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


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

Comment Re:I thought diesel ran cleaner (Score 1) 177

Please read before replying.

Really, you are going to go there?

What do you think happens to the nitrogen intake to the engine?
What do you think happens to the oxygen intake that is not used in combustion?

Would you like me to tell you about my AT185. or my OM617.951A?

OMG, you know the part number for your engines. That must make you an expert on diesel engines. Wow, I bow to your knowledge. </sarcasm>

Comment Re:20 million is pocket change for FB (Score 1) 58

Wow, a European showing up to point out what's wrong with America. Thanks! Where would we be without you people? If we didn't have your constant sniping and criticism, we'd be lost in a sea of positivity! Thanks again for telling us how we're wrong. It means so much, especially coming from a European.

Comment Re:In other news (Score 0) 68

It's a joke. Laugh. Another nail in the coffin for the humorlessness of the Left - as long as it involves them as the butt of the joke. They're perfectly OK ridiculing the fuck out of everyone else, up to and including the point of cruelty. Most recently Rosie O'Donnell ridiculing Trump's son. How low do you have to go?

Comment Re:I thought diesel ran cleaner (Score 1) 177

because it's important: exhaust gas volume is proportional to load.

Gasoline engines, yes, Diesel, no. As I posted elsewhere, Diesel engines have something closer to a fixed air intake on each revolution, irrespective of load.

Remember that Diesel engines use compression ignition and, without sufficient air, there is insufficient compression to ignite the fuel.

Comment Re:I thought diesel ran cleaner (Score 1) 177

My 3.0L V6 diesel truck cruises at 65 MPHat 1550 RPM. My 3.2L V6 gas car cruises at 65 MPH at 1800 RPM. 7% higher engine displacement, 16% higher RPM, so 23.9% more airflow volume at the same speed.

Your understanding of how diesel engines work is rather poor. Diesel engines don't have throttles, there is no variable control on air intake; power output is controlled by controlling input fuel (not input fuel/air mixture like a gas engine). So, generally more air will flow through a diesel engine than a similar sized gas engine (unless the gas engine is operating at WOT condition).

Turbocharging the diesel engine will result in even more airflow through the engine.

Comment Re:Why is this guy still talking (Score 5, Insightful) 404

But WAIT A SECOND, while the pies and baskets have each fallen in value by a factor of ten, a pie is still worth ONE basket. So Abby and Betty can just continue life as before. The robots changed nothing.

The just-so story is pretty, but it's hard to take it seriously as a prediction of the future when it doesn't even predict the past accurately.

If I replace "robots" with "cheap foreign labor", can you explain why so many American manufacturers went out of business (or moved operations abroad) in the last few decades?

According to your theory, American companies should have been able to continue operating just as before ("the foreign workers changed nothing"), because one ton of American steel was still worth exactly one American-made car (or etc). But that isn't what happened, is it? Instead, many people lost their jobs and ended up either unemployed or working at less-desirable unskilled service jobs afterwards, because they were unable to compete with the cheaper/more efficient new foreign producers who didn't need to hire them.

Abby can just switch to making baskets

Can she "just switch"? Does Abby somehow already have the skills to make baskets, or the time and resources to learn those skills to the point where she can perform them at a commercially viable level? Switching to a completely different skill set is not without cost; not everyone can afford to spend months or years without any income while they retrain themselves. That's why so many previously-high-earning people end up "switching down" to something like Walmart cashier after the industry they trained for becomes non-viable.

So the most likely scenario is to put [the "losers"] on some sort of welfare until we can get riot control robots perfected

And here is exactly where the core of the problem lies. As the skill level of available automation rises, the pool of "losers" (i.e. people who aren't sufficiently skilled or adaptable to economically compete with cheap automation) gets larger every year, and eventually includes most (if not all) of the human population.

Dismissing that issue as a negligible corner case is ignoring the problem entirely. The fact that you think "riot control robots" are the endgame suggests that you do also see the problem; you just refuse to label it as a problem because you lack sympathy for "those people".

Comment Re:Police searches (Score 1, Informative) 190

Well I could sue the police and retire on the settlement. Its like winning the lottery only with a beatdown thrown in

You haven't been paying attention to the news much, have you? It's very rare that police officers are held accountable for misbehavior; society (for better or worse) gives them a lot of latitude. Police officers literally get away with murder(*) on a regular basis.

(*) or at least, actions that would definitely be called murder if anyone else did the same thing

Comment Re:Continuing the tradition (Score 3, Insightful) 404

I see that Hawking is continuing the tradition of world-renowned physicist commenting on things they have no specialty in.

Well, why shouldn't he? Everyone else on this thread is doing the exact same thing. Commenting on things you aren't an expert on is something just about everyone does, on a daily basis.

The only difference is that when we make a brilliant (or stupid) post to Slashdot, it doesn't get picked up by any news agency. If you find that troublesome, you ought to blame the news agencies, not Hawking.

Comment Re:Not mine. (Score 1) 404

No, your code generates code, or outputs it, or produces it. It doesn't "write" it, and provided you actually do write some code, this should be beyond obvious to you.

But he is writing much less code than someone would have had to write 20 or 30 years ago to get the same results. Now he can get the same amount of functionality implemented by himself that would have taken a whole team previously. Thus his company didn't have to hire so many programmers.

Comment Re:Nope (Score 2) 404

And exactly where does this *magic* money come from to pay out all this Universal Basic Income?

From taxing the profits of companies who have successfully used automation to drive their costs down to near-zero -- with negligible labor, their only costs are input materials, maintenance, and the electric bill.

The one good thing about a vast army of robot workers is that they can provide their owners with fantastic 24/7 productivity at low cost, and thus generate vast material wealth; the only question is whether that vast wealth will accumulate in the savings accounts of the 1% while everyone else starves, or whether some mechanism will be found to allow that wealth to benefit the rest of mankind so that civilized society can continue.

Comment Re:Too much to express here, but (Score 1) 404

How will it work if you have 90% unemployment? Simple, it won't be that way for long. You will have massive unrest, and all of the horrors that would entail.

And what are then eventual results of that unrest? Laws to ban robots so that low-paid humans get to do all the menial work instead, forever? I suppose that's a possibility, but the other (more sensible) outcome would be laws to tax the robots to fund training and/or subsidize employment for humans, so that the humans can find work in other (less-menial) areas that robots are not so good at.

(And the end-game of that, when robots and AIs are finally better than humans at absolutely everything, would be that the training/employment programs would end up supporting humans in "jobs" that are really hobbies; e.g. dance instructor or pottery making. And that would be a fine outcome IMO)

Comment Re:Why is this guy still talking (Score 1) 404

What DOES (apparently) take an expert, is to see that they are wrong this time too, for mostly the same reasons.

Can you find me such an expert? I'd very much like to understand what kind of gainful employment the blue-collar workers of today and white-collar workers of tomorrow can look forward to in our future AIs-and-robots-do-all-the-work-better-and-cheaper-than-humans-can paradise.

Comment Re:It's OVH (Score 1) 93

I would not expect a lot of real CPU for $12/month. It works for me (small mail/web server, VPN endpoint, etc.).

If I were relying on a machine for work, it would probably be better to pay for a dedicated machine, or to install my own hardware in a datacenter.

The problems I have seen have been the time when they started shutting down the infrastructure and one class of VMs. I only found out because I noted that the RDNS wasn't working. They claimed that they had sent me an email telling me that I needed to migrate to a new VM, but they had not sent emails to me about this.

Slashdot Top Deals

A debugged program is one for which you have not yet found the conditions that make it fail. -- Jerry Ogdin