Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:Always Assuming... (Score 1) 126

I can't decide if you're high, crazy, stupid or just trolling. Let's just unite under one Führer, that worked so well the last time. Because what we have is clearly an anarchist's dream where everyone does exactly what they want, no laws or regulations to hold us back. And the richest parts of the world that could support the most kids have women go crazy to have a little league team each. My guess is your sarcasm meter is so broken you'll think I'm serious.

Comment Re:Isn't all of this just BS? (Score 1) 174

as far as I understand AI, it's basically plugging the program to a (insanely huge) database about the subject and help him interpolate the input and it's own data. That's computer program getting better, not getting "intelligent". Or is my definition of "AI" that off the mark?

Well it depends on how much you consider "MacGyver" style problem solving to be intelligent. As in I have a task to complete, I have a bunch of random items that can be combined/used in some way to produce a non-obvious result. Computers are great a combinatorics even to the point where they might do something that's original and never been done by a human. A lot of what humans consider creative is putting together known things in unexpected ways, or at least that this particular person has never done before. You might say that the computer is always in the box but we're trying to expanding it while at the same time guiding it so it doesn't get lost in an endless number of possibilities.

Maybe it's easier to explain with a practical example, before you gave the computer a toolbox and taught the computer that the the hammer could hammer, the saw could cut and the screwdriver screw and that was the box. Then we gave it free roam as a few hunks of wood and metal and it got totally lost. Now we give it examples of people hammering and cutting and screwing which guide it, but doesn't bind it. And we find that sometimes it does things in novel ways because nobody told it that it couldn't. The goal is to make "the box" the laws of nature, physics, chemistry, gravity, optics and so on. That we stop defining for the computer what something is and what it can do.

Comment Re:No surprise... (Score 1) 198

Intel appears to edge out in single core performance, but by less than 5-10% depending on processor and we still haven't seen single core performance of Ryzen 5 or 3.

Well so far AMD has intentionally only compared their own 8C chips with Intel's 8C desktop chips that have been clocked very conservatively, all the good chips go to the way more profitable server market and not against the far more price-similar quads. So the quad core i7-7700k is still king of the hill in single threaded with Ryzen 1800X trailing offering about 80% performance (2.02 vs 1.62) in Cinebench single threaded. Of course 8x80% is much more than 4x100% so if your applications use multithreading well Ryzen leaves the 7700k in the dust by a substantial margin. It will be interesting to see if they can bump frequency further on quads, it's a bit the Phenom x6 again with more cores at lower speeds. But a much better attempt at that.

Comment Re:Good grief (Score 2) 305

SLS is up to 2.5 times the LEO capacity of a Falcon Heavy, which SpaceX has never actually launched. SLS is in a different class.

The block 2 version that's at least a decade away, yes. The one they plan to launch late next year is in pretty much the same class (70 vs 54 tons), by the time the 130 ton version is ready SpaceX should have a Raptor-based competitor to match. Maybe not ITS-size, that's a bit megalomania (300 ton reusable, 550 ton expendable) but even a "Raptor 9" would give NASA a run for the money. But yeah... I want to see the Falcon Heavy fly now too, it's been pushed back quite a few times.

Comment Re:This won't fly. (Score 1) 259

The proposal is only a wipe. If this happened accidentally you can log back into icloud or your google account and resync. Crisis averted.

So to protect all your information, put it in the cloud. The NSA loves you.

How would they know the code?

Well what should happen when you type the wrong code over and over? Here it's company mandated that four wrong attempts = wipe. Somebody's figured out the hard way what happens when the kid gets hold of your phone, bye bye vacation photos (abroad, too expensive to cloud sync).

Comment Re:Rockets are too expensive (Score 5, Interesting) 305

And a space elevator, of course, would only cost about a Trillion, and there's this little problem of it hitting something (we'd have to make Earth Orbit absolutely pristine and keep it that way) and there's a problem with the kinetic energy if it falls down. Sort of like having many atom bombs go off.

Maybe someday. But right now making rockets as cheap as they can be is a better idea. It's only $200K to fuel up a Falcon 9. We don't get the whole thing back in working order yet, but that would be a lot easier than making a space elevator.

Comment No Dragon 2 Soft Landing Yet (Score 5, Informative) 305

Dragon 2 isn't built yet. The escape test was a boilerplate capsule more like a Dragon 1 than 2. Dragon 2 has not demonstrated a soft landing, because it's not built yet. That was the Falcon 9 first stage.

