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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Epic Fail? Hardly. (Score 0) 534

Ok, the PS3 was launched on November 11, 2006. [wikipedia.org] Today's date is December 29, 2010. That means that it took over four years to be broken.

No, it took 8 months to be broken.

The Other OS functionality of the PS3 was unilaterally removed by Sony on April 1st 2010. The years before are of no importance, because you could freely boot Linux. Nobody who had the skills to crack the PS3 even bothered to look.

When they removed Other OS, Sony signed their own fucking death warrant.

Comment Re:The writing was idiotic (Spoilers?) (Score 1) 412

#2: You're complaining that some things in the computer world were represented literally instead of metaphorically or as a pixelated analogue. Ah bloo bloo bloo bloo bloo.

The simulated computer world can do anything. ANYTHING. Look at the other computer-simulated-world movie, The Matrix where they hang a lampshade on it; "you think that's air you're breathing?". The characters defy real world physics with impunity.

In the original Tron, and reappearing in this one for nostalgia's sake, there are physics-defying constructs like the two-legged aircraft carrier and the solar sailship. This is what Tron was about - a computer world that is radically different to our own; it doesn't behave like reality because it's not reality.

So, given that, why the fuck do we have data-planes escaping their pursuers by doing stall turns? Something that only happens when you have gravity and air?

It's this schizophrenic mix of physics-ignoring nostalgia with physics-dependent New Content that irks me particularly. It's like there were two directors, one who was trying to copy the original Tron as authentically as possible, and one who was trying to cram in as much CGI physics as possible, and didn't know or care that the Tron world is meant to appear artificial.

Comment Re:The "enhanced" procedures are useless (Score 1) 609

The TSA's measures are worse than useless: they actually create a hazard, with long, slow-moving, densely-packed lines full of by-definition unscreened persons--lines that are about the ripest target for a bomb that you can find.

I've been thinking about that for years, but never said anything because I didn't want to give anyone any ideas.

People already have the idea and are making drama out of it. In Iain Banks' Transition, a Christian terrorist blows up a packed security line at the airport while guards up ahead are trying to take some nail clippers off a granny.

But while it's undefended right now, and you're at risk from it, it's not a threat the US needs to guard against, because no Islamists have tried it yet.

You can commit any act of terrorism in the US you like, it won't matter unless you're an Islamist, which is to say you have a beard and a funny hat. You can shoot up your local mall or campus, and that'll just be "a tragedy" and it will be forgotten by the next day, nobody will do anything about it. But if the TV reports a Mooslim even thought about blowing something up, the nation collectively loses its shit, so Something Gets Done, right there and then, no matter how hilariously improbable.

So, why don't Mooslims attack the US? Because most of them aren't terrorists, and the handful that are are either satisfied with what they've wrought so far (remember that Osama achieved his main goal of getting the US military out of Saudi Arabia, he only has one goal left - getting the US money out of Israel), or they're still scratching their heads as to how up the ante after 9/11. Tough job, and it will have to involve getting on a plane with a bomb, because that's what the US public are focused on and fear most.

Terrorists don't score points just on how many people they kill - they could just do a coordinated rampage in some shopping malls to top the 9/11 hiscore - but they score points on how spectacular and audacious their successful plots are. We're still fixated on exploding or hijacked transit, so that's what they have to aim for.

In Israel, however, the terrorists have lower standards. They'd get nationwide media coverage for killing any Israelis at all, so the murderous bastards are everywhere. Left the back door open? BOOM! Didn't eat your greens? BOOM! Terrorist hiding under the broccoli.

When you have a real threat, from groups who will accept any amount of death as a success, not just Bond movie plots, then you need to be far more focused. The US doesn't have a real threat, so it can keep deluding itself with security theater.

Comment Re:Here we go again (SCO) (Score 1) 675

Well, this one example does look pretty copied. Sun wrote sun.security.provider.certpath.PolicyNodeImpl - notice it's fully documented, and authored by Seth Proctor and Sean Mullan. It's not part of the standard Jaa library, it's part of the JVM's private implementation, and was released later on as part of OpenJDK.

