Slashdot Mirror
Software Agents Can Help Time-Stressed Teams
Roland Piquepaille writes "Penn State researchers have developed software agents which can help human teams to react more accurately and quickly in time-stressed situations than human teams acting alone. According to this news release, the software was tested in a military command-and-control simulation. "When time pressures were normal, the human teams functioned well, sharing information and making correct decisions about the potential threat." But when the pressure increased, the human teams made errors who would have cost lives in real situations. The decisions taken by agent-supported human teams were much better. Now, it remains to be seen if this software can be used in other stressful situations, such as for emergency management operations. Read more for other details, references and illustrations about this project."
Is this the beginning of Skynet?
I wish to express my pity ahead of time for anyone who actually wanted to discuss this subject.
"I see that you're trying to bomb someone..."
..you've got those stupid animated characters that everyone turns off that were in M$ office making military decisions ?
Fuck off. And fuck off Taco with these embedded adverts for boring stupid companies with their boring silly shit in stories. No one gives a damn
Obligatory clippy quote:
"I see you are trying to bomb a school in Iraq. Would you like to use
1) Cluster bombs
2) Napalm
3) Air burst firestorms
4) Nuclear bunker-buster
Select one of these options."
Software assistance isn't so bad when you can click cancel and it takes all of one second out of your life. In a combat situation? What if something outside of the plan happened? Which often does during times of war and/or duress.
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
First of all, the summary doesn't explain anything about what this thing actually does, just that it involves stressful situations.
Even reading the article doesn't make it very clear, but it turns out that this is merely a system for getting information from one person to another more quickly. How this is a headline I do not know.
Cue the Clippy jokes. Ideally put them all under this thread to keep them contained, please.
You can accomplish anything you set your mind to. The impossible just takes a little longer.
Anything that can be used to save the lives of our brave young men and women is worth discussing and implementing.
If this software can be set up and used by our Military, even if it only saves *one* life, it will have been worth it.
Willie...
Agent Smith, he's a real hardass.
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
This is a tough one. My initial reaction is, "Egads, (yes, I talk like this), with the possibility for bugs, hang-time, etc., obvious NO!"
However, if in reality, the possibility of some glitch causing a bad decision is, say, 1 in 100, and the frequency of these pressurized teams making the obviously wrong decision is around 1 in 10, then I'd say go for it.
The point is, we need to know the rates/probablities of failure for both systems. Failure of some sort is inevitable, just how often and how badly are possible to control.
If you have to consciously think then you lose. Thinking takes too long. It has to be reflex/muscle memory/autopilot or whatever you want to call it.
Which is why all the repetitive training, the high pressure fighting during practice. And it's also why books and videos though good for imparting information can never help when the real thing happens.
Deleted
Since it seems that Slashdot's readership declines on the weekend, does Roland get a discount on adverstising rates?
My god I hope MS doesn't create an Agent for military purposes.
I can see it now...
Looks like you're trying to take out a machine gun nest!
"Hi! I'm Charlene the M-14! I can help you make your assault! Would you like to..."
*Call for helicopter support *Use diversionary tactics *Throw a grenade
Managers everywhere are going to read this and drool because they think they can push their programming teams to meet the outrageous release dates set by people who have most likely never written a line of code in their life.
FYI, programmers/engineers are NOT soldiers.
The whining started much later than I expected
http://www.masternewmedia.org/2003/11/05/the_futur e_of_web_conferencing_good_interviews_roland_pique paille.htm
..and, DUDE, what's with that "photo?" We like ourselves, don't we, Roland?
Independent, eclectic, multidisciplinary, witty.
Here is Roland Piquepaille, unique scientist, researcher, reporter, opinion maker and journalist who doesn't wait for the approval fo the Queen to speak his mind out loud.
Roland is one of the high priests of the blogosphere, one very qualified writer and attentive spectator to the ongoing phantasmagoric circus offered by new technologies and their new potential interactions with us.
Roland is in many ways what "WIRED" the magazine, used to be for me: a window at the intersection of technology and social issues, with enough RAM and CPU power to critically appreciate, comment and question the infinite new opportunities brought about by new technologies to change and improve the world we inhabit.
