Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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

Submission + - Google's New Compression Tool Uses 75% Less Bandwidth (

An anonymous reader writes: Google just released an image compression technology called RAISR (Rapid and Accurate Super Image Resolution) designed to save your precious data without sacrificing photo quality. Claiming to use up to 75 percent less bandwidth, RAISR analyzes both low and high-quality versions of the same image. Once analyzed, it learns what makes the larger version superior and simulates the differences on the smaller version. In essence, it’s using machine learning to create an Instagram-like filter to trick your eye into believing the lower-quality image is on par with its full-sized variant. Unfortunately for the majority of smartphone users, the tech only works on Google+ where Google claims to be upscaling over a billion images a week. If you don’t want to use Google+, you’ll just have to wait a little longer. Google plans to expand RAISR to more apps over the coming months. Hopefully that means Google Photos.

Comment Re:Does it really matter? (Score 1) 286

I look at computer languages as a designed tool to best express what the programmer wants accomplished. If the programmer has to conform to the tool, or recreate the wheel every time they program something, or have to relearn how to do things in the language in order to do something useful, then its not a good tool/language. C has the ability to interface with assembly, and it has some higher level abstractions which makes programming easier than assembly. But for a 1K chip, you probably have to discard stuff like stdio just to get code to fit in that space. And while its easier to get a C programmer to do something useful for that chip (because at least they know C), that C programmer will probably have to learn a boatload of esoterica (ways of doing things) for that environment to be an effective developer. If the programmer is the least bit sloppy, the C compiler will allow a completed binary to be larger than the available working environment. Therefore, C is not a language defined to help a programmer create code while the language helps manage the environment's constraints. (I wish I knew what the term was...) Ideally, there should be language for 1K chip environments to significantly ease development, but I guess assembler would be the only alternative that could fit the bill (unless you can use FORTH).

Comment Re:Does it really matter? (Score 1) 286

Regardless of C falling in popularity (if legitimate) it's unlikely to be buried any time in the next 50 years given its use in the core of everything from OSs to 1K microcontroller firmware.

Just like COBOL, although I still think that COBOL programs will decline in percentage of business computing as time passes. As a sidenote, I find it sad that C is used in 1K microcontroller firmware. Where would it payoff in either space efficiency or developer "friendliness"?

Comment Keep the receipts! (Score 1) 303

You may have blown it if you're not going in as an independent contractor (which you'd at least need to be an S Corporation). But a lot of what you're describing that you would like to do can be written off your federal taxes. If the employer is paying for all of this, then they're the one that gets the tax break. Talk to your tax preparer (who also would be "useful" for an S corporation. But a real small business tax guy, not some dork at H&R Block).

Comment Re:Only Fixed by Resigning (Score 2) 410

You are a fool, or a clever public media spin doctor. No one thinks /u/spez is going to modify their posts. But they are totally aware that government or corporate psy ops departments are capable of modifying or burying their posted speech, in order to manipulate a public consensus. That's why no one believes a corporate product forum when its known they delete negative statements against a product or the company. Tough luck reddit shareholders.

Comment Re:Cue the hipocrisy... (Score 2) 412

It was 8 years of Obama and the threat of 4 more years of his policies that caused reactionary voting patterns.

Bullshit. The US rejected a neocon warmonger in 2008, an investment banker in 2012, and the Democrats decided to run a candidate that essentially promised to be the handmaiden of both (among her many other problems). Given a choice of steadily boiling to death, or going full dumbass with a low possibility of a better life, the significant portion of America decided the latter.

The American public would have re-elected Obama for a third term over Trump, if the CotUS had allowed it.

Comment Re: Cue the hipocrisy... (Score 2) 412

We also need to accept that we live in a unitary and take education expenses to the national level.

Ah yes, so one day we can aspire for the American educational system work as well as VA funded hospital care.

It's not right that the quality of education receives is dependent on where they live.

While I can generally agree with that notion, economic management by the US federal gov't has not gotten to the point where it can equitably redistribute funds to every US citizen. (Thank God.)

Slashdot Top Deals

For every bloke who makes his mark, there's half a dozen waiting to rub it out. -- Andy Capp