Why Twitter? WTF would you even break twitter up into? All it has is twitter. That's just Trump getting butthurt that he can't get infowars tweets anymore.
Google makes a bit more sense, but still, what would you break it up into? Would you separate youtube from search, would that really affect things? What about Alphabet as a whole? Regulation and investigation would make more sense.
But Facebook, Facebook is an easy yes. Facebook is trivial to break up into Facebook, Instagram, and Whatsapp. They're all separate entities that would compete with each other if they weren't all owned by the same company.
It still runs on hardware. It runs on the same exact hardware you always need it to run on. And many of the "benefits" of it not always needing to be run by the same person can easily be snapped up by needing to run a ton of damned networking hardware.
Every games exec that brings up streaming seems to think hardware will come from the magical hardware fairy who gifts it to the wonderous cloud for free!
I'm slightly confused as to the popularity of this sort of voice chat. For phonetic alphabets it's far faster to read messages than hear them spoken, even if you talk like you're written by Aaron Sorkin. Writing can also be nigh as fast as talking for anyone quick enough.
Is simplified chinese still such a burden that talking is easier and more convenient, or is it some other thing that makes this popular?
Possession of cannabis is punishable by up to 5 years in the UK.
Instead this kid, guilty of murder or not, only gets 14 months. He's doing the very thing the laws say is smartest to do, and because of it it's possible a murderer may get away with their crime.
I own my stuff! Or, well, I have a personally accessible copy of the data available locally and/or in personal cloud storage.
I of course didn't acquire these in, horror of horrors, traditional capitalist means and methods! I'm sure that makes me some sort of commie, and not the good commie like the Nazis say the Russians are now (didn't the Nazis have a treaty with them last time too?). Oh no, I'm an anti-corporate commie! That's the worst kind of all. But hey, I can access my data without paying an eternal corporate rent for it, so that's good with me.
It's brilliant, don't you see it? The entire application should be so confusing, obfuscated, and aggravating in how it works that anyone trying to do anything with it kills themselves just to get rid of the PTSD nightmares of trying to understand how any of it works. It's the perfect defense.
Is this written by some guy that can't get a programming job because he doesn't have a degree? "Wah, they're all elitist nerds. Now I have to write for this stupid website to pay rent. They're the stupid ones, not me! Why don't I get paid $200k a year? Wahh!"
Back in the late 60's Arthur C. Clark predicted networked computers would make remote work possible for everyone.
Ironically, the people least allowed to work remotely appear to be those that allow increasing amount of people in other industries to do exactly that. Sure, that website's employees can all be remote and there can be no actual HQ to even speak of, but hell forbid that anyone working for Evil Tech Inc. work anywhere but at HQ where they can be properly monitored and recorded!
What he's saying, very badly probably, is that they're building an inference chip, which is designed to deploy neural nets, rather than a repurposed GPU like Nvidia offers, which is much better at training neural nets.
Difference being floating point precision requirements, as well as bandwidth v alu balance.
Alexa is now selling less than Google home, much less. Amazon's smartphone foray was a total flop. Its self driving car tech is, somehow, behind even Apple. For some reason it decided to make video games. If you want to check on how that's going ask yourself if you even knew that before reading this.
Amazon might be able to "disrupt" industries outside the tech industry. But its track record of taking on other tech companies is dismal. I don't see this changing anytime soon.
The Fermi Paradox is an utterly useless test. It takes variables you have no data on and then says to compute their probability.
Statistical probability, to be of any use in the real world at all, must by definition be based off already measurable data. That we have basically no measurement of any of this data means it is impossible to use the supposed equation of The Fermi Paradox to determine anything at all.
That this "equation" is mentioned with anything like passing respect should be considered a joke. That a paper from Oxford uses it is, one would hope, a joke from a couple drunk frat students hoping to get an easily published paper out to boos their careers.
A: How do you PAY for this? No one seems to be able to answer that. It's been six+ years now since "Cloud Gaming" has been the future and no one can answer how to get gamers to pay for this stuff. It might make sense for some corporations, but after a two years of heavy gaming on an Amazon instance you'll pay as much as a decent gaming PC of your own, let alone the price of a console.
B: You can't play VR games on the cloud. You just can't. The lag would make you throw up a thousand times over. And VR is ripe for a huge mass market expansion. It can be awesome by yourself, even better at a party (surprisingly enough) and is barely just scratching multiplayer. Get the cost down from a good gaming PC + $500 to say, just a console price, and it could take off. But not on the cloud, because the lag is far too much, even on a landline to a nearby server, for that to work.
Businessmen who don't know anything about Cloud cost structure or engineering have been predicting dumb terminals with centralized computing for 30 years now. Hasn't happened yet, even the modern Cloud is just used to run massive, occasional use server stuff rather than any sort of day to day end user experience.