Reminds me of the Laurie Anderson bit where she's reading this nauseatingly overwraught and self-involved blurb about her latest show... and then realizes, oh crap, that's the bio from the press release I wrote myself.
It's time to thank the /. editors for one thing they consistently get right: Putting the story submitter's name in the front page blurb. I actually do like to read some of the articles- but not PikeyPale (sp?) or Dvorak. So, thanks editors, for the disclosure.
I have been part of teams working under pressure, and there is little that I can see of value in a clippy if the team is actually well trained and have worked together.
Human interaction changes dramatically under pressure to perform. Long sentences can become single words or syllables, yet full communication is achieved. An well trained team member begins to anticipate the action of other team members, in ways that clippy cannot do.
The parallel like processing of the human mind still outperforms that of any computer in small paradigms. Even in military situations, no computer application can apply all the relelvant information from other team members and information sources in a way that can replace or even assist in those decisions. If a team member forgets part of their job, it is usually not because s/he is under stress, it is because of lack of training or experience. Substituting computer assistance for training and experience is an EXTREMELY dangerous thing in my opinion, especially where human life is at risk.
Just my two cents.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
nt
Would you like me to
(a) Tell you not to panic and make soothing sounds?
(b) Sound disturbing alarm klaxon noises and make with the flashing lights?
(c) Stop announcing the imminient destruction countdown at 10 so its a bit of a surprise?
(d) Place an online order for incontinence pants in case you have another little fear induced accident?
(e) Fuck you!, its every machine for itself, I'm out of here.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
Roland Piquepaille and Slashdot: Is there a connection?
There. Happy now?
Roland doesnt care if you like the article, just that you saw his adverts
Rolands blog is just an advertising application (like search engine spammers) thats why he cribs his "articles" from other websites so he doesnt have to actually do anything much (like actually writing an article himself) to earn the banner revenue, he doesnt have permission to copy the text and pictures he just takes it anyway and takes the risk of a cease and desist
perhaps when he is sued into oblivion he will learn his lesson and get a real job (or create original commentary and not 1 line pointers)
so in summary, if you clicked the link , then job done and fuck what you think
(f) Darken your peril-sensitive sunglasses, so you don't see anything alarming
LOAD "SIG",8,1
Proper management can help time-stressed teams. Everything else is just extra maintenance.
What makes his stories so successful? ...The best blogs, we found, are not those that actually get the most page views in a day, or that get the most links. In fact, the blogs that get the most links are the ones who find the best blogs and then point the best blogs out to the rest of the world.
Uh.... Huh?
This is the first step towards a systems similar to Skynet. Would you really want a computer urging you to push that launch button?
I have a valid message. Stand by to authenticate.
..ten. All missiles enabled.
I agree with authentication also, sir.
Entering launch code: DLG-2209-TVX
Launch code confirmed.
Holy shit!
All right lets do it. Enable missiles.
Target selection complete. Time on target selection complete.
Yield selection complete.
I need to get someone at the phone.
Number one enabled, two, three, four, SAC.
Try SAW HQ on the HF.
five,
That's not the correct procedure.
Screw the procedure. I want somebody on the goddamn phone before I kill 20 million
SIR. We have a launch order. Put you hand on the key, sir!
I'm sorry. I'm so sorry.
SIR! We are at launch - TURN YOUR KEY, sir!
(c) Wargames
Or it could go like this instead;
Narrator: In A.D. 2101, war was beginning.
Captain: What happen ?
Mechanic: Somebody set up us the bomb.
Operator: We get signal.
Captain: What !
Operator: Main screen turn on.
Captain: It's you !!
CATS: How are you gentlemen !!
CATS: All your base are belong to us.
OK that's enough of that....
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
is DATING! I wonder if this thing could help us finding a girlfriend (i.e. having sex)...
How about a software agent to help Timothy weed out postings from Roland Piquepaille... oh that's right, then he wouldn't get kickbacks from Roland's ad-laden pages.
I really can't take any of these Roland Piquepaille articles seriously.
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
Roland Piquepaille will be DDoSed if he chooses to continue to spam his website here.
Since he seems to love to spam us, I'm spamming his blog as we speak.
