Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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:Other (Score 1) 134

But the human variety can usually search google for it better than any of the voice assistants as they can both get your words transcribed right the first time, and understand the context of your request, neither of which even the most advanced assistants have much luck with.

Comment Re:Missing option: None (Score 1) 134

Works fine if your street names are all real words that the system understands. Many however are not, so searching for street names with any of these can be infuriating as it can't figure out how to spell "shaganappi trail" same goes for business names, if it can't spell it, it can't find information on it.
Meanwhile simple things like the appointment example you give are so often screwed up because you put the subject and the time in the wrong order or something equally easy to do as a human who hasn't yet been trained to work in exactly the way the "assistant" expected. I find that I need to manually pull out my phone and double check each one anyway, at which point I might as well have just entered it that way in the first place.

The reply one should be good, but again I usually get in to voice recognition/autocorrect ridiculousness that makes it too unreliable to use on a regular basis.

Comment No way to evaluate the pilot (Score 2) 342

It's really hard to tell if UBI is a great idea, or a horrible one, but the biggest issue is that it's impossible to trial in this manner.

To actually test UBI, several things need to happen:
1) you make it truly universal, no means testing, no targeting to certain demographics, everyone gets it, from the millionaires, to the homeless.
2) you cover everyone in a reasonably large geographic area, no exceptions.
3) You also need to turn off all the other services it's supposed to replace (welfare, employment insurance, disability amounts, etc)

This is important because without 1 and 2 you end up with a distorted system. You don't get to see if everyone having extra money simply drives all prices up by that amount making it useless (if the poverty line moves up by the exact amount of the UBI, have you really helped anyone?), or if it actually allows people to live. You end up with simply a lottery where some lucky people have more money, while everyone else has the same.
While 3 also helps make sure you're looking at an undistorted system, it is also about being able to afford to do this at all. UBI can only be affordable if you use it to cut out massive amounts of government bureaucracy, if all the bureaucracy is left in place, you'll never find enough money to make it work.

These trials will be a success or a failure depending on what the agenda of the study really is, but neither outcome tells you anything at all about how the system would actually work if rolled out universally.

Comment Re:Wrong (Score 0) 306

It's political suicide for a scientist to avoid blaming climate change for anything these days. That doesn't mean it's a credible reason for this particular issue. If a difference of a few inches will cause your city to flood or not, you already flooded any time there was a storm anyway. Keep in mind that on an average day (not a storm) the wave heights are more than that difference.

Comment Re:The problem with your explanation (Score 1) 306

But again, the most expensive land is what you just called "less desirable". It seems in fact that the floodplain land in most cities is the most expensive, not the least. People WANT to live beside the water, even though it's a horrible idea. The most expensive properties in my city tend to have a river running through their backyard, they're also the first to flood. So every time they flood, the government pays out millions of dollars in disaster relief to the richest people in town.

You can hardly say that the risks weren't disclosed either, the river is *IN* their yard!

Comment Re:The problem with your explanation (Score 2) 306

We have learned something since then.

I'd love to think you're right, but I just can't.

We see it over and over again, in many places the oldest parts of the city is fine but the newer parts are the problem, 150+ years ago the people settling areas often looked at the terrain before building and built on hills, but since then we gave up and decided that riverfront was a selling feature instead of a hazard.

A few years ago we had major flooding here, the original historic properties (first houses in a city founded at the junction of 2 rivers) were high and dry (of course now they're a park), but the modern skyscrapers had their basements full of water.

Interestingly enough, in rich countries riverfront, lakefront, and oceanfront properties are where the wealthiest people live, but in poorer countries the wealthy people live up on hills and the poor people live on the floodplains, maybe we could learn something? when you live right beside water, water may come to visit you!

Comment Re:so if you have iptv from bell it will kill your (Score 1) 65

This gets to be a tough subject. Where I live you have 3 options for TV service:
- Satellite (sucks once you get used to modern cable/iptv offerings)
- Cable from the cable company
- IPTV from the phone company

From an end user perspective, the Cable and IPTV offerings are identical, but behind the scenes they are very different, cable is it's own path and doesn't exist as an IP service on the customer's network, but IPTV does.

If you stop allowing zero rating of the IPTV service, you put the phone company at a major disadvantage to the cable company, and effectively kill that as a competitor in the marketplace. So right now the CRTC has taken the view that if a holder of a broadcast license is streaming that content on their own network they can consider it "equivalent" to the cable offering, and zero rate it, however if it's over someone else's network, or it's not content covered by the broadcast license, it can't be zero rated. (though interestingly enough the rulings so far have limited "their own network" to the wired network, zero rating it over a cell phone was deemed to violate net-neutrality, probably because that's not competing directly with cable on equal terms)

This is a reasonable compromise to keep IPTV as a competitor in the marketplace, while still enforcing net-neutrality.

Comment Re:Pay the going market pay rate, or go out busine (Score 1) 619

Two issues. First of all, who determines "X"? If it's too low, businesses who need the workers are screwed, and if it's too high, those who exploit the system aren't hindered. Secondly the salary level doesn't necessarily equate to the job scarcity once you take skill level in to account. Imagine a job that normally pays $150,000, the company decides to get an H-1B to fill it and lay off the existing worker, post it at $100,000 to save money, they still get the foreign worker over the company that has a job that normally pays $50,000, but still can't find anyone to hire at $75,000 due to a lack of enough domestic workers with the right qualifications.

Slashdot Top Deals

We don't really understand it, so we'll give it to the programmers.