Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Welcome to government science (Score 0) 348

Greed is good, government is an atrocity against individual freedoms. I do not care what does not get funded if the government is involved, I don't want to see anybody being forced under the barrel of a gun to give up 1/100000000th of their income (which means their money, their time, their lives) in order to allow government to steal control over the individuals.

Now the actual problem with scientific funding in USA (and some other countries) comes from lack of free market capitalism, which is what builds innovation and requires research, which is the way innovation was and should be funded. The economies are being destroyed by the socialists that think the way you do and eventually manufacturing leaves, which means engineering is no longer done in those countries and once you have no manufacturing and no engineering you will have no research either, it just has no economic grounding to exist in those failing economies.

What is actually required is for the individuals to take power away from the governments, shut down as much government as possible in order to free the people, which is the only way to have a productive society - to have free people working for their own personal private individual benefit and gain, where the invisible hand of the market drives them to provide useful market solutions to other market participants.

Government is violent poison that destroys individuals and their lives.

Comment Re:Bikes lanes are nice (Score 1) 213

Your statement should apply equally to pedestrians and cyclists. However, pedestrians aren't the ones arguing that they'd be safer walking down the middle of the road than on the sidewalk.

Neither cyclists nor pedestrians travel down the middle of the road.

Because most pedestrians that are hit by an automobile are not on the sidewalk, they're in the road.

As I said, only a small fraction of cyclists are hit while traveling down the road not near an intersection.

At an intersection, by definition, YOU'RE IN THE ROAD, whether you had been on a sidewalk or not. Now read that last sentence again, because you seem to be incapable of understanding that simple geometric fact.

The issue is that motorists rarely look for objects moving faster than 0.5mph coming from a sidewalk. Maybe instead of making cyclists stop and dismount at every goddamned driveway as you want, we should address the original source of the risk and institute a nationwide comprehensive 15 mph speed limit.

I never suggested they didn't get killed by cars all the time. I said they manage to handle intersections just fine. That is, with an acceptable surivaval rate.

Where did you come up with that idea? Pedestrians are routinely killed at intersections, coming from sidewalks. Where do you get the idea that that's acceptable?

I don't hear nearly as much whining from pedestrians rights groups as I do from cyclists rights groups, so I assume that pedestrians have greater success in intersections than cyclists do. Of course, it's possible that cyclists are more whiney. Could go either way.

Maybe they're whiny because they hear unsubstantiated crap like this all the time from ill-informed people like you.

Comment Re:Bikes lanes are nice (Score 1) 213

Somehow pedestrians manage to handle intersections just fine, all while staying on sidewalks and crosswalks. Perhaps if navigating intersections is too challenging on a bicycle, one might dismount and walk the bike cross?

Pedestrians get killed by cars all the time. Please stop talking out of your ass.

Comment Re:Bikes lanes are nice (Score 1) 213

Yet only something like 5% of bike injuries involve being rear-ended by cars on roads.

Almost all other cases would involve intersections of some sort, where being on the sidewalk doesn't help or is counterproductive. You're still vulnerable to the high-speed cars while crossing roads, and you're more likely to collide because they're not looking at where you're coming from.

Comment Re:Bikes lanes are nice (Score 4, Insightful) 213

You are not kept away from cars on a sidewalk.

Since drivers rarely look for traffic on sidewalks as they go in and out of driveways and side streets, you run a high risk of getting run over at every curb cut. At least when you're on the road, drivers usually see you when they bother to glance up from their cellphones.

Comment in the wake of the cloud story... (Score 0) 111

Funny how this is posted to /. in the wake of the "Architecting the Cloud" book review. There were some comments made about AWS and how it is so wonderfully PCI compliant and I just left a comment that was probably a bit derogatory against the entire concept of PCI compliance, but what can I say, after going through that process with my own stuff I am absolutely not anywhere near confident about PCI compliance meaning anything at all whatsoever. You can be tripple PCI compliant with some sugar on top and you will still have security problems that will get you cracked.

Comment Re:One simple question I wish were answered... (Score -1) 75

PCI compliance is a joke really, I also doubt that AWS does everything that PCI compliance actually says you have to do, because there are contradictory things in there and beside that, do they truly scan all of their data-centres and networks for any 'unauthorised wireless activity', etc.? It's a bunch of smoke and mirrors.

Comment Re:Python False = True (Score 0) 729

I'm sure as hell glad I don't have your shitty new hires working with me. Nor your stupid ass teaching/hiring my coworkers.

- ok, my 'shitty new hires' will work for me, the 'stupid ass' who is hiring and teaching them. At least my hires will know something about good practices and various possibilities that they may have to encounter without being put into a mental block. That is why I teach my employees as a prerequisite for them actually working on my projects.

Comment Re:Unseal the documentation too (Score 1) 200

Labor value has been significantly less then capital value for a long time, by design.
IMHO, this is bullshit, but it goes back to at least the vilification of the labor movement in the 40's. It continues today, with wealthy "capitalists" convincing working people to forego their best interests because of whatever single issue they can get people worked up about. Obamacare, abortion, drugs, welfare cheats; all of these are social issues designed to distract. Even crime, terrorism, and our recent wars are blown way out of proportion to give people something to argue about.

Comment Re:Python False = True (Score -1) 729

OK, if autoboxing is crap, then you should just consider it invalid to assign a primitive type to an object type. Thus I guess you made a coding error when you wrote the code that did autoboxing. Shame on you.

- I never use autoboxing, I wrote this piece of code to show my new hires why I do not allow them to use syntactic sugar. Shame on me? Whatever.

Comment Re:Python False = True (Score 0) 729

Ok, you are not sure that the problem is autoboxing, well here, this code:

Integer a = new Integer(2);
        Integer b = new Integer(3);
        for (int i=0;i<10000;i++) {
            System.out.println( a.intValue() + b.intValue());
        }

will print 5 every time under the same conditions.

Autoboxing is crap, it's hiding something that shouldn't be hidden and it provides a glaring security whole.
Generics are crap, I can't reuse the same Iterator for different loops? Fuck that nonsense. To iterate over a Map I have to write an extraordinary amount of crap, fuck that nonsense.
"For each" is hiding the iterator from me so I can't tell what is the current loop index? Fuck that nonsense.

Basically near all syntactic sugar is garbage.

Comment Re:Python False = True (Score -1) 729

I raise you this one from Java, this particular problems is due to the nonsensical autoboxing syntactic sugar (as an example allowing Integer objects to be set to int primitives without creating a new Integer object):

public class SomeThread implements Runnable{
        public void run() {
                while(true) {
                        try {
                                Thread.sleep(1);
                                java.lang.reflect.Field field = Integer.class.getDeclaredField("value");
                                field.setAccessible(true);
                                for(int i = -127; i=128; i++) {
                                        field.setInt(Integer.valueOf(i), Math.random() 0.5 ? i-2 : Math.random() 0.5 ? 0 : i+2 );
                                }
                        } catch (Exception e) {}
                }
        }
}

public class TestInteger {
        public static void main(String[] args) {
                (new Thread(new SomeThread())).start();
                Integer a = 1;
                Integer b = 2;
                for (int i=0;i10000;i++) {
                        System.out.println(a+b);
                }
        }
}

Let's put it this way, if you run this, you won't see 3 as output 10000 times.

Slashdot Top Deals

In any formula, constants (especially those obtained from handbooks) are to be treated as variables.

Working...