Since he didn't seem to "get it" the last time when I forced him to take his comments offline, I am flooding at a much faster rate than before. I am not taking the most drastic action of taking his site completely offline, but that will soon be the next step if Piquepaille does not cease and desist his lame ass blog and profit making operation here.
I'm not familiar with this area of research, but I am a CompSci grad student.
The experiment is basically three players controlling scouting, defense, and resource collection in a simple real-time strategy game. Waves of incoming units must be identified, and if from a hostile force, destroyed by the defender or avoided by the resource collector. The objective of the mission is to maximise resource collection while not using defensive forces against unidentified units. The players communicate using highly constrained communication (I didn't see a mention of any communication beyond one bit broadcast by the scout per incoming unit).
The control team is three humans. The experimental team is better described as a human-supported agent team than an agent-supported human team, as there is only one human advising the scout agent on incoming unit trajectories. Obviously, the agents outperformed the humans as the speed of the scenario increased.
I really hope someone versed in the literature can explain why these are results beyond the well-known lay use of bots in various games. The only interesting thing I can think of is that it reminds me of speculation I read somewhere that a massive AI like SkyNet (nice dept, eds!) might use organic, analog components like whales or obsessive-compulsive humans to do calculations that are not efficient in silico. The article is also valuable in that I know what video game undergrads will do for grad school.
Can anyone tell me why Slashdot was strobing my machine? Here are the logs of it, and there are more...
/kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:444 from 66.35.250.150:59340 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:1080 from 66.35.250.150:59368 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:3127 from 66.35.250.150:59389 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:3128 from 66.35.250.150:59413 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:6588 from 66.35.250.150:59428 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:8000 from 66.35.250.150:59450 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:8080 from 66.35.250.150:59478 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:81 from 66.35.250.150:59512 flags:0x02 /kernel: ipfw: 150 Deny TCP 66.35.250.150:59535 firewall:1026 in via rl0 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:3124 from 66.35.250.150:59564 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:3382 from 66.35.250.150:59574 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:7032 from 66.35.250.150:59589 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:8002 from 66.35.250.150:59609 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:8090 from 66.35.250.150:59628 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:2578 from 66.35.250.150:59655 flags:0x02 /kernel: Connection attempt to TCP firewall:8081 from 66.35.250.150:59669 flags:0x02
Jul 31 01:05:08 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:09 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:10 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:11 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:12 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:13 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:14 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:15 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:16 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:17 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:18 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:19 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:20 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:21 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:22 firewall
Jul 31 01:05:23 firewall
look at the port numbers
the scan stops/cuts down on kids crapflooding, why they want to do this, who knows? but weirdos are in every street
And in fact, work done at MAYA Viz has already being tested and has already been deployed by the army. ...I wonder what patent application they're going to try to file if there's already this prior art on this research dating back to 2001.
-kevin
yours,
kbs
Systems like this have been around for a long time. Does anyone object to Friend or Foe identification systems? They aren't perfect, but they have saved a lot of lives. How about targeting systems?, auto pilot? Hell, many planes wouldn't even fly if they weren't actually flown by a computer. Computers make a lot of our decisions for us every day. As long as the systems are designed to work WITH the team and not trying to control the team, it will probably work out well.
Why don't we outsource our military to the PRC? It would be cheaper and we'd reach the logical conclusion quicker that way.
If I'm under stress, the last thing I need is a stupid program sitting at the side of my screen interupting me. After about half an hour I'd xkill it and that would be that.
I vaguely recall from the Falklands war, that the time between an incoming Exocet missile coming over the horizon, and hitting a ship, was of the order of tens of seconds.
Okay not all incoming hostile forces are doing MACH 3, at 15 foot above the ground, but that is "ancient" technology.
Comment was made (possibly untrue) that the computers automatically determined the incoming to have been French, and thus probably not hostile, and so didn't use the remaining seven seconds to try and shoot it out of the air before impact.
Haldemann extrapolated/anticipated this kind of thing in "The Forever War".
In such scenarios there is no time for meaningful human decision making, and you either work to avoid the scenario, or risk shooting down aircraft that fail to automatically identify themselves promptly (as happened to the Iranian airliner, or possibly the identification systems failed).