Because this is shit science reporting to nth degree. What scientists have found is a more controllable source of neutrinos, ones that result from kaon decay, that can eliminate the variability that prevents neutrino experiments from being conclusive. That this was in any way connected with sterile neutrinos is because it was an accidental discovery from an apparently inconclusive experiment trying to find sterile neutrinos, but the discovery itself is no indication of whether sterile neutrinos exist or not.
"Waah intergenerational politics makes people click on headlines, so click away masses!"
FFS shut up, it's just more clickbait. This shit needs to stop appearing on/.
At the very least I expect the clickbait on here to actually be somewhat related to "clickbait for nerds". Not "clickbait for whiny morons."
Intelligent alien 1: "Hey, lets shoot these kind of intelligent animal eggs at a habitable planet and make sure they land safely so they'll spread there!"
Intelligent alien 2: "Dude, why?"
Intelligent alien 1: "Cause it's a fun prank! C'mon, don't be a buzzkill."
Simple hypothesis far more likely than god damned melanin (what idiot thought of that?). Blue light causes you to get worse sleep. Plenty of studies on it, already confirmed. You get worse sleep, your body doesn't repair itself as well, including looking for errors during mitosis, your immune system doesn't hunt cancer as well, you're more likely to get cancer. Boom, easy.
Hey, instead of long term planning and investment in a market that could take off in the not too distant future lets give up and shut everything down because it's not helping quarterly profits! Not like that's ever come back to haunt a tech company ever.
My god, we're doomed, finished, caput. A task beyond 90% of humanity has just been perfected by robots, and done far faster than humanly possible. Next to this warfare is child's play. I'd say to get into your bunkers, but those are probably designed by Ikea and the robots already know their weaknesses.
While the answer is yes, you have to admit this law is sci-fi as fuck and hand it to whoever managed to put that paragraph in there. I never thought I'd be impressed by an anonymous bureaucrat, but a round of applause right there.
Last I looked the point of money, and jobs, and all that shit was to make things people wanted. Hey guess what, if the robots do all that for cheap to free then we still get stuff! We even get more stuff than we have now, a lot more! Everyone wins! Imaginatively this whole "money" and "economy" and "jobs" thing doesn't actually have to exist if we still get stuff we want without it.
The first thing to understand is that the Nvidia and MS press releases are complete crap. Oh it "works". The UE4 Star Wars thing is real enough. It's also running on $12,000 worth of GPUs at 30fps in 1080p, and is only partially raytraced.
Now does this mean realtime raytracing isn't here? Well the answer is no, it is here. The game Claybook is entirely raytraced, unlike the DirectX demos. It's in early access and runs on nothing more than an Xbox One or PS4, and does so at 60 frames per second. Here's the trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Now THIS is possible because graphics programmers have gotten quite clever over the years. The cleverest bit is called signed distance fields. This can be thought of a volume of points, or boxes, that all store the nearest distance to a solid "surface". Going through this structure allows you to raytrace very very quickly, as you know how much empty space you can skip each time without hitting anything. And since this data is relatively small for each point it doesn't use up a lot of memory either. It's so fast and low memory you can run a demo in your browser here: https://www.shadertoy.com/view...
Obviously there's a bunch of other clever programming going on in Claybook and other titles. But SDF's are the biggest thing to understand. That and that the MS Raytracing API is totally uninteresting from a performance perspective. In fact it's rather awful.
These aren't really that terrifying. We just don't have the GPU power for re-enforcement learning like this to search for really out there solutions to problems at the moment. But they can produce really funny stories like this.
My favorite story is of a bot given the task of moving itself through a maze or somesuch (important part incoming). Anyway, the programmer decided the more time the bot spent away from the center of the maze the worse points it would get (it's trying to optimize for points here). But instead of going towards the center of the maze as fast as possible to maximize points it just couldn't figure out how to get through. So it sent itself off the virtual edge of the simulation area, ending the run and minimizing it's negative score as best as possible. By accident someone created a suicidal bot, yay!
And that is really the extend of "Deep Re-enforcement Learning" aka AI that teaches itself to do things today. Sometimes, like with Alpha Go, it works. But a lot of the time it does something stupid.
So the dosage does seem uncorrelated to cancer cells, which is odd. But according to this study then mice in the wild should have a lot more cancer over time, and humans should be getting more brain cancer over time. Neither has happened. In fact incidences of brain cancer have gone down between 1992 and 2014 https://seer.cancer.gov/statfa... . Even if this study is correct, which seems dubious already, you'd be looking at a doubling from 0.6 percent chance to 1.2 percent chance over your life time at most.
Slashdot Mirror
Why Twitter? WTF would you even break twitter up into? All it has is twitter. That's just Trump getting butthurt that he can't get infowars tweets anymore.
