

Being prejudiced can be practically helpful in some contexts but don't pretend that isn't what your doing, don't confuse it for fairness and don't bother making up a bunch of mystical bullshit about how your dataset or programmers are biased. Prejudice is the raison d'etre of these systems. It is what they are designed to do.

Comment Re:Meanwhile (Score 1) 121

If you want someone to blame, blame the fucking EU with their damned RoHS directives. If electronic solder still had LEAD in it, like God intended, we wouldn't have BGA parts breaking-free from their PCBs at the slightest provocation. Metallurgy has developed over centuries, but with a stroke of a pen, the chemists were sent back to the drawing board to find a substitute for that which has no substitute.

God intended kids in poor countries who end up mining first world disposable e-trash to get lead poisoning.

And before you say "But no one else has this problem", do a little Googling. You'll find LOTS of similar problems with HTC, LG, Samsung, etc. It's a RoHS thing; but none of those other phones (unless they catch on fire a lot) make for Clickbait on Slashdot like the iPhone does. But the stories are there. But do your own research, Hater

Problems and solutions associated with removing lead are well studied and widely implemented. If your still making EXCUSES for vendors who failed to adapt and get the memo some dozen years after the fact that's on you. Customers don't care about lame excuses they care about outcomes.

There is no excuse for unsafe or failure prone products by any vendor.

Comment Re:The odds (Score 1) 110

You pretty forcefully made my point. There are literally millions of cars with fire troubles. No one gets on TV and tells us to stop using cars. No one thinks that a car fire is the most important risk of using a car, nor should they. Yet when Samsung "hides" the fact that three of their devices caught fire, we rain fire and brimstone on them.

When there are vehicle defects discovered that are known fire hazards vehicles are recalled and people DO get on TV and send letters and make telephone calls to let people know to get their vehicles fixed. The same to varying degrees applies to every other product you purchase with known defects rendering the product unsafe.


The entire point was that the risk may have been a bit overblown. Yes, of course, for the unlucky three people, the impact can be terrible, even catastrophic. But like it or not, life has risks. When you walk outside, you risk your life. When you walk inside, you risk your life. If one of those remote risks became reality for you, ending your life, that would be terrible for you, but that risk should not keep us all from going outside, or inside.

This is not a falsifiable statement. Just because risk exists says nothing about whether a risk from a particular problem or defect is acceptable. Replay your exact response above verbatim except substitute battery fire or car fire for exploding Barbie doll or plastic army dudes who sometimes fire real bullets and hurt people. When you make a statement that can't be falsified you are not communicating useful information.

Batteries inherently carry a risk of fire. All batteries have this risk.

The problem at hand isn't presence of risk it is defects causing unacceptable unnecessary risks. Some batteries are much safer than others. Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries can be abused overcharged, undercharged, shot, thrown off cliff, submerged and they won't catch fire. The problem isn't batteries the problem is vendors pushing parameters to marginally increase energy and reduce size while decreasing BOM costs that is actively placing people at increasingly unnecessary risk.

We live with it, because the benefit outweighs the risk. Is Samsung's risk higher or lower than the risk of a standard AA battery catching fire? Is it higher than any other cell phone model? I don't think we know that yet. If Samsung has created an unsafe product, they should address it. But let's not get ahead of ourselves, the replacement devices haven't yet been proven to be any riskier than any other cell phone.

Samsung themselves seems to know the answer to this question because they are halting production.

Comment Re:The odds (Score 1) 110

Samsung has sold millions of these things. Three of them have caught fire. That makes the odds of a device catching fire less than 1 in 1,000,000. Business Insider says that 17 cars catch fire every hour. Where are the cries for recalling cars?

I'm going to keep a copy of your post for safe keeping. This "what about y" device is constantly being invoked as justification for everything from mass surveillance to red rum so often in so many different contexts it usually makes me cringe/sigh Al Gore style whenever I encounter it.

Boldly inquiring about cries for recalling products that catch on fire takes it to a whole new level.













If you want to hear cries from victims themselves click keywords and enter fire. http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/o...

Comment Re:Issue with batteries or with phone design? (Score 1) 110

Bull fucking shit !

Ever hear of the Air Force bombing Al Qaeda by dropping batteries on them ?
Are SpaceX stuffing their rockets full of batteries and igniting them ?

Of course not.. because they use other stuff that has a higher energy density than a fucking battery.

Energy density of Lithium Ion batteries is 1 MJ/kg
Energy density of TNT is ~5 MJ/kg
Energy density of Pizza is ~50 MJ/kg

Ever hear of the Air Force bombing Al Qaeda by dropping pizza on them?

Of course not because the reality is energy density means shit and these comparisons are ALL crap. What makes most bombs dangerous is their POWER not overall ENERGY.

Slashdot Top Deals

The end of labor is to gain leisure.