Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:When will VideoCards peak? (Score 1) 89

The progress is definitely slowing down, however. Far Cry was released in 2004 and looked amazing at the time. Crysis came out just three years later and was clearly a whole new level. That was 2007, or almost ten years ago. It still looks very, very good by todan's stanards, if not quite top notch. Crysis 3 is three years old now, and while it's a moderate improvement over 1/2, not much, if anything, surpassed it yet, certainly not to a degree that Crysis improved on Far Cry.

Hopefully it's been mostly an issue of consoles holding everyone back, but I'm not quite so sure any more. Processors are barely getting any faster, AMD's new cards are basically last-gen level of performance and efficiency, and Nvidia's, while a noticeable improvement, took two years to update.

Still, we'll probably hit that mark since it's not that far off. A 1080 can hit 50-60fps at 4k in most games, and simultaneous re-projection should enable stereoscopy at minimal cost. For VR, foveated rendering would also cut down on effective resolution significantly.

So we'd need double or triple performance, at least, with significant improvements to graphical engines and tech. Back in the day this would've taken a couple of years at most, but this is still doable within a decade.

Comment Re:Politicians are people, LESS trusted (Score 1) 1140

This is one thing that would actually be addressed by UBI - poverty causes people to make bad short term decisions so providing a guaranteed stream of income would slowly improve that.

Ultimately, as you say, everyone makes bad decisions, and you can't eliminate that even if you created a Department of Good Decisions that had to approve every choice everyone makes.

Comment Re:Oh yes! TOUGH! (Score 1) 729

Seriously, this. Case in point, I just bought an off-lease ThinkCentre with 8 gigs of ram and an i5 for about $150, swapped the PSU from my previous PC because it didn't have a 6-pin power connector, and it's ready for whatever GPU you want to slap in it. I just used my existing GTX650 Ti Boost until the 1070 is more available here.

The only serious downside is that the CPU is not overclockable (almost guaranteed in a business machine), which is the only thing preventing it from being 90% as good as any latest quad core CPU.

Comment Re:Sorry but (Score 1) 72

I'm not really into podcasts but most of the ones I have heard had ads and were pretty terrible with them. Just in the middle of content they'll launch into a ridiculous pitch like "Hey let me tell you about squarespace!" And it's always fucking Squarespace or Wix or some stupid shaving company, and the pitches are particularly annoying when the host pretends to really use and care about the product. I KNOW YOU ONLY CARE ABOUT THE MONEY JUST FINISH IT ALREADY!!

Comment Re:Loyalty to people not companies (Score 1) 765

On the other hand, companies are comprised of people, and by just dropping the mic and walking out mid-meeting, you might be throwing the people in your team who had nothing to do with your grievances under the bus.

IMO unless your're being actively fucked over somehow or your specific company has a habit of trowing people out without a notice and good cause, it's probably better to give proper notice. Just for selfish reasons if nothing else, you might end up running into these people again later in your career.

Comment Re:Current gen vs last gen (Score 1) 144

I think the 1060 is one of the more expensive x60 range cards so far. While the performance increase this generation is pretty decent, the combination of long time between generations and increased prices means that you could've bought a 970 at launch for maybe just $50 more two years ago and enjoyed 1060-level performance this whole time. Unless you can find a 970 well below $200 on a firesale somewhere, I'd definitely go with the 1060 (or RX480 if you're so inclide).

Comment Re:yet more poor design. (Score 1) 113

From a security standpoint you shouldn't be using antivirus software for real-time scanning. These issues have been known for years and keep occurring ( https://www.blackhat.com/prese...
http://www.pcworld.com/article...
http://www.theinquirer.net/inq...
https://community.sophos.com/k...
). Antivirus vendors have been screwing up too often - false positives (blacklisting OS files etc), being exploitable (like this), being unstable, using too much resources.

Real time AV scanning should only be used by people who are incompetent enough to screw up their own systems (or let malware do it) more often than a AV company would. If you know what you are doing you wouldn't be using real-time AV scanning. You'd only scan certain stuff using sacrificial machines and more as a precaution and additional layer of defence.

Comment Yawn (Score 1) 74

So when are we going to get this: https://threatpost.com/ibm-unv...

I mean it's not like I've been waiting or asking for it for years: https://it.slashdot.org/commen...
https://mobile.slashdot.org/co...

Shared key WPA2 means that anyone who knows the shared key can decrypt other people's traffic if they managed to sniff the 4-way handshake messages:
https://mrncciew.com/2014/08/1...
http://www.howtogeek.com/20433...

It's true using WiFi means you still have to trust the entity providing it, but that's the same with a wired network or using an ISP.

To those who say "use VPNs" I'd say:
1) Defense in depth
2) that's a different layer - just because you can workaround a broken layer doesn't mean the broken layer isn't broken. The fact is the layer already has encryption but it has a broken implementation which can be improved.

Comment Even simpler (Score 4, Insightful) 451

Hahaha. It's even simpler than that. Everyone seems to be making the assumption that the cars will be such driving geniuses. That's not going to happen for quite a long while.

0) We all know that stopping in the middle of the highway is dangerous, BUT the way the laws are written in most countries, it's practically always your fault if you drive into the rear of another vehicle especially if it didn't swerve into your path and merely braked suddenly, or worse was stationary for some time.

1) Thus for legal and liability reasons the robot cars will be strictly obeying all convincing posted speed limits (even if they are stupidly slow by some mistake, or by some prankster), and will stick to speeds where they would be able to brake in time to avoid collisions or at least fatal collisions. Whichever is slower.

2) In most danger situations the robot cars will brake and try to come to a stop ASAP all while turning on its hazard lights. Which shouldn't be too difficult at those said speeds.

3) If people die because of tailgating it's the tailgater's fault. Same if the driver behind doesn't stop.

4) There are hardware/software failures then it's some vendors fault.

5) If braking won't avoid the problem even at "tortoise speeds", in most cases fancy moves wouldn't either. In the fringe cases where fancy moves would have helped but braking wouldn't AND it would be the robot car's fault if it braked, the insurance companies would be more than willing to take those bets.

The odds of the car being designed to do fancier moves to save lives are practically zero. If I was designing the car I wouldn't do it - imagine if the car got confused and did some fancy moves to "avoid collision" and killed some little kids. In contrast if it got confused and came to stop ASAP if any little kids are killed it would more likely be someone else's fault.

If you are a human driver/cyclist/motorcyclist you better not tailgate such cars.

Look at the Google car accident history, most of the accidents were due to other drivers. Perhaps I'm wrong but my guess is it's because of "tailgating". Those drivers might still believe the AI car was doing it wrong but the law wouldn't be on their side.

Slashdot Top Deals

He's dead, Jim.

Working...