Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


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 Yeah, I'll take your money (Score 1) 77

Certainly Mr. (Mrs.) tech billionaire, I share your enthusiasm for integrating the human mind with a machine and believe it is indeed within our reach now that innovators such as yourself are stepping up to the challenge. A one-time donation of $15,000,000 to my lab to pursue our groundbreaking research that we were already doing anyway will ensure that humanity will praise your name forever, parades will be held in your honor, and all other entrepreneurs will gaze at you longingly at tech events.

Comment Black Box Problem (Score 1) 44

Until we know more about how these algorithms make predictions, it'll be tricky integrating them into medicine: "I think you have a melanocytic lesion because I graduated medical school and have trained in dermatology for six years" still carries more weight than "Our highly accurate algorithm said you scored in a particular way on the 21 dimensions that we can't quite correlate to anything tangible, but it suggests you need this invasive surgery".

Comment ...Seriously? (Score 1) 285

I feel like I read stupid article titles like this every week (mostly on futurist tech type sites! "EXTREME TECH", yarrrr) about how team of neuroscientists has found the center for "free will" or have developed a new algorithm can "predict human thoughts" or some bullshit. An fMRI study in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics that shows that spontaneously switching attention between two screens with stuff on them activates the frontal lobe (planning), the basal ganglia (action selection), then the parietal lobe (just a total guess here, but maybe the part of the parietal lobe involved in spatial orientation?) is not appropriate to use for the claim that we've "found the free will center". Just because your attention switches to something, doesn't mean it's free will, either! When you gaze at different parts of a piece of art, are you using "free will" every time you move your eyes, or letting aspects of the picture attract your gaze?

Comment We need better science reporting... (Score 1) 158

Holy smokes. This is bad. Memory gets a lot of attention because it's sexy and everyone has them and they are obviously incredibly clinically relevant (PTSD, alzheimers, etc.), but I think when anybody can do a FRACTION of what this is alluding to...we will have heard about it before PBS releases this truly groundbreaking and exciting news in a special called "Memory Hackers"...The Telegraph isn't doing itself any favors with this bullshit either.

Comment This "controversy" is still all dudes (Score 1) 781

One thing I can't help but notice in the original post is that the controversy this stirred up was a couple of comments in a thread written by guys, one of which had a vague reference to a feminist. So...although I'm sure this controversy might evoke bad memories about being shut down or censored by feminists (trigger warning, yall), there was actually just the one woman who had a opinion about it, who may or may have not have even called herself a feminist. Before you cry about it as being some wicked extension of the doom-bringing matriarchical victimhood SJW superpower...take a deep breath

Slashdot Top Deals

You should never bet against anything in science at odds of more than about 10^12 to 1. -- Ernest Rutherford