NeatNit

joined 10 months ago
[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

While true, I wonder how many games actually do this.

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 6 months ago

I think even the imperfect sensor data is enough to beat a human. My main argument for why self-driving cars will eventually be objectively safer than the best human drivers (no comment about whether that point has already done) is this:

A human can only look at one thing at a time. Compared to a computer, we see allow, think slow, react show, move slow. A computer can look in all directions all the time, and react to danger coming from any of those directions faster than a human driver would even if they were lucky enough to be looking in the right direction. Add to that the fact that they can take in much more sensor data that isn't available to the driver or take away from precious looking-at-the-road time for the driver to know, such as wind resistance, engine RPM, or what have you (I'm actually not a car guy so my examples aren't the best). Bottom line: the AI has a direct connection to more data, can take more of it in at once and make faster decisions based on all of it. It's inherently better. The "only" hurdles are making it actually interpret its sensors effectively (i.e. understand what cameras are seeing) and make good decisions based on this data. We can argue about how well either of those are in the current state of the technology, but IMO they're both good enough today to massively outperform a human in most scenarios.

All of this applies to an AI plane as well. So my money is on the AI.

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 6 months ago

I see this as a positive: when both sides have AI unmanned planes, we get cool dogfights without human risk! Ideally over ocean or desert and with Hollywood cameras capturing every second in exquisite detail.

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

What did this say before the edit?

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 22 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I've never seen this meme format before. Wasn't too hard to find but there were alarmingly few results. Here's an unedited copy: https://pin.it/4IDvvJwNb

I think what I'm trying to say is: where are you getting your memes? What should I make of this obscurity?

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 7 months ago (3 children)

I imagine there'd be a performance penalty if using a flash drive for the OS. Not sure though.

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 7 months ago (5 children)

They're clearly asking about performance not security

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Right, that's where OP comes in - most malware will be made for Windows, so if you visit such a malicious website, it'll likely be inert under Linux!

.... I'm not saying this is a great reason to use Linux, but there's at least a little bit of merit to it.

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 7 months ago (5 children)

There's always a risk of JavaScript breaking out of the sandbox and crap like that. Browser vendors do their best to protect against things like that but security is often a trade-off for speed and people like fast software, not to mention browsers are huge and complex and they're going to have vulnerabilities. A browser's whole job is to execute remote untrusted code, do you trust it that much to be flawless?

...... I mean, I don't but I use it anyway so ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

If I as a buyer can't tell the difference between fresh and expired food before I buy it, then what's the store's incentive to not sell me something a few days or weeks after its sell-by date? Even if they want to, they can't keep track of every product on the shelves (I've encountered items past their date on shelves a number of times, sometimes significantly so) and they certainly don't check each item's date at checkout. If customers can't do the check as they shop, there's no way to protect against it. And just kick the shop, customers can't open the packaging before they buy.

I do realise based on your comment and others that I may have been wrong (probably country dependent), printed dates might be intended more for stock keepers than for consumers, but that doesn't mean it's okay to hide this information from buyers.

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Very well, you seem to definitely know this stuff better than me! I based my comment on this answer and getting this myself on Mint 21.3:

$ cat /etc/debian_version 
bookworm/sid

But reading a bit closer, I think this is the key part:

That's how, for example, Ubuntu 20.04, released in April 2020, can be based on Debian 11 "Bullseye", which was released in August 2021.

So Ubuntu probably pulled Bookworm before it was released, and before it upgraded policykit. But it's still to some extent based on Bookworm. Does that sound right?

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Mint 21.3 is based on Debian Bookworm (via Ubuntu 22.04, not counting LMDE of course). I don't know what you're looking at and I also don't fully know how this works, but what you said doesn't seem to be the case.

view more: ‹ prev next ›