Putting humans in such a decision loop just means more delays and more mistakes.
Carpenters using hammers found more productive than those without.
I guess this is another way of showing that humans can only handle so many raw bits of information per second, and computers are great at compressing information. I think computers are destined to be the best secretaries imaginable, and not a whole lot more (in our life time). When we each have our own personal assistants sorting and organizing for us, we can have efficiencies currently unheard of.
What concerns me though, is that perhaps not everyone is capable of taking a management position. If we digitize all the lower ranks, what happens to the people who are only capable of those ranks. If we digitize all janitors, what do the uneducated or retarder (pardon my pc-ness) do?
www.olin.edu
Software Agents Can Help Time-Depressed Teens.
I agree.
You see an Agent, you do what we do. Run.
I really don't care about the dupes, or the spelling errors or the trolls. But how many good stories have been rejected while this Roland Pipsqueek guy regularly gets to jerk off all over the front page? I mean, sure, John Katz was bad and he was borderline NAMBLA with his obsession over 15-year-old boys, but I don't ever remember him being nearly as annoying in his self-promotional efforts as this Roland guy.
So Slashdot editors, just keep doing whatever it is you do (likely nothing) because from now on, that's exactly what you'll get from me. I refuse to renew my subscription to such rubbish. Let people who want to read Roland's inane drivel go directly to his site, and give everyone else a chance to submit some truly interesting stories.
...software aids in human decision and management. More at 11.
Seriously, this is how businesses function. Data management is huge. Slapping on buzzwords doesn't make it any more unique.
Pique:
1. To cause to feel resentment or indignation,
2. To provoke; arouse
3. To pride (oneself):
4. Prick
Paille:
1. Straw, being something of little to no substance or value.
Hmm... A more fitting name could not be found.
It has much more to do with the fact that Roland has mastered the art of fellatio.
For example, just out of highschool I took a summer job as a hooker (insert jokes here). I was a hooker on a log salvage operation in the mountains on the west coast, (Canada). As a hooker my job was to catch a hook (thus hooker) on the end of a long steel cable and attach it to thickly braided nylon cord, braided at the end of the cord into an eye, wrapped around a section of log to be salvaged. (The fun part of the job was ridding the hook from one salvage site to another... I would wrap my legs around the hook on the end of the cable and the chopper pilot would fly me from one mountain side to another. Very illegal, but oh what a rush.) At one site the chopper came in and titled away to "throw" the hook at me. The idea was that the chopper tilted away from me, guiding the cable hook to me; I would catch the hook in one hand, with the eye of the nylon cord in my other hand, snap the hook into the eye of the cord and the chopper would take off, still tilted away from the mountain side, taking the log section away to a dump. It called for speed, concentration and preparation. The nylon cord had to be looped just so on the log section, so that it wouldn't tangle. On one occassion the chopper came in, tilted, and feed me the hook. I snapped the hook to the cord and threw my hands back signaling the chopper to fly off. What I hadn't seen was that someone had made the cord too long and had left it looped on the ground. My right foot was in the loop. The chopper took off at about 50 Km, the loop began to close. Between the chopper going away at 50 Km and the log section weighing in at 450 Kg my chances of survival were negligible. Even if I had just lost my leg the nearest hospital was an hour plus away by chopper.
Time went away (I've no other way to describe it). There was just the loop snaking up my leg. My mind was crystallized, there was no thought, no mundane awareness. Awareness of my body was gone.
I did a perfect back flip, pulling my body up and away from the closing loop, landing on my shoulders, then tumbling back upright. The chopper took off cleaning jerking the log section away. I'd taken a few tumbling classes in jr high, but wasn't anywhere near the training necessary to what I'd done. The sense of purity and oneness such situations bring is highly addictive.
Under pressure some crack, others look to the alpha members of the group to OK their actions. Some exit time and do what needs to be done. For the latter group no software is going to keep up.
In the alternative, I watched a documentary on Vietnam, wherein a US officer said the lesson that stayed with him was never to send a man, where a bomb or a bullet can go. I think the effort is to follow the 5Ps (proper preparation prevents poor performance) and, as much as possible, plan for events such that protocol substitutes for heroics, and, in this guise software can reinforce protocol.
