Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror

Comment This is a bad look for the New York Times (Score 2, Insightful) 21

NYT's complaint is valid.

That NYT is willing to set the precedent that OpenAI chat logs can be subpoenad is incredibly dangerous. People have all kinds of private conversations with ChatGPT, and this will hurt all of us so that NYT can strike out at LLMs. The trade is not worth it. OpenAI is 100% correct to protect chat data.

Comment Re:Starship Troopers (Score 1) 702

by NitsujTPU (#51994665) Attached to: 2016 Hugo Awards Shortlist Dominated By Rightwing Campaign

This whole "taking jabs at the original material" bit was engineered on later. They had a plot. They had a property with a recognizable title. They stuck the two together.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F...

Nobody engineered that movie to take swings at the "source material." They changed the names of the characters in an entirely different script to cash in on the recognizability of Heinlein's book.

Submission + - Controversy Over High-Tech Brooms Sweeps Through Sport of Curling

Submitted by HughPickens.com
HughPickens.com writes: Billy Witz reports at the NYT that the friendly sport of curling suddenly has become roiled in controversy over — what else? — the brooms. The crux of the debate is fabric — specifically, something called directional fabric. The use of this material in broom pads is the latest escalation in an arms race among manufacturers, whereby the world’s best curlers can guide the 44-pound stone around a sheet of ice as if it were controlled by a joystick. Many of the sport’s top athletes, but not all of them, signed an agreement last month not to use the newest brooms. But with few regulations on the books and Olympic qualifying tournaments underway this month, the World Curling Federation has stepped in and issued new rules that set severe restrictions on the types of brooms that can be used. “There’s definitely some anger over it,” says Dean Gemmell. “In curling, we’re generally known for being pretty friendly with most of your opponents. Even at the big events, you see the top players hanging out. But it’s sort of taken that away this year, that’s for sure.”

It was prototype brooms made by BalancePlus that were the focus of complaints at the Toronto tournament, but Scott Taylor, president of BalancePlus, says they were never intended for sale, and were meant to demonstrate the problems that the reversed fabrics could cause. Players say the brooms allowed sweepers to "steer" the rock much more than they were comfortable with, and even slow them down. The brooms have been compared to high-tech drivers that allow amateur golfers to hit the ball as far as a pro, or the advanced full-body swimsuits that were banned from competition in 2010 for providing an unfair advantage. Of his company’s high-tech broom, Taylor says: “This isn’t good. It’s like hitting a golf ball 500 yards.”

Submission + - Exploit Vendor Publishes Prices for Zero-Day Vulnerabilities

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: A shady exploit vendor published a price list for the zero-day bugs it's willing to buy. The highest paid bugs are for remote jailbreaks for iOS. Second is Android and Windows Phone. Third there are remote code execution bugs for Chrome, Flash, and Adobe's PDF Reader. This is the same company that just paid $1 million to a hacker for the first iOS9 jailbreak.

Submission + - Apple Loses Patent Suit to University of Wisconsin, Faces Huge Damages (reuters.com)

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes: Apple has frequently been in the news for various patent battles, but it's usually against one of their competitors. This time, Apple is on the losing end, and they're losing to the University of Wisconsin-Madison. A jury found that the university's patent on improving processor efficiency (5,781,752) was valid, and Apple's A7, A8, and A8X infringed upon it. Those chips are found within recent iPhone and iPad models. Because of the ruling, Apple could be liable for up to $826.4 million in damages, to be determined by later phases of the trial.

Comment This is more about hype than robots (Score 0) 114

by NitsujTPU (#50351631) Attached to: How Long Until We Have a Home Robot That Lives Up To the Hype?

Robots will *never* live up to the hype. Hype is there to get outsiders excited about something. I'm a robotics researcher, and even *inside* the community, people hype things in order to drum up interest. That's the point of hype.

The fact that things are sometimes overhyped doesn't detract from the fact that significant advancements are being made.