Google makes a bit more sense, but still, what would you break it up into? Would you separate youtube from search, would that really affect things? What about Alphabet as a whole? Regulation and investigation would make more sense.
But Facebook, Facebook is an easy yes. Facebook is trivial to break up into Facebook, Instagram, and Whatsapp. They're all separate entities that would compete with each other if they weren't all owned by the same company.
It still runs on hardware. It runs on the same exact hardware you always need it to run on. And many of the "benefits" of it not always needing to be run by the same person can easily be snapped up by needing to run a ton of damned networking hardware.
Every games exec that brings up streaming seems to think hardware will come from the magical hardware fairy who gifts it to the wonderous cloud for free!
I'm slightly confused as to the popularity of this sort of voice chat. For phonetic alphabets it's far faster to read messages than hear them spoken, even if you talk like you're written by Aaron Sorkin. Writing can also be nigh as fast as talking for anyone quick enough.
Is simplified chinese still such a burden that talking is easier and more convenient, or is it some other thing that makes this popular?
Possession of cannabis is punishable by up to 5 years in the UK.
Instead this kid, guilty of murder or not, only gets 14 months. He's doing the very thing the laws say is smartest to do, and because of it it's possible a murderer may get away with their crime.
I own my stuff! Or, well, I have a personally accessible copy of the data available locally and/or in personal cloud storage.
I of course didn't acquire these in, horror of horrors, traditional capitalist means and methods! I'm sure that makes me some sort of commie, and not the good commie like the Nazis say the Russians are now (didn't the Nazis have a treaty with them last time too?). Oh no, I'm an anti-corporate commie! That's the worst kind of all. But hey, I can access my data without paying an eternal corporate rent for it, so that's good with me.
So the quality of your work doesn't matter, as long as you sit there and look like you're doing a hell of a lot of it?
It's brilliant, don't you see it? The entire application should be so confusing, obfuscated, and aggravating in how it works that anyone trying to do anything with it kills themselves just to get rid of the PTSD nightmares of trying to understand how any of it works. It's the perfect defense.
Is this written by some guy that can't get a programming job because he doesn't have a degree?
"Wah, they're all elitist nerds. Now I have to write for this stupid website to pay rent. They're the stupid ones, not me! Why don't I get paid $200k a year? Wahh!"
Back in the late 60's Arthur C. Clark predicted networked computers would make remote work possible for everyone.
Ironically, the people least allowed to work remotely appear to be those that allow increasing amount of people in other industries to do exactly that. Sure, that website's employees can all be remote and there can be no actual HQ to even speak of, but hell forbid that anyone working for Evil Tech Inc. work anywhere but at HQ where they can be properly monitored and recorded!
What he's saying, very badly probably, is that they're building an inference chip, which is designed to deploy neural nets, rather than a repurposed GPU like Nvidia offers, which is much better at training neural nets. Difference being floating point precision requirements, as well as bandwidth v alu balance.
Alexa is now selling less than Google home, much less. Amazon's smartphone foray was a total flop. Its self driving car tech is, somehow, behind even Apple. For some reason it decided to make video games. If you want to check on how that's going ask yourself if you even knew that before reading this.
Amazon might be able to "disrupt" industries outside the tech industry. But its track record of taking on other tech companies is dismal. I don't see this changing anytime soon.
The Fermi Paradox is an utterly useless test. It takes variables you have no data on and then says to compute their probability.
Statistical probability, to be of any use in the real world at all, must by definition be based off already measurable data. That we have basically no measurement of any of this data means it is impossible to use the supposed equation of The Fermi Paradox to determine anything at all.
That this "equation" is mentioned with anything like passing respect should be considered a joke. That a paper from Oxford uses it is, one would hope, a joke from a couple drunk frat students hoping to get an easily published paper out to boos their careers.
A: How do you PAY for this? No one seems to be able to answer that. It's been six+ years now since "Cloud Gaming" has been the future and no one can answer how to get gamers to pay for this stuff. It might make sense for some corporations, but after a two years of heavy gaming on an Amazon instance you'll pay as much as a decent gaming PC of your own, let alone the price of a console.
B: You can't play VR games on the cloud. You just can't. The lag would make you throw up a thousand times over. And VR is ripe for a huge mass market expansion. It can be awesome by yourself, even better at a party (surprisingly enough) and is barely just scratching multiplayer. Get the cost down from a good gaming PC + $500 to say, just a console price, and it could take off. But not on the cloud, because the lag is far too much, even on a landline to a nearby server, for that to work.
Businessmen who don't know anything about Cloud cost structure or engineering have been predicting dumb terminals with centralized computing for 30 years now. Hasn't happened yet, even the modern Cloud is just used to run massive, occasional use server stuff rather than any sort of day to day end user experience.
Seriously, wtf, how does this get on here?
