Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



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

Comment Re:TensorFlow DOES NOT require python (Score 1) 33

Yes, of course it does, the C++ API is the one that Python uses. But there is a lot of functionality in Python that is not available in the C++ API, because a lot of rich features were quickly added in Python, rather than taking the time to develop them in C++: the Python API is not just a thin layer over the C++ API.

Comment TensorFlow requires Python; iOS forbids Python (Score 3, Insightful) 33

A lot of the TensorFlow functionality is written in Python right now, for whatever bizarre reason (many TensorFlow pipelines take a huge performance hit by dropping out to Python after every training batch, in order to feed the next batch from a Python data structure). The TensorFlow team eventually plans to push more of the Python functionality down into C++-land, so you can build bindings for other languages (e.g. Swift/Obj-C), but this isn't currently possible. Since Python doesn't run on iOS (modulo a few hacky solutions like tinypy), I'd say the TF team has a lot of work to do before TF on iOS is a possibility. (Note -- this is for building arbitrary TF models in iOS, which would currently require Python, as opposed to executing runs through already-trained models, which can be done more simply by means of a TF graph serializer and de-serializer, which doesn't necessarily require Python, and already exists in some form for Android and other runtimes.)

Comment Kill switch = killing something intelligent? (Score 1) 209

There's a kill switch for humans too, but murder is considered unethical. You either believe in the eventual moral equivalence of the intelligence (consciousness, being, ...) of humans and AI, or you don't. If you do believe in it, a kill switch is not ethical. If you don't believe in it, you have no reason to want to install a kill switch in the first place, because AI will never transcend levels of human intelligence.

Comment Re:Just Drive The Other Way... (Score 1) 259

This doesn't fix the numbers issue for practical driving speeds. Assuming a fixed number of lanes, you'll see the same number of vehicles if you're parked on the median as if you're moving at the same speed as traffic on one side of the road. In the latter case, assuming traffic is moving the same speed in both directions, and you are too, you see zero new license plates on your side of the road as a function of time, while traffic on the other side is approaching at 2x the relative speed. Of course, once you start speeding much faster than the traffic on either side of the road, you can start increasing the rate at which you see license plates without bound, assuming you can drive at extremely high speeds, and the camera can handle the motion without blurring too much. (But this is not practical.)

Comment Thousands of license plates per minute?? (Score 3, Interesting) 259

This scanner can scan thousands of license plates per minute?? Let's do the math.

The vehicle has cameras on both sides. Assuming each camera can capture plates from up to 3 lanes of traffic, to achieve "thousands" of scans per minute, conservatively interpreted as at least 2000 scans per minute, each camera would have to pull in 1000 scans per minute, or 333 scans per minute per lane. This translates to a little over 5.5 scans per second per lane, or 0.2 seconds per scan per lane. This is impossible with the recommended 2 second minimum following distance between cars, regardless of the speed the cars are traveling -- in fact, the scan rate is 10x larger than the safe carrying capacity of 3 lanes on each side of the car.. Therefore, to scan "thousands" of plates per minute, this vehicle would have to be parked in the middle of a road 10x as wide, for roughly a total of 60 lanes.

The only alternative to this would be to scan cars parked close together on both sides as the scan-van travels really, really fast up the middle. You'd have to pass 5.55 cars per second on each side. Assuming the cars are parked 5.5 meters apart, you have to travel 70mph past the line of parked cars to hit this rate, which would be not only illegal in a zone lined on both sides with parked cars, but it would also be dangerous. Maybe that's where they get the number from though? (Also, this is probably not workable due to motion blur at those speeds...)

Comment Something humans haven't been able to do?? (Score 1) 170

"Swarm Intelligence" allows groups to amplify their collective IQ beyond the capacity of individuals, something that the human species hasn't been able to do because of evolutionary restraints.

Because our brains is not an immense colony of cooperating neurons? Each cell is an organism. Humans are a superorganism.

Slashdot Top Deals

Five is a sufficiently close approximation to infinity. -- Robert Firth "One, two, five." -- Monty Python and the Holy Grail

Working...