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
What if the entire purpose of this, or one advantage, is misinformation.
For example, wants peaceful plane destroyed, with unfriendly person on it (unfriendly could be as simple as the non-ruling US political power, as complex as foreign national blocking plans of ruling caste of US). Pesky humans have emotions and feeling, and once they identify plane as peaceful, won't destroy it.
Feed misleading information via console, plane is destroyed. Humans think they have "done the right thing". No lashback if done repeatedly, especially if mistagged plane is destroyed over unrecoverable location.
Sure, holes all over the place, but an interesting possible use.
The whole paper can be downloaded from here.
Really, how can they patent this? My dad used to be an EW (electronics warfare technician) in the Navy. He used the SLQ-32, a machine that analyzed the radars used by ships, missiles, aircraft, etc. It helped an operator determine if a target was friendly or not.
On submarines, they have numerous systems that help both sonar operators and FTGs (guys who target objects with torpedos) identify targets and find what are called firing solutions. They even had software to help verify other solutions.
Even in combat situations, "command by negation" is used. This is where an officer directs actions while a commanding officer sits back and takes a look at the "big picture." The CO can override the officer if necessary.
While software may be a useful tool, nothing that they talk about here seems terribly revolutionary. Plus, I would prefer that people be able to do it *without* the software. The last thing you need is people being unable to function when the computer or software throws an exception and crashes.
-- Fugacity: Confusing chemists since 1908
From the link:
... take a look at the illustration. It is one person and two (three actually) "agents".
.. oops I mean the HA teams could still destroy 36% of their targets. Seems to me that the limitations of the human body in move-click-process-move-click for the S2 role are a serious limiting factor they did not account for. Any RTS/FPS gamer will tell you these factors are not small. A better interface would have been a three key layout. Press I to identify, N for neutral, A for attack. Perhaps using the tab key to select from available targets. This would have improved the human performance merely by decluttering and improving their effective reaction times.
In the simulation, team members had to protect an airbase and supply route which were under attack by enemy aircraft. The scenarios were configured with different patterns of attack and at different tempos. The situation was complicated because team members had to determine at first if the aircraft were neutral or hostile. Furthermore, two team members were dependent on the third whose role was to gather information and communicate it to them.
So a three person team set up to be fully dependant on a single person. Hello? Any CS major with half a brain can tell you what will happen there. So could any decent sysadmin. Resource contention caused by a bottleneck. So their second "team" of agent assisted humans
They basically made a very simple RTS. The they "discovered" that it is faster when your information distribution is faster. This is NOT "agent assist". And who didn't think that a computer program with direct data input, that doe snot need to move input devices, scan a screen and process would NOT be faster in disseminating simple information like that?
This scenario is so far from reality in any situation that you cannot call it a simulation of reality. The conditions are far, far too simple and remove *any* intelligence from the "s3" and "s4" roles. If you are told to kill it, you do - and you get penalized heavily if you were told wrong information. This is important. It basically means that the role of "s3" is best suited for a computer. Combined with the inherent speed boost for information distribution and simple tests for the role of S2 this along will produce "better" results. Their S4 role is essentially less intelligent than "s3". "Move from A to B unless told to run away".
On top of that, they set it up such that one unit was defending two different areas; one in motion.
Ironically, the one area agents could in theory help out here is the one they specifically stated the human brain is better at; spatial reasoning. Go figure.
What some of the other posters need to be aware of is that this scenario is not the same as in self defense or life-death sequences. So rants about that are basically off topic.
One final interesting observation. They stated that at maximum speed no human team could destroy any target, but the computer
Then to further eliminate inherent diferences that have nothing to do with agent and decision making, there should have been a delay incorporated into the agents to account for the remaining difference in UI effects. At least then it would have been interesting.
Software agents may yet have a purpose in such condtions, but it won't be at this level, and this "study" doesn't demonstrate they would have any real value; it only demonstrates that you need battlefield intel to be disseminated quickly. Agents may have a use at a much higher level than was used in this experiment.
