Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Red Barchetta (Score 1) 81

I think you're mistaking the lack of evidence for the actuality of absence. But most relicts don't survive. Stone tools a durable, but wood and fiber aren't.

Also, even at maximal glaciation there were large areas that were temperate. Many of them are currently under water, so we really haven't even looked at them.

Additionally, technologies take time to develop. With relatively small populations, the development is slower. There is probably a minimum population size that is required for each degree of technological development, since you start to need specialists. (We know that at least one quite small group in the old stone age had a specialist in pottery, but most of the evidence for other specialties isn't as durable.)

So your assertion that earlier civilizations required the earth warming up is to definite and too sweeping. It's plausible, but to go further is to go beyond the evidence.

Comment Re: For us dumbnuts (Score 1) 33

Observation requires "making a measurement". You can't observe something without measuring it.

OTOH, "making a measurement" doesn't require that YOU interact with the measurement...so the state doesn't have to collapse, just to get spread out. (Every interaction is "making a measurement", even if it's only an electron interacting with a proton, and you never look.) But the state doesn't collapse until YOU joint the interaction, and become yourself entangled.

At the macro level there's so much entangled that the state is very spread out. It's like tunneling. Heavy particles are much less willing to tunnel than lighter particles, because they are less spread out, i.e. the probability of where they are is more definite. Once you get to the size of a spec of dust, it's almost impossible to keep the state pure. (They've done it to crystals in labs, but it wasn't easy.)

Comment Re:Come on, we've been through this... (Score 1) 29

You're being silly. A method can find lots of errors that should be corrected without requiring a pentest. I'll admit, that there are lots of errors it probably won't find, but at least you can reduce the attack surface.

And the benefit of using an AI here SHOULD be that it de-emphasizes problems without any real effect. (Whether it is or not, I couldn't say, but if it doesn't, then why use an AI.)

Slashdot Top Deals

No hardware designer should be allowed to produce any piece of hardware until three software guys have signed off for it. -- Andy Tanenbaum

Working...