Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:My TV is a monitor (Score 4, Informative) 77

A little computer with Mint on it does a great job accessing streaming as well as my NAS. And it doesn't report my activities to anyone.

What are you using for the streaming services? Netflix etc? A web browser?

If so, that's a complete non-starter; it fails the ease of use expectations of watching TV of the wife using a remote control to turn it on and make it go. (and honestly it fails my own expectations for that matter too; having to reach for a keyboard or mouse to watch a movie or stream a show is just clunky). It also limits you from watching content in 4k.

At the moment, I've got a RokuHD of some sort on one TV, and an nvidia shield on another one. Plex, netflix, f1tv, and a couple other things on both of them. The TV remote can fairly seamlessly control the TV/soundbar and the attached box and it works well, and passes the usability test, but both devices are still more ad-laden than I want.

I've also got computers and consoles hooked up to TVs for gaming and what not, but i find them utterly miserable to use for streaming. Their is no app for linux that I'm aware of. And even the app for Windows is regularly just complete ass to use, and its a PITA to switch from plex to netflix and back etc, and using them with a remote control is pretty trashy. So I've been using the aforementioned boxes for streaming as the least awful way to run things for some years now.

But if there's a better way now, I'm listening.

Comment Re:Yes (Score 1) 91

Why care about the person behind the Banksy signature?

The art is the important part here.

It's an interesting journalistic debate. On the one hand their job is to report, not to help people stay anonymous.

But Banksy is part performance art, and his anonymity is part of that, by revealing his identity you arguably destroy the art work.

I feel like this expose kinda gets forgotten because Banksy was never completely anonymous, the reason he's not really known is that people recognize the anonymity is part of it and they don't want to know who he is.

Comment Re:renewables (Score 1) 184

At least Britain and France have (had) enrichment plants and separation processes. Which is more efficient ... hard to say from the outside. Classified on the inside - at least the military parts of the programme.

Germany and "Europe" as a whole ... no. Not yet.

An obvious consequence of America's disintegration into civil war will be that the EU *has* to bind it's forces into one group.

Whether they (remember : the UK is no longer politically in the EU) can tolerate having US bases in their territory which are likely to schism into Loyalist (Trump) and Loyalist (Constitutionalist) factions during the civil war (CW-2, CW-3 ... ?) and fight amongst themselves ... that must be subject to vigorous planning at this moment. Removing nuclear weapons from them would be a high priority.

Comment Re:Security Theater (Score 1) 87

Most proof of work are on synthetic data or toy data, e.g., matching Waldo in a where is waldo image. You won't use the network later to spoil the fun of finding Waldo, you later fine-tune it on the objects you're looking for.

The difference being that finding waldo in a sea of faces almost but not quite waldo, some with the right hat but no glasses, some with the stripe shirt but no hat, etc etc is a lot more representative of the real problem.

It always starts with a synthetic or toy problem but, again, its about selecting a good representative proof-of-concept to be for it to be convincing.

If you showed me the exact same waldo image recognition system and demonstrated it finding waldo on a blank page, it would in fact be the same system, but this demo would not "prove" the concept very convincingly, right? The engine is the same, but the 'proof' in the proof-of-concept is far less persuasive.

120 bytes of binary for a dead simple cpu, likewise, is just not very persuasive. Its a very weak demonstration like using the image recognition system find waldo on a blank page.

Comment Re:Security Theater (Score 1) 87

I am always confused why people don't understand proof of concepts

It is like demonstrating a system can see toy boats through a 5mm sheet of slightly tinted glass and then talking about how the same tech will be able to help researchers find shipwrecks at the bottom of the ocean, after a century of decay, half buried by silt, ... from a satellite in space.

A proof of concept is a non-production demonstration that provides convincing evidence you'll be able to scale it up and do the ACTUAL thing in the real world that you claim it can do.

This demonstration just isn't convincing. It is too small and simplified a case to justify the grand claims.

In practice you then apply your skills to real-world problems that are (hopefully) simpler because you do not need to shave the last byte to fit things in the toaster's RAM.

Except in this case the real world problems are several orders of magnitude more complicated than the toy problem of reverse engineering binary source of a 120 bytes of code for very simple 40 year old 6502 processor.

You've assembled a lego space ship and then claimed you are qualified to design and build a real one.

Comment Re:Turns out we don't need all that fuel (Score 1) 114

All this shows is that society does not need to consume that much fuel, we can adapt.

Not in the slightest.

It just shows we have some levers to reduce consumption that we don't normally use.

It doesn't show that we can reasonably use those levers long term, not that those levers are actually sufficient to reduce fuel consumption enough to make up the difference.

Comment As many as that? (Score 1) 162

It has been about 6 years since I went to the cinema.

Now, if Hollywood would produce some interesting movies - even those involving Pinewood and Shepperton, or even New Zealand - then that might be a reason to go. But no, there hasn't been anything worth the 3-day's income cost of going to the local fleapit.

Slashdot Top Deals

All Finagle Laws may be bypassed by learning the simple art of doing without thinking.

Working...