Comment So does this mean (Score 1) 79
we've finally discovered dehydrated water?
we've finally discovered dehydrated water?
Overall, I'd say the patent examiners did their job just fine. A patent isn't guaranteed to work.
Exactly. It's a perfectly cromulent idea.
*sigh*
by using reverse().
What a stupid test.
Agreed. I would take that as a sign that it was not a place I would want to work at. I mean, it's a bit better than asking for VB, but not by much.
If I did bother to respond, I think I would respond by using replace(). It's more efficient because it exists and does exactly what is required. My comment would be longer than the code.
I think you meant François Petit.
No, we like criticizing the notion that adding "on a computer" to an existing idea somehow makes it a new idea worthy of ownership/patent/suing for infringement. We are not against the notion of doing things on a computer in and of itself. We consider that to be an improvement upon an existing idea, generally to help avoid mistakes and make existing systems more efficient.
Our issue with the patent of such ideas is it causes stagnation and prevents us from continuing to improve systems and make them more efficient.
Agreed. And in the spirit of K.I.S.S., I'd suggest you use external storage like a drobo. You can grow the disk as you see fit, no technical expertise needed. Just add/swap drives as you go. Braindead simple.
No, I don't work for them, but for simple self-maintaining medium sized storage they work pretty well. I've got 4 (3 at work, one at home), and the only problem I've had was when I put a bad WD drive in a unit and it fried the slot.
No kidding. I read that summary as "Hey, we've found these systems that are really working well and so we were thinking we'd like to change that".
It's working JUST FINE- bugger off.
I just hope they don't make Samsung post an apology on their website.
I'm sure he has stacks of books, whey not get him a nice bookshelf coffin?
I've always loved this idea. Doubt it would ship by Christmas though.
I think Google should impose a fee to said studios for making bogus takedown requests. After all it's not free for Google to comply with these requests, and if the studios aren't even willing to validate them perhaps they should be billed for the time it takes to do so.
I'm just going to toss this out there, as it's probably interesting to the vast majority of slashdotters:
Is that what we call a blow job?
Yes, that would probably be an effective way to blow your job.
No, poster is correct. It's called winsorising. It's common to toss out the top and bottom 5% just to discount anomalies.
But you don't discount it after you see the data because you don't like it, you plan to discount it before you collect the data and more importantly you do it indiscriminately and equally on both sides of the data set. Not just points you don't like after you see the data.
Make sure your code does nothing gracefully.
