Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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:Holy Blinking Cursor, Batman! (Score 1) 221

Knowledge seems inversely related to understanding. /sarc

But really. In psychology, it is known that accessing memory while attempting to learn hampers your ability to learn. Internalizing a concept such that you no longer need to access memory, but instead "just think that way" frees up your memory. A typical person can only hold a hand full of concepts in their head at once. If you're dealing with a complex system, memorizing it is incredibly inefficient. Learning to think like the system allows you to effectively hold it all in your head without having to use your memory.

Like Minecraft, if you instead algorithmically generate your "memories" you can free up your actual memory. Minecraft manages to compress an entire map down to a small seed and only has to store the differences. This is how you deal with large complex system.

I literally have a memory disability, but I can manage hugely complex systems in my head by designing the system using simple patterns and making sure the patterns can express the complexity of the system. Like a fractal. I compensate for my disability by "regenerating" my memory in real time. I have difficulty telling the difference between something I just thought of or something that I remembered because thinking is nearly the same as remembering for me.

This breaks down outside of logical systems. Day-to-day activities give me issues. Sometimes I forget my own birthday. It took me nearly 6 months to remember my wife's name while we were dating, and I saw her almost every day. I had to give her a pet name. At first she didn't like it, but it grew on her. Most people who meet me think I'm fairly normal but slightly dunce. That is until they get me working on something that requires abstract reasoning.

I think anyone could do what I do, but I take a much longer time getting up to speed because it takes time for me to internalize a concept into my way of thinking. But once I integrate a concept, I no longer have to remember anything about it, it become natural for me to think that way. I am forced to do this because of my disability, but if people were not in such a hurry to crank out some code, they to could free up their limited memory for other more important things, like learning.

Comment Re:Holy Blinking Cursor, Batman! (Score 1) 221

"Tell me what a class invariant is."

I don't know most terms myself. I typically self discover nearly everything that I know by thinking about a problem for a little bit. I didn't know the term "race condition" when I was 8 years old when I theorized they would be an issue within a few minutes of learning that multi-core CPUs exist. I've been using "tiling" for years to optimize memory access without knowing what it was called. These things just seem blindly obvious when you see the problem.

Comment Re:In Other Words (Score 1) 412

why create a system that requires fourteen billion years to actually produce them, with them being around for a mere 50,000, and each having a life span of (almost always) less than 100 years?

Ever play an XT DOS game on a 486 in DOS? The games that clocked to the fixed 4.77 MHz were unplayably fast on a 100 MHz machine. Also, the world is 6000 years old, right? With dinosaurs being created in the fossil record by The Creator. So it ran 6000 years, at a 1000:1 speed, so the simulation has been running for 6 years. Much more reasonable, and if a simulation, no more unreasonable of an assumption than being in a simulation in the first place.

Comment Re:In Other Words (Score 1) 412

If you take the assertion that the Universe is a simulation seriously, then rocks ARE designed objects, even though there is absolutely nothing about rocks to suggest that they actually are designed.

In No Man's Sky, the rocks aren't "designed", they are "generated". Whether they were generated by a simulation or "nature" is not something we can challenge while we are inside the simulation. In Oblivion/Skyrim/Fallout, the rocks are "designed".

I agree it doesn't indicate we are in a simulation, but "not-designed" doesn't lead to "not-simulated".

Comment Re:Picking one at random (Score 1) 234

I wouldn't say you have to specialize. It would just mean you need to spend more of your time researching. In general, I find I can catch up to almost any specialist within a month, but that's a month of no production, just learning. That is a lot of down time. On the flip side, most projects that we have take 6 months to a year, and spending 1 month of it researching to catch up to what a specialist spent a life-time specializing is probably acceptable.

It really comes down to the size of your project. If it's really small and needs to be done quickly (less than several months) and well, go with a specialist.

Comment Re:I guess /. still approves this crap (Score 1) 270

Anyone can audit the blockchain, not just miners.

When you get back and find your bitcoins stolen, you'll be able to identify the wallet they end up in. Congradulations. But what good does that do when the protocol doesn't allow for a mass audit? Oh yeah, you have no understanding of how this works.

Comment Re:I guess /. still approves this crap (Score 1) 270

If every bank involved agrees the invalid signature is valid, what happens to the money? Now apply that to bitcoin.

You bought into the lie that it's "secure" so completely, that you can't conceive of a situation when it's not. There are plenty, some are obvious, others, less so.

The situation I describe is almost exactly what you described. The swarm is supposed to have some people processing transactions. They confirm the keys. If enough people confirm the fraudulent signature as valid, the transaction takes place, both in bitcoin, and at your bank. You seem to understand the attack 100% and refuse to accept it's possible. It's been proven possible, and is at the point now where it's quite practical. The "fault" is that if someone were to steal 100% of all bitcoins, nobody would ever use another bitcoin. So you'd just destroy bitcoin, not gain anything. Stealing a coin here or there from a wallet that hasn't been touched in a while would be more "practical", and for all we know, is being done now. Bitcoins are finite and identifiable. It'd be possible to find every bitcoin not traded in the past 3 years, assert it "lost" then the attacker fraudulently claim them with the attack given, and it's possible he could liquidate after the theft without anyone noticing until he's cashed out.

Comment Re:Pay your taxes (Score 1) 270

What income? He had x bitcoin 5 years ago, he has x bitcoin today. No bitcoins incoming, there was no income.

He had $10 5 years ago. He bought something. He sold it for $100. That's $90 in income. Pretending math doesn't work because you hate government-mandated inflation just makes you look like an idiot.

Comment Re:I guess /. still approves this crap (Score 1) 270

It's a deflationary system. People will lose wallets (die without clear instructions and such for others to use them, and the like).

And it's hijackable by a single person. When a single person has control of the blockchain long enough, which happens as people drop out of the mining business, a single entity could transfer all coins to themselves, then process the transactions, until they "own" them all. It will happen, and when it does, people will lose faith in all block chain systems, even those without the same limitations.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The number of Unix installations has grown to 10, with more expected." -- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June, 1972