Submission + - New Tesla Model S P90D "Ludicrous Speed" Goes 0-60 MPH in 2.8 Seconds Read more (automobilemag.com)

Submitted by Eloking
Eloking writes: The highest-performance Tesla Model S gets even quicker thanks to a new “Ludicrous Speed” mode (Elon Musk must be a big “Spaceballs” fan). In combination with a newly optional 90-kWh battery pack, this new mode brings 0-60 mph acceleration down to 2.8 seconds (from a quoted 3.2 seconds for the P85D model). This larger battery pack is offered as an upgrade from the existing 85-kWh model, creating new 90, 90D, and P90D models.

Submission + - G7 vows to phase out fossil fuel by 2100 (euobserver.com)

Submitted by Taco Cowboy
Taco Cowboy writes: The G7 group of countries, comprises of Germany, England, Japan, Canada, France, Italy and the United States, has issued a pledge that they will phase out fossil fuel by the end of this century

The conclusions after the meeting in Bavaria, southern Germany, said the Paris agreement should have “binding rules at its core to track progress towards achieving targets

The announcementwas warmly welcomed environment groups. “Angela Merkel took the G7 by the scruff of the neck,” said Ruth Davis a political advisor to Greenpeace and a senior associate at E3G

“Politically, the most important shift is that chancellor Merkel is back on climate change. This was not an easy negotiation. She did not have to put climate change on the agenda here. But she did,” she said

Tom Burke, environmental advisor to Shell, Rio Tinto and Unilever, said Merkel had made a “big play”

“It’s more aggressive than you would have expected. That’s been helped a lot by the US démarche with China and the growing signs are that China is probably going to do better than a lot of people are expected,” he said

The G7 plege includes a goal proposed by the EU to cut emissions 60% on 2010 levels by 2050, with full decarbonisation by 2100, and another goal for G7 countries to decarbonize their own energy sectors by 2050

In a sign of growing hopes the G7 could deliver a significant boost to UN climate talks, on Sunday thousands of leading businesses issued a call for the G7 to adopt a long term goal

“We want a global climate deal that achieves net zero emissions well before the end of the century, and that to be a firm commitment at COP21 In Paris in December,” said Nigel Topping, CEO of We Mean Business

A coalition of UK NGOs including Greenpeace, WWF and CAFOD also issued a plea to prime minister David Cameron to support a zero emissions target

Getting previously reluctant governments from the US, Canada and Japan to agree to a long term climate goal would be hugely significant for global efforts to secure agreement in Paris, said Jennifer Morgan from the World Resources Institute

“It makes a difference – having the G7 signal in any way they’re up for along term goal that makes avoiding 2C [of warming] more real would I hope be a shot in arm for the in debate in the UN – it matters,” she said

“To get the US, Canada and Japan to agree to this is a remarkable achievement by Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande, and a good sign for the negotiations," said Michael Jacobs, advisor to the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate

The G7 also noted that the earth's average temperature must not be allowed to rise above 2 degrees Celsius, but this is a pledge that has been made before, including at international climate talks

More importantly is the statement “that deep cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions are required with a decarbonisation of the global economy over the course of this century”

It is the first time that G7 leaders speak of decarbonisation — reducing to zero the carbon emissions from fossil fuels — of the global economy

That means that by the year 2100, there are roughly two outcomes for fossil fuels

One is that energy production has shifted away from coal, oil, and gas – the three fossil fuels which according to the International Energy Agency, in 2012 accounted for about 81.7 percent of the world's energy

The other is that fossil fuels are still used, but their emissions are captured before they would have been released into the air

However, the technique of carbon capture and storage, is still at an experimental stage

“From an investment point of view, this announcement from the G7 today only serves to further highlights that fossil fuels now and in the future are a poor risk”, said Tim Buckley, director at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis
Crime

Verdict Reached In Boston Bombing Trial 250

Posted by samzenpus from the verdict's-in dept.
An anonymous reader writes "A Boston jury has reached a verdict in the trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who admitted that he planted a bomb at the finish line of the Boston Marathon that left three dead and wounded 264 others. After deliberating for 11½ hours the jury has found Dzhokhar guilty on all 30 charges brought against him."