Because this is shit science reporting to nth degree. What scientists have found is a more controllable source of neutrinos, ones that result from kaon decay, that can eliminate the variability that prevents neutrino experiments from being conclusive. That this was in any way connected with sterile neutrinos is because it was an accidental discovery from an apparently inconclusive experiment trying to find sterile neutrinos, but the discovery itself is no indication of whether sterile neutrinos exist or not.
There, the truth, now please never ever link to another shit site that does this again: https://smbc-comics.com/comic/...
"Waah intergenerational politics makes people click on headlines, so click away masses!" /.
FFS shut up, it's just more clickbait. This shit needs to stop appearing on
At the very least I expect the clickbait on here to actually be somewhat related to "clickbait for nerds". Not "clickbait for whiny morons."
Intelligent alien 1: "Hey, lets shoot these kind of intelligent animal eggs at a habitable planet and make sure they land safely so they'll spread there!"
Intelligent alien 2: "Dude, why?"
Intelligent alien 1: "Cause it's a fun prank! C'mon, don't be a buzzkill."
Simple hypothesis far more likely than god damned melanin (what idiot thought of that?). Blue light causes you to get worse sleep. Plenty of studies on it, already confirmed. You get worse sleep, your body doesn't repair itself as well, including looking for errors during mitosis, your immune system doesn't hunt cancer as well, you're more likely to get cancer. Boom, easy.
Hey, instead of long term planning and investment in a market that could take off in the not too distant future lets give up and shut everything down because it's not helping quarterly profits! Not like that's ever come back to haunt a tech company ever.
My god, we're doomed, finished, caput. A task beyond 90% of humanity has just been perfected by robots, and done far faster than humanly possible. Next to this warfare is child's play. I'd say to get into your bunkers, but those are probably designed by Ikea and the robots already know their weaknesses.
While the answer is yes, you have to admit this law is sci-fi as fuck and hand it to whoever managed to put that paragraph in there. I never thought I'd be impressed by an anonymous bureaucrat, but a round of applause right there.
It's almost as if technology is advancing beyond the useful life of capitalism.
Nah who are we kidding, praise the almighty dollar!
Last I looked the point of money, and jobs, and all that shit was to make things people wanted. Hey guess what, if the robots do all that for cheap to free then we still get stuff! We even get more stuff than we have now, a lot more! Everyone wins! Imaginatively this whole "money" and "economy" and "jobs" thing doesn't actually have to exist if we still get stuff we want without it.
The first thing to understand is that the Nvidia and MS press releases are complete crap. Oh it "works". The UE4 Star Wars thing is real enough. It's also running on $12,000 worth of GPUs at 30fps in 1080p, and is only partially raytraced.
Now does this mean realtime raytracing isn't here? Well the answer is no, it is here. The game Claybook is entirely raytraced, unlike the DirectX demos. It's in early access and runs on nothing more than an Xbox One or PS4, and does so at 60 frames per second. Here's the trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Now THIS is possible because graphics programmers have gotten quite clever over the years. The cleverest bit is called signed distance fields. This can be thought of a volume of points, or boxes, that all store the nearest distance to a solid "surface". Going through this structure allows you to raytrace very very quickly, as you know how much empty space you can skip each time without hitting anything. And since this data is relatively small for each point it doesn't use up a lot of memory either. It's so fast and low memory you can run a demo in your browser here: https://www.shadertoy.com/view...
Obviously there's a bunch of other clever programming going on in Claybook and other titles. But SDF's are the biggest thing to understand. That and that the MS Raytracing API is totally uninteresting from a performance perspective. In fact it's rather awful.
These aren't really that terrifying. We just don't have the GPU power for re-enforcement learning like this to search for really out there solutions to problems at the moment. But they can produce really funny stories like this.
My favorite story is of a bot given the task of moving itself through a maze or somesuch (important part incoming). Anyway, the programmer decided the more time the bot spent away from the center of the maze the worse points it would get (it's trying to optimize for points here). But instead of going towards the center of the maze as fast as possible to maximize points it just couldn't figure out how to get through. So it sent itself off the virtual edge of the simulation area, ending the run and minimizing it's negative score as best as possible. By accident someone created a suicidal bot, yay!
And that is really the extend of "Deep Re-enforcement Learning" aka AI that teaches itself to do things today. Sometimes, like with Alpha Go, it works. But a lot of the time it does something stupid.
So the dosage does seem uncorrelated to cancer cells, which is odd. But according to this study then mice in the wild should have a lot more cancer over time, and humans should be getting more brain cancer over time. Neither has happened. In fact incidences of brain cancer have gone down between 1992 and 2014 https://seer.cancer.gov/statfa... . Even if this study is correct, which seems dubious already, you'd be looking at a doubling from 0.6 percent chance to 1.2 percent chance over your life time at most.