Also, you can't get Dragon 2 down to the Moon and back up on it's own. Not enough delta-V. You would need to have Dragon ride on top of something that can hold enough fuel. Like a larger version of the Apollo Service Module.

The Command/Service module was originally intended to land on the moon and return without the LEM, before NASA bought the LEM concept, and was overpowered for the mission it got. Dragon is larger and heavier, but a lunar landing one would probably look a lot like an Apollo Command and Service module, and legs.

And yeah, Orion: I'm Not on Board. Big expensive obsolete rocket with no mission that makes sense.

But good luck getting Elon Musk to focus on the practical and eminently desirable target of the Moon. He isn't interested. It's only Mars for Elon.

I try not to watch all of the Mars Colonial Transport speculation. Falcon 9 and Dragon are great, and they're here, and we could do so much with them.

Comment Re:Maybe, but maybe not (Score 1) 298

Sure but my Uber account works in 20+ countries worldwide, I don't have to sign up for the local transit whatever. That's a huge plus. (...) As someone traveling in Hawaii, California, Texas, London and Hungary

...you might be in a niche market. Everything you said about billing sure but for most people most the time it's a very limited geographical area. You can search for "taxi <city>" and install the local app ten times waiting to get off the plane, not that airports lack taxi queues. And I usually pay by a credit card that's linked to the travel and expense system no matter what the currency is, it not only works for taxi rides it works for everything else. I'm not saying it's not nice to have... but in terms of make or break for Uber's business model I think it's totally irrelevant.

Submission + - Why Don't Mobile OSs offer a Kill Code? 1

gordo3000 writes: Given all the recent headlines about border patrol getting up close and personal with phones, I've been wondering why phone manufacturers don't offer a second emergency pin that you can enter and it wipes all private information on the phone?

In theory, it should be pretty easy to just input a different pin (or unlock pattern) that opens up a factory reset screen on the phone and in the background begins deleting all personal information. I'd expect that same code could also lock out the USB port until it is finished deleting the data, to help prevent many of the tools they now have to copy out everything on your phone.

This nicely prevents you from having to back up and wipe your phone before every trip but leaves you with a safety measure if you get harassed at the border.

So slashdot, what say you?

Comment Globalist Idiots. (Score 1) 1081

I think most I know don't like people coming into their country breaking laws, particularly Immigration Laws.

Some people are upset. Some people are more upset than others.

Importing large amounts of people using the law to enable legal immigration, to malign, or aggravate a local culture in a country is probably a bad idea.

I can't think of something more politically charged than importing large numbers of people for the gain of a few, to undercut the hard work of a local culture to educate themselves only to find that they are priced out of the market. You can see this happening in the USA right now and it is creating structural problems economically that, are going to be quite explosive in the coming decade.

This idea that anything goes for profit or labor cost to obtain unfair trade deals by leveraging Third world people in a 1st world context will bring war if it isn't stopped. It incites people to listen to these globalist complain they can't find qualified people to do a given job, for example, when they are being blatently untruthful and only care about the cost of labor.

A very very nasty big war is coming.

Comment Re:Too good to be true. (Score 1) 196

This seems to be an incredible invention that will be a game changer. Passive cooling on the order of what this article talks about would seem to be too good to be true. If it is true these guys should be filthy rich soon.

Well the article certainly lacks critical sense:

And because it can be made cheaply at high volumes, it could be used to passively cool buildings and electronics such as solar cells, which work more efficiently at lower temperatures.

Cool solar cells.... by blocking the sunlight *facepalm*. Also I'm thinking how big a deal is the "not blocked by the atmosphere" really, I mean it's not like heat reflected of a little building significantly changes the ambient temperature. And finally production cost is one thing, but how it works in real dust-covered conditions and if it can survive being exposed to the weather all year long is another matter. I don't think it's quite as revolutionary as the article might suggest.

Submission + - In the 21st century, we still have education systems for the 18th century. (theguardian.com)

golden_hands writes: The education system in most countries is still designed for a world that has ceased to exist- long term employment for someone else, industries which need people to make a profit are all vanishing over the horizon. We need an education system which will help children survive and thrive in the modern economy and teach them how to innovate, co-operate, collaborate and survive in today's age.

Slashdot Top Deals

Know Thy User.

Working...