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


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:1 million processing operations = 1.2 inches (Score 1) 52

You should learn the difference between a single sensor return and a full perception result. Also, look up sensor noise, integration time, classifier inputs and training. Please tell me how you're planning on dealing with rain and snow.

Yes, if it was as simple as a magic sensor that could tell you instantly at max range 1) that the thing is a car (even though you won't see all of it immediately) 2) what its velocity vector is and 3) what its going to do, then yes, things are as simple as you wish they were.

But they are really, really not.

Comment Their requirements are lacking (Score 1) 52

Unless they just want the small/low speed vehicle market, their requirements are grossly lacking. For a road-going autonomous vehicle, "dozens of meters" is useless at any real speed. Try ~100 meters as a start and go from there. Otherwise you'll always be outrunning your perception and unable to see anything in time to stop.

Comment Re:Malcom Gladwell is a corporate shill (Score 2) 247

Not only that, but in the article he completely dismisses/ignores/pretends-it-doesn't-exist the Toyota unintended acceleration analysis that happened after the NASA folks got their chance. Turns out the NASA folks didn't get everything there was to analyze, and low and behold once all of the info was available: Toyota's engineers did a crap job of safety in their software.

Full details can be read here.

I can't speak to him being a shill, but he's definitely either misinformed or disingenuous.

Submission + - Your site is broken! 2

s.petry writes: I guess that Dice learned nothing from the last Beta roll out. Text is all over the place with clipped characters on the top line and links covering the bottom line, and the buttons are completely broken. Some don't look like buttons at all, just text, others are a solid color with same color text and white shadows so you can't really read text. The lack of QA and testing is simply inexcusable a second time, sorry.

Just like the last Beta little to no concern or care for users that have been making Slashdot Slashdot for well over a decade. At least last Beta we had a chance to test and tell you it was broken (which was ignored), this time it was just dumped on the community broken.

I originally thought that the submit button was gone, but it showed up with a new color and stands out if you look far enough down the menu. That is the only thing positive I can see from the update. Interestingly, the "Preview" button on the "Submit" page actually looks like the old button so I can read it. (Please don't attempt to "fix" that with what you broke everywhere else)
User Journal

Journal Journal: Well, this is a bummer 1

So now this place wants to look like a cross between Lollipop and iOS!


Okay, it's not entirely yucky. I can zoom all the way in now and line wrap works! Yay!

Comment Re:CMU has the right (Score 1) 85

But if CMU wins outright, it will be a clear sign to corporations that using academia as it's main R&D "arm" is bad for business...

This is only the case where corprorations try to cheat academia. Marvell had the option ~10 years ago to license the tech from CMU. They said no and used it anyway.

Comment Re:wow (Score 4, Informative) 85

You should really just read the whole FAQ.

Basically Marvell desperately need the invention after trying and failing to come up with something that could do the same thing. CMU offered to license it to them. They declined, and then used it anyway. It completely turned around their drive business. So, only 25% of the profits for willful infringement of critical technology that they could have licensed for much less if they'd played fair back in the day doesn't really seem too bad to me.

Comment Re:wow (Score 4, Informative) 85

Briefly from CMU's FAQ:

The size of the award was based on an analysis by Catharine M. Lawton, an intellectual property damages expert who testified on behalf of CMU during the trial along with CMU's technical and industry experts. Ms. Lawton applied several commonly used and court approved methods of determining an appropriate royalty for Marvell's infringement in patent cases. Ms. Lawton's analysis rested on a comparison of Marvell's business and economic circumstances both before and after it started to infringe. Her opinion and application of these accepted methods were based on a detailed analysis of the facts and financial records in the case, as well as the testimony of Dr. Steven McLaughlin, CMU's digital signal processing expert, and Dr. Chris Bajorek, CMU's expert in the hard disk drive industry.

Marvell earned an average revenue of $4.42 per chip and made an average operating profit of $2.16 for each of the more than 2 billion chips sold over more than a decade. Based upon her analysis of all the facts, Ms. Lawton determined that the proper value of the CMU invention was $.50 per chip.

Comment Re:Taxpayer subsidized? (Score 1) 85

In fact, it was funded by industry.

From CMU's FAQ on the case:

"Their work was done under the auspices of CMU's Data Storage Systems Center, which was formed as a partnership between CMU and certain members of the information storage industry and through which CMU has worked closely with industry partners for decades. The DSSC was formed to and has played a critical role in preserving research and development efforts and jobs in the hard disk drive industry in the United States."

Comment Re:Good guys and bad guys (Score 1) 85

You are correct that the specific breakdown of that 50% is entirely dependent on the percentages agreed upon when the internal invention disclosure was made, and that the assignation of those percentages between the various inventors is not dictated in any particular way by the IP Policy. What is clear, however is that 50% (minus 1/2 of the legal fees) will be distributed amongst to the two inventors.

That said, at CMU, any faculty member who tries to cut his or her grad students out of their invention disclosures will likely soon find him or herself running short on grad students, not to mention liable to be hauled into court for fraud. So there is strong self-interested impetus to make those percentages as correct as possible.

Slashdot Top Deals

Never tell people how to do things. Tell them WHAT to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity. -- Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.