Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



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

Comment Re:The nature of the Trump-fans is pretty obvious (Score 1) 172

Independent here, not a "Trump fan".

They are authoritarian followers, that fight anybody that disagrees with them with violence. They are irrational and dangerous. They are unable to find a middle-ground with others.

You're describing Hillary's followers here.

.

Because authoritarians follow charismatic leaders...

Just saying repeating what someone else says doesn't make it true, no matter where you claim your loyalties lie (or in this case loyalties you disclaim).

Comment Re:The nature of the Trump-fans is pretty obvious (Score 1) 172

There's a clear subset of Trump fans that are extremely authoritarian https://psmag.com/donald-trump-s-appeal-to-the-authoritarian-personality-b5a0e8820a6e#.l9khk8wf5 and Trump supporters in the primaries were on average more authoritarian than supporters of other Republican candidate http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533 but this isn't all Trump supporters. Moreover, the evidence here suggests a Denial of Service attack by a small set of coordinated people, so it really doesn't say much about Trump supporters as a whole.
Yahoo!

Yahoo Open Sources a Deep Learning Model For Classifying Pornographic Images (venturebeat.com) 95

New submitter OWCareers writes: Yahoo today announced its latest open-source release: a model that can figure out if images are specifically pornographic in nature. The system uses a type of artificial intelligence called deep learning, which involves training artificial neural networks on lots of data (like dirty images) and getting them to make inferences about new data. The model that's now available on GitHub under a BSD 2-Clause license comes pre-trained, so users only have to fine-tune it if they so choose. The model works with the widely used Caffe open source deep learning framework. The team trained the model using its now open source CaffeOnSpark system.
The new model could be interesting to look at for developers maintaining applications like Instagram and Pinterest that are keen to minimize smut. Search engine operators like Google and Microsoft might also want to check out what's under the hood here.
The tool gives images a score between 0 to 1 on how NSFW the pictures look. The official blog post from Yahoo outlines several examples.
China

The Smog-Sucking Tower Has Arrived in China (vice.com) 146

Jamie Fullerton, reporting for Motherboard:Daan Roosegaarde reached into the pocket of his suit jacket, pulled out a plastic bag filled with black powder, and waved it around. "This is Beijing smog," Roosegaarde said, before gesturing to the seven-metre tall, gently humming metal tower we are stood next to in the Chinese capital's art district, 798. "We collected it from the tower yesterday. Incredibly disgusting." Dutch designer Roosegaarde's smog souvenir may be disgusting, but it's the byproduct of an invention that he has touted as a potential alleviator of China's pollution problems. His "smog-free tower" sucks air, filters it with ion technology, with Roosegaarde having explained: "By charging the Smog Free Tower with a small positive current, an electrode will send positive ions into the air. These ions will attach themselves to fine dust particles. A negatively charged surface -- the counter electrode -- will then draw the positive ions in, together with the fine dust particles. The fine dust "is collected together with the ions and stored inside of the tower." With the dust collected, the tower then spews out cleaner air through vents, creating a "bubble" in the area surrounding it that contains, according to Roosegaarde, up to 70 percent fewer pollution particles than the pre-cleaned air.

Comment Re:Technically neither can ICANN or a domain provi (Score 1) 135

Copyright law still benefits people.

Overall it does. In some specific situations, it does not. One category of these is a copyright owner deliberately keeping a previously published or publicly exhibited work out of print everywhere or in particular countries. An example of this is Song of the South. Another is uncertainty over whether a song you've written is legally original, as opposed to an accidental infringement of copyright in someone else's song. An example of this is "My Sweet Lord" by George Harrison. Why are those specific cases worth keeping?

Heck, I did something similar with a needle - just pierce a hole at random, then figure out which sectors are unreadable in my original. If you could read them, the floppy was not an original. And since it was at random, no two disks were alike. Writing data to the original wasn't a big deal - once you knew where the bad sectors were, skip over them.

Nintendo GameCube disc authentication works the same way: burn six evenly spaced pinholes in the lead-in at some random theta, and then mark in the Burst Cutting Area which sectors were burned.

Comment Re:Weird definition (Score 1) 238

Well, if you've ever been an expert at something, you no doubt use certain words in ways that confuse non-experts, because you have need of more precision than they do.

I have no idea what the technical epidemiological standard is for being something- "free", but it can't be the utter absence of that something (which is the non-specialist's definition) because you can't prove a negative. So there must be some criteria short of absence.

Comment Re:Fear is a good thing for business (Score 1) 296

It's been tried before, on an impressive scale. Humans haven't figured out absolutely how to keep rats, cockroaches and bedbugs out of their domiciles, much less most persistent and clever pest of all: other humans.

It'd probably be worthwhile for the rich to consider what being rich actually means. It's not having a lot of gold. Gold through the ages has only been useful as specie because (a) it's pretty and (b) it didn't have much practical use other than being pretty.

What being rich means is having the ability to command the cooperation and compliance of other human beings.

So a bunker is only good for a couple of weeks or at most months of disorder. It's a place to go while someone on the outside is struggling to re-establish the status quo ante. So it makes no sense to build one unless you also invest in the stability of the status quo, because if those people trying to preserve society fail you're actually in a worse situation than other survivors when you come out of your bunker. The vast majority of your money will become only scare-quotes "money" if the legal framework in which debts and ownership exist ceases to function.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Marriage is like a cage; one sees the birds outside desperate to get in, and those inside desperate to get out." -- Montaigne

Working...