Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment Re:I don't even like Uber but (Score 1) 633

Or we could just not make people suffer through that out of some vindictive "I did it so you should too" attitude.

That attitude is in your head, not my post.

I get this bullshit a lot. I explain some situation and how I or others found a way out - real world answers actually done. And people come out of the woodwork to complain in the way you did. WTF? Do you object to any useful advice in life? Not every bit of advice will worth for everyone. We get that. But everything that actually worked for someone will be useful for someone else!

Some people can't be functional adults, and obviously need charity, whether physically or mentally disabled. For the rest, yes, they need to find some path to skilled work. We as a society need to make that path easier, but it's clear there will be no unskilled jobs by the end of the century.

Comment Re:And they're improving, too (Score 1) 176

Well, when you make hyperbolic claims with no supporting details or evidence, expect skepticism.

And Microsoft was in fact paying people to do the very same with Linux back in the day, when the term "astroturf" was invented and Linux had a similar market share on the desktop to DDG's. Also, Google does all evil things, so I'm sure they're doing this evil thing.

Comment Re:I don't even like Uber but (Score 1) 633

Hate to break it to you but most jobs, by the numbers, require "almost no skills." 40% of US workers are unskilled. Should they all starve to death?

Today many of those jobs do pay a living wage, because "unskilled" is a broad category, and some of those jobs are just hard work. But there also need to be "first jobs", and those don't need to pay a living wage. I don't think Uber counts as that, though, but they still sound less sleazy than taxi companies.

When I was poor and working those sorts of jobs, you made a living by working 60+ hours a week. Because overtime kicked in at 40, no job would ever give you close to 40 hours: mid-30s was the most you could hope for. So you worked 2 jobs, and commuted between them, often with very inconvenient gaps between the jobs. I used to hate the idea of overtime pay, as it destroyed what little time might nave been left most days, and still no one in my circumstance got overtime pay.

It sucked, but you find a way to move to something better.

Comment Re:For comparison (Score 1) 176

That gives Google the revenue to be far more evil than DDG. They have a full engineering team devoted to determining your race, your religion, level of education, income, and so on. If you're worried about Trump wanting a "Muslim registry", you should at least be vaguely concerned that Google already has one.

Comment Re:And they're improving, too (Score 2) 176

They can't NOT improve. It looks and behaves like a first-year CompSci student's summer project. I applaud the spirit behind what they are doing, but if Google is Photoshop, DDG is an Etch-A-Sketch.

I hear just complaint just often enough to suspect astroturfing. I've never had a problem with DDG search results - well, no more problem than I have with Google. Plus there's a lot of good bang commands that give me a better command line in my search box, starting with !wa to use the wonderful Wolfram Alpha site.

Comment Re:Where's the president (Score 1) 162

Not just the 80s - employers have never been willing to train for skilled labor, unless you go back to old-school apprenticeships, starting at age 12 and replacing later schooling. With some relevant training, employers will generally soak of the cost of the last 10%, just as you do when hiring someone from a non-identical job elsewhere. But that takes proving that you've already learned the basics, or a similar skill (and thus proving you can learn).

Comment Re:Where's the president (Score 2) 162

There are over a million skilled manufacturing jobs unfilled right now. There's plenty to manufacture, but skilled workers willing to do blue-collar work are hard to find. Sure, we'll never return to the old days, "but the good old days weren't always good, and tomorrow ain't as bad as it seems".

Comment Re:NextLight Fiber (Score 1) 137

Aww yeah, same here. We stream a fair amount of video and the occasional steam download, so I suppose we could potentially butt up against a data cap at some inferior ISP. I'm sure going to hate it if I ever have to move back to a sluggish-ass 20MBPS connection!

Doing a video upload to youtube and having the upload complete before I can finish typing the description in the video is also pretty nice.

Comment Re:AI? (Score 2) 161

Bro, do you even dictionary? It does have a defined meaning and it's not machine consciousness. For fucks sake, that's science fiction and only science fiction. It's not the common meaning of the term. It's not what "AI researchers" research. It's fanwank. Get over it.

1 : a branch of computer science dealing with the simulation of intelligent behavior in computers

2 : the capability of a machine to imitate intelligent human behavior

Comment Re:AI investment will be interesting (Score 1) 161

As you increase efficiency, people can buy more fore the same money, so it evens out. Looked at a different way, set the notion of money aside: what we consume is what we produce (assuming an efficient market, so we're not producing stuff no one wants). More production will always mean more consumption. More efficiency just means more production, because we as consumers are never satisfied.

Of course, times can get turbulent as jobs move to new areas faster than people can retrain, and this certainly isn't the first time that's happened.

Comment Re:Important milestone (Score 4, Interesting) 161

Not as humans play it. You don't play the early game, or any area where pieces are sparse, by exhaustive analysis, but that's where the mechanical search space would be largest. (Much like humans don't play the endgame in chess that way.) "Complexity" of the naive search space, before even the most basic pruning, isn't an interesting measure.

Playing as humans play, the early game in chess is more complex than go, the midgame is similar, the endgame is much more complex in go. Go is harder to write a bot for, because chess is more complex in ways that are hard for humans, while go is more complex in ways that are hard to program. Does that make it a "more complex game"? Maybe - it's all down to definitions.

Slashdot Top Deals

Those who can, do; those who can't, simulate.