Google have exactly this same code, minus the comments in their copy of Apache Harmony, but it's not in the official Apache Harmony, at least since 2005 (Don't believe me? Run svn log -v http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony | grep PolicyNodeImpl).

However, this code isn't central to Android. It's part of the test suite, it doesn't run on any phones.

On the one hand - this looks like a cut and dried infringement. On the other hand, it's a pretty trivial part of the project. Is that the best Oracle can find? If it is, then it's on a par with SCO holding up malloc.h as the "smoking gun".

Comment Re:So obvious question... (Score 3, Informative) 388

Oracle makes 90% of its profits from support contracts renewals. Customers renew to get continued support for whatever Oracle sold them, and to get access to the newer versions. We'd have to ask them to get actual numbers, but say x% renew because they want support/upgrades for Oracle DB, y% renew because they want support/upgrades for some enterprise app, surely z% renew because they want support/upgrades for JVM/Netbeans/some other Java bollocks.

Comment Re:Most of the people leaving don't need it (Score 1) 388

Google hasn't got a case, they used what is now Oracle's trademark to refer to something that isn't the Java language as the Java language. The best Google can do is settle it out of court.

Android uses the Java language. When writing Android applications, you write code in the Java language and compile it, with Sun/Oracle's Java compiler, into Java bytecode.

Then you convert the Java bytecode to Dalvik bytecode and run it on the Dalvik VM with the Harmony class library, which is also Java language code that has been compiled to Java bytecode and converted to Dalvik bytecode.

Note:

  • "Java language" used correctly, not misrepresented.
  • "Java Virtual Machine" not used by Google.
  • Dalvik VM cannot load Java bytecode, ergo doesn't even implement a Java Virtual Machine.
  • "Java class library" not used by Google.
  • "Java compatibility test suite" not used by Google. Harmony class library and Dalvik VM would fail that test suite anyway, as they don't fully implement the Java class library not have the ability to load Java bytecode.

Congratulations, you're wrong on all counts! Good job you're not on Oracle's legal team.

Comment Re:They are for two different people (Score 1) 864

I don't like to have to jump through hoops to get root on my phone (with iPhones it's a simple, automated process)

You do realise that the reason you have root on your iPhone is because hackers found a hole in Apple's security, one that soon got closed?

The "hoops" in getting root on Android are because they're the sanctioned way to do it. If there was a remote root exploit in Android's web browser, some other hacker could give you a one-step jailbreak too.

Besides, there's very little you actually need root for - for Apple users, it's to be able to install apps that aren't from the app store, or to run more than one thing at once. Android already does that without root.

Comment Re:You don't get to decide. (Score 2, Informative) 589

It was a pejorative retasked to insult homosexuals from the start.

Neither of you are entirely right.

"gay" has meant "full of joy and mirth" or "brilliant, showy" since around the 13th century. Victorians used the words "mandrake" or "buggerer" to disparage homosexual men. Or just "homosexual"; that was bad enough.

However, "gay" began to take on the meaning of "promiscuous" or "male prostitute" (who sleeps with men or women, not exclusively men) around the late 19th century. It took until the 1930s to become established as slang for homosexual men.

Source: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=gay

Comment I'd love to see some good interactive fiction (Score 4, Informative) 84

Zork is somewhat overrated; it's from a time when adventure games were a grab-bag of fantasy cliches and "zany" objects. The past two decades have been spent retconning it into something grander than it actually was.

However, there's some amazing interactive fiction out there; atmospheric, tight writing. Totally immersive story. Brain-wrenching puzzles. It'd be great to read / play these on a Kindle. Some of my favourites:

  • Spider and Web by Andrew Plotkin - possibly the most unreliable narrator ever. See how long it takes you to work out what's really happening.
  • Varicella by Adam Cadre - renaissance period intrigue.
  • Anchorhead by Michael S. Gentry - Lovecraftian horror.
  • A Bear's Night Out by David Dyle - adorable kid's story

Other couple I like are A Day for Soft Food (have you ever wanted to roleplay as a cat?) and Trinity (a mix of high fantasy and nuclear history)

Slashdot Top Deals

Ya'll hear about the geometer who went to the beach to catch some rays and became a tangent ?

Working...