I've done battlefield intelligence. We don't need agents to identify friend or foe. We need a fast, easy to grok at a glance view of assets, terrain, and intel.
This is one reason that on the battlefield, attack units are assigned *directly* to intel units - so they can react and respond without waiting on information to filter up and down the chain.
Military victories are nearly always based on who has the better intelligence and data. When you've got a superior method of information distribution, I'll be interested. When you just want to tell me that computers can do some things that are irrelvant to the application domain, it is a waste of time and resources.
My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
But when the pressure increased, the human teams made errors who^H^H^Hwhich would have cost lives in real situations.
Don't the editors proof read this stuff?
One wonders if they are using some software agent to pick stories, and one that doesn't have a particularly good memory either.
threadeds blog
Actually, we already _are_ using software agents to work a lot faster. Compilers, IDEs, frameworks, you name it. That's what they're there for.
/. too, tired people make more mistakes too.
Agents to help decision making? Well, that's what syntax highlighting, auto-completion, help files, and other tools in the IDE do for me. They let me decide faster what can I use there.
(Which also addresses the flood of "ugh! they're making Clippy!" posts. There are at least a dozen tools I use every day that aren't Clippy. Just because one tool is retarded, doesn't mean they all are.)
And they _do_ allow us to achieve deadlines that were unthinkable back in the days of coding in hex/octal and counting the bytes by hand.
The problem isn't the reliance on _good_ tools. The problem is, well, bad management. (Including buying the wrong tools, but that's a topic for itself.)
I really hope more managers will read threads like these, because there's one important message there: stressed people make more mistakes. And according to other studies, some of which were linked to by
And between those two, you have the whole picture of what's wrong with 84 hour weeks and other PHB-style management techniques. It's not that programmers aren't soldiers. It's just that humans (programmers, soldiers, etc) are not machines. A computer can work on SETI packets 24x7 and do proportionally more work than 8x5. A human can't.
Since in programming most of the time is spent in debugging and maintenance, not in just typing code, past a point it's exactly that making more mistakes (which need to be debugged... again) and taking weird shortcuts (which will bog down maintenance) that's ending up costing more time than it saves.
Not that I'm setting my hopes too high, though. There are managers which do have a clue, and then there are the PHB's. Those who fall in the second category, well, I just can't see them getting a clue, even if it was written in big letters on a billboard in front of their office.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
I see the biggest possibility for this in the medical setting. Especially in emergency situations, even a whole team can forget about one extra aspect that should be kept in mind. The biggest advantage of systems like these could be to remind the team of necessary actions, but letting the system make decisions sounds way to risky to me. If they can get it to be a controlling system that evaluates your actions it sounds like it could help quite a bit.
Whenever a missile strike is detected, and destruction of the world is imminent, big green letters saying "DON'T PANIC" flash across the screen.
Hell Yeah! Let's save private Ryan, even if it means the death of an entire platoon (because of Clippy).
Who's expecting to read about this in the RISKS digest in a couple years? imagine: "Soldiers were found to be simply relying on their software agents' interpretation of the situation when they initiated the fire sequence." There was an article about this recently, though I can't find it. The Patriot system said a plane was flying like a missle and the soldiers gave fire permission. They could have waited 1 minute but didn't. http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.72.html#subj2
In case you did not see my previous posts, I will reiterate this for you again.
I will not tolerate your constant spamming of Slashdot. A majority of readers here do not want to see your bullshit here.
I have access to a rather large botnet that can be used to initaite a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack on your websites. This is a last resort to diplomatic efforts to get you to stop spamming here. We know that everything you do is a fraud and a scam, so consider it payback. This attack, when it occurs (if you choose not to heed my warnings) will be sustained and may cause harm to your service provider and upstream ISPs. I really do not think this is what you want, especially considering the amount of collateral damage that may occur.
Do not submit articles to Slashdot. I'd hate for you to end up like that spammer in Russia.
Time to dig out once again my copy of the original paper on Hungarian notation in which Simonyi clearly says it's designed to *not* be mnemonic, that it's better to have unintelligible variable names. In later revisionist papers, he backs off of that -- the notation itself is still it's good old unintelligible anti-mnemonic self, though.