Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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

Comment Re:Get it MFers? (Score 0) 357

I believe that would be because billions of dollars aren't at stake.

This is a region of the US where politicians are made from the same poorly educated, short-sighted few that live in these desolate parts. A place where dollars are rarely spoken of in terms of millions and billions will motivate anyone to execute their grandma and sell their daughters as concubines to Lucifer. Government oversight is unheard of and born of the same libertarian tradition that insists citizens be free of oversight and intrusion.

Comment Re:Built In Doesn't Warn You About Police (Score 1) 310

Of course they do. You just need to pay extra to get Sirius' traffic advisory subscription. In car navigation/infotainment sucks first and foremost because there are a couple well entrenched companies providing all the hardware and especially the services. These companies do not have the same kinds of pressure to innovate and compete as in the mobile space. Google and Apple are trying to change that, but as anyone paying attention can see Android Auto and Apple Carplay have been at it for several years now and still have not seen meaningful adoption. The old guard isn't going away any time soon. Usually these companies supply many other parts for cars and I wouldn't be surprised if they use that as leverage. "If you drop our navigation, just wait to see what we do to the cost of your other 1000+ parts we supply to you".

Comment Re:They earn that in 16 minutes (Score 4, Insightful) 116

The more important question that should be being asked is "How much did they make from the practice of cramming?" If the answer is "less than what they were fined"--which it almost certainly is--then they have no motivation to alter their practices. This fine is nothing but whitewash to mollify some grumpy petitioners.

New AI Is Capable of Beating Humans At Doom ( 170

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Den of Geek UK: Two students at Carnegie Mellon University have designed an artificial intelligence program that is capable of beating human players in a deathmatch game of 1993's Doom. Guillaume Lample and Devendra Singh Chaplot spent four months developing a program capable of playing first-person shooter games. The program made its debut at VizDoom (an AI competition that centered around the classic shooter) where it took second place despite the fact that their creation managed to beat human participants. That's not the impressive part about this program, however. No, what's really impressive is how the AI learns to play. The creator's full write-up on the program (which is available here) notes that their AI "allows developing bots that play the game using the screen buffer." What that means is that the program learns by interpreting what is happening on the screen as opposed to following a pre-set series of command instructions alone. In other words, this AI learns to play in exactly the same way a human player learns to play. This theory has been explored practically before, but Doom is arguably the most complicated game a program fueled by that concept has been able to succeed at. The AI's creators have already confirmed that they will be moving on to Quake, which will be a much more interesting test of this technologies capabilities given that Quake presents a much more complex 3D environment.

Comment Re:Oh, Democracy... (Score 4, Interesting) 332

Citation? start here. While not being particularly effective at modifying driver behavior (see aforementioned link), they are also not impartial. While they may capture a vehicle and it's operator (maybe) in the middle of a crossing, they do not provide the context. They do not make the observation that the city rigged the yellow lights to be impractically short, they do not even make the observation that the light was in fact red prior to the driver entering the intersection.

This is in contrast to a police body cam which records the video and audio of a police encounter from start to conclusion providing full and usually easy to understand context.

Comment Re:Correlation? (Score 1) 332

I find it harder to accept the opposite side, that the citizen having decides they can't misbehave and/or complain. The first assumption being that they citizens even know that cop is wearing a cam. It's not at all obvious to someone unfamiliar which such devices that that's what it is. Two it doesn't reasonably allow for the >50% drop in reports since only half the cops are wearing them at any given time.

Comment Re:Wacky? Maybe, but at least he's got vision. (Score 2) 289

While Musk specifically probably is a poor pick given his domain expertise. I would argue that a Musk type might make more sense that you'd think. Musk is a visionary with means. He courageously dreams up outrageously difficult goals and has an unusually long reach that sees him accomplish far more than most ever could. If you only reached for that which you can confidently achieve on time and on budget you'd never amount to much. The POTUS should be that kind of visionary, one that can see us accomplish more than confident mediocrity.

Slashdot Top Deals

He keeps differentiating, flying off on a tangent.