Comment Honest Thought (Score 1) 451

by NitsujTPU (#49289901) Attached to: Lyft CEO: Self-Driving Cars Aren't the Future

I think that autonomous vehicles will come and go, but they'll be around almost as long as cars with drivers. I'd bet that in the long-long term, urban planning will change such that cars become entirely unnecessary in all but the most remote places. I don't think that we'll ever become so densely populated that the world is one big city, but I'll bet that we'll see large high-rise condos become much much more common, and then it'll be a ride down an elevator to do your shopping and a walk or train ride to school.

It's not that suburbia isn't awesome. It's just the direction I kind of envision things going in. I could be wrong. This sort of radical shift in urban planning would take centuries, to take hold in the west.

Submission + - Is That Dress White and Gold or Blue and Black?

Submitted by HughPickens.com
HughPickens.com writes: Color scientists already have a word for it: Dressgate. Now the Washington Post reports that a puzzling thing happened on Thursday night consuming millions — perhaps tens of millions — across the planet and trending on Twitter ahead of even Jihadi John’s identification. The problem was this: Roughly three-fourths of people swore that this dress was white and gold, according to BuzzFeed polling but everyone else said it's dress was blue. Others said the dress could actually change colors. So what's going on? According to the NYT our eyes are able to assign fixed colors to objects under widely different lighting conditions. This ability is called color constancy. But the photograph doesn’t give many clues about the ambient light in the room. Is the background bright and the dress in shadow? Or is the whole room bright and all the colors are washed out? If you think the dress is in shadow, your brain may remove the blue cast and perceive the dress as being white and gold. If you think the dress is being washed out by bright light, your brain may perceive the dress as a darker blue and black.

According to Beau Lotto, the brain is doing something remarkable and that's why people are so fascinated by this dress. “It’s entertaining two realities that are mutually exclusive. It’s seeing one reality, but knowing there’s another reality. So you’re becoming an observer of yourself. You’re having tremendous insight into what it is to be human. And that’s the basis of imagination.” As usual xkcd has the final word.

Submission + - The Peculiar Economics of Developing New Antibiotics

Submitted by HughPickens.com
HughPickens.com writes: Every year at least two million people are infected with bacteria that can’t be wiped out with antibiotics but the number of F.D.A.-approved antibiotics has decreased steadily in the past two decades. Now.Ezekiel J. Emanuel writes at the NYT that the problem with the development of new antibiotics is profitability. “There’s no profit in it, and therefore the research has dried up, but meanwhile bacterial resistance has increased inexorably and there’s still a lot of inappropriate use of antibiotics out there," says Ken Harvey. Unlike drugs for cholesterol or high blood pressure, or insulin for diabetes, which are taken every day for life, antibiotics tend to be given for a short time so profits have to be made on brief usage. "Even though antibiotics are lifesaving, they do not command a premium price in the marketplace," says Emanuel. "As a society we seem willing to pay $100,000 or more for cancer drugs that cure no one and at best add weeks or a few months to life. We are willing to pay tens of thousands of dollars for knee surgery that, at best, improves function but is not lifesaving. So why won’t we pay $10,000 for a lifesaving antibiotic?"

Emanuel says that we need to use prize money as an incentive. "What if the United States government — maybe in cooperation with the European Union and Japan — offered a $2 billion prize to the first five companies or academic centers that develop and get regulatory approval for a new class of antibiotics?" Because it costs at least $1 billion to develop a new drug, the prize money could provide a 100 percent return — even before sales. "From the government perspective, such a prize would be highly efficient: no payment for research that fizzles. Researchers win only with an approved product. Even if they generated just one new antibiotic class per year, the $2-billion-per-year payment would be a reasonable investment for a problem that costs the health care system $20 billion per year." Unless payers and governments are willing to provide favorable pricing for such a drug, the big companies are going to focus their R&D investments in areas like cancer, depression, and heart disease where the return-on-investments are much higher.

Slashdot Top Deals

You can do this in a number of ways. IBM chose to do all of them. Why do you find that funny? -- D. Taylor, Computer Science 350

Close