Well, "nonlinear classificator" or "planning algorithm", or the like is not suitable for modern "journalism" as it does usually not inspire awe or fear. And that is all these people seem to be aiming for these days.
This is a lens-system at the end of an optical fiber. The actual camera is a the other end of that fiber. The paper-title gets it right: "Two-photon direct laser writing of ultracompact multi-lens objectives". There is nothing "injectable" here and no "surveillance concerns" either. This is a better endoscope, and that is it. As such it is very interesting, no doubt. But the add-on concerns and fear-mongering are complete bullshit.
Yep. The core problem is that only very few kids are interested in coding and these usually find that interest as teenagers, not before. Hence this is just as futile as all the other "teach everybody and their dog how to code" projects. While there is strong indication at least a large part of the industry behind this wants cheaper coders (and completely misses that this would be really, really bad coders), the individuals driving this just seem to be fundamentally ignorant about the realities of who can learn what. Coding, mathematics, advanced engineering, etc. are not things many people can learn and that is not going to change. You have to bring too much in talent and motivation to the table for these things.
Spoken like a true moron that has no clue at all about safe design. You probably also think guns should not have safeties and all safety features from chainsaws should be removed.
You must never have written any software in the real world. (Note that clicking things together does not qualify as "writing software".) The thing is that writing software that works well, completely disregarding security, is already pretty hard and writing software that is "mostly secure" is something most programmers cannot do.
There are other options, agreed. But tactile feedback is by far the best understood and most established one. If you go the extra mile on an alternate option and design it really carefully, it can work just as well. But just removing the tactile feedback on something safety-critical without replacing it with something that works at least as well is asking for people to accidentally kill themselves and others. And, surprise!, that is exactly what is happening.
For pretty insane values of "sane". Actually nobody sane does it that way. Breaking convention has no place in solid engineering, and only communities that misidentify "different" as "better" will ever accept such a moronic design.
"You have not tried it"-Fallacy. I recommend you jump off a cliff, set yourself on fire and drink a bottle of cool-aid in order to find out why only utter morons use that non-argument.
Naaa, that is old tech. Nobody in their right mind uses that today. It is sooo outdated and you need several years to learn how to do it too. And in addition, it requires you to think about it yourself because you have to reconstruct your own version of what is happening form a tiny, slow data-stream. And not only that, it may even require you to think about things because it does not show you everything. Thinking and understanding are skills that are fast becoming obsolete (just look at this story), and you do not want to be bogged down by old skills that nobody wants anymore, do you? It is really astonishing that "reading" ever had any people doing it by choice.
It is _entertainment_! Making it last shorter is about the most stupid thing you can do with it. If you think it wastes your time, then do without it in the first place.
The heights of stupidity some people can reach is truly astonishing.
Removing tactile feedback in a safety-critical user-interface element is not a problem on the user's side. Even a competent user will get this wrong from time to time. This is a design-screwup of epic proportions. The morons that designed this must not even have the basic course on ergonomic and save design.
Religious fanatics are not interested even in what their own holy books say. They are not interested in right or wrong. They are into suppressing anything that disagreed with their own perverted world view and in exercising power. If you want to find the worst of the worst in the human race, you need look no further.
Oh, and when we do that we need to stop all sex without contraception! The thing you are obviously not aware of is that most fertilized eggs die, hence the very act of fertilizing eggs is "horrible and inhuman" according to nil-whits such as you.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, "nonlinear classificator" or "planning algorithm", or the like is not suitable for modern "journalism" as it does usually not inspire awe or fear. And that is all these people seem to be aiming for these days.
It is just stupid journalism: "game-changer" "breakthrough" "revolutionary" "unheard of" bullshit. Apparently, the masses like it that way.
Indeed. This is about making better lens-systems at the end of an endoscope. The camera sits at the other end of the fiber.
This is a lens-system at the end of an optical fiber. The actual camera is a the other end of that fiber. The paper-title gets it right: "Two-photon direct laser writing of ultracompact multi-lens objectives". There is nothing "injectable" here and no "surveillance concerns" either. This is a better endoscope, and that is it. As such it is very interesting, no doubt. But the add-on concerns and fear-mongering are complete bullshit.
My guess is that they make these additional statements by some algorithm that is completely stupid. The link here seems to be copyright.
Yep. The core problem is that only very few kids are interested in coding and these usually find that interest as teenagers, not before. Hence this is just as futile as all the other "teach everybody and their dog how to code" projects. While there is strong indication at least a large part of the industry behind this wants cheaper coders (and completely misses that this would be really, really bad coders), the individuals driving this just seem to be fundamentally ignorant about the realities of who can learn what. Coding, mathematics, advanced engineering, etc. are not things many people can learn and that is not going to change. You have to bring too much in talent and motivation to the table for these things.
So essentially, this is just another stupid hype.
Good examples for more bad design. Unfortunately, the Linux community how has its fair share of idiots as well. One of the consequences of growing.
Nice! Even more of an idiot than the average AC. Have a look at the Wikipedia page for C to find out how massively, badly wrong you are.
Spoken like a true moron that has no clue at all about safe design. You probably also think guns should not have safeties and all safety features from chainsaws should be removed.
You must never have written any software in the real world. (Note that clicking things together does not qualify as "writing software".) The thing is that writing software that works well, completely disregarding security, is already pretty hard and writing software that is "mostly secure" is something most programmers cannot do.
There are other options, agreed. But tactile feedback is by far the best understood and most established one. If you go the extra mile on an alternate option and design it really carefully, it can work just as well. But just removing the tactile feedback on something safety-critical without replacing it with something that works at least as well is asking for people to accidentally kill themselves and others. And, surprise!, that is exactly what is happening.
Well, one thing if for sure, dear AC, you are not even it the running for last place.
Sounds entirely plausible. The same thing is true for software security experts. That is why most software is badly insecure.
For pretty insane values of "sane". Actually nobody sane does it that way. Breaking convention has no place in solid engineering, and only communities that misidentify "different" as "better" will ever accept such a moronic design.
Comparing unusable trash to unusable trash? How is that going to help? Or are you grading language quality on "hipness"?
You are doing it wrong: In order to fix something bad, you do not go to something worse...
Well, maybe if you are a masochist and enjoy the toxic rust community.
And ironically, one of its most severe shortcomings is that it is far too complicated. Seems they are hard at work on making things worse.
Personally, I have moved back to C for anything that needs efficiency and use Python for anything that does not. The two also combine well.
"You have not tried it"-Fallacy. I recommend you jump off a cliff, set yourself on fire and drink a bottle of cool-aid in order to find out why only utter morons use that non-argument.
Naaa, that is old tech. Nobody in their right mind uses that today. It is sooo outdated and you need several years to learn how to do it too. And in addition, it requires you to think about it yourself because you have to reconstruct your own version of what is happening form a tiny, slow data-stream. And not only that, it may even require you to think about things because it does not show you everything. Thinking and understanding are skills that are fast becoming obsolete (just look at this story), and you do not want to be bogged down by old skills that nobody wants anymore, do you? It is really astonishing that "reading" ever had any people doing it by choice.
It is _entertainment_! Making it last shorter is about the most stupid thing you can do with it. If you think it wastes your time, then do without it in the first place.
The heights of stupidity some people can reach is truly astonishing.
Removing tactile feedback in a safety-critical user-interface element is not a problem on the user's side. Even a competent user will get this wrong from time to time. This is a design-screwup of epic proportions. The morons that designed this must not even have the basic course on ergonomic and save design.
Law enforcement is busy fighting non-existent terrorists. Of course they cannot do anything about actually dangerous malware.
Too many idiots on this planet. The only real problem the human race has.
Religious fanatics are not interested even in what their own holy books say. They are not interested in right or wrong. They are into suppressing anything that disagreed with their own perverted world view and in exercising power. If you want to find the worst of the worst in the human race, you need look no further.
Oh, and when we do that we need to stop all sex without contraception! The thing you are obviously not aware of is that most fertilized eggs die, hence the very act of fertilizing eggs is "horrible and inhuman" according to nil-whits such as you.