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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:noooo (Score 1) 560

Also, I still believe the focus is on the wrong thing: rather than try and stop climate change (after all, if it doesn't change because of CO2, it may change due to something else) we should try and work on technologies so we can survive - no, thrive - regardless of the climate. (Isn't that what humanity has done for most of its existence anyway?)

I'd like to ask the Mayans, Anastazi, Minoans, and the Harappans, about surviving and thriving regardless of climate.

.... or the Vikings who colonized Greenland.

Comment Re:noooo (Score 1) 560

Also, I still believe the focus is on the wrong thing: rather than try and stop climate change (after all, if it doesn't change because of CO2, it may change due to something else) we should try and work on technologies so we can survive - no, thrive - regardless of the climate. (Isn't that what humanity has done for most of its existence anyway?)

I'd like to ask the Mayans, Anastazi, Minoans, and the Harappans, about surviving and thriving regardless of climate.

Comment Re:"Peopleware" in 1987, Harlan Mills in 1971 ... (Score 1) 420

Every study ever done, every paper written by smart and productive people, says that knowledge workers need private spaces for concentration, and separate conference spaces for conferencing. The wide-open "collaborate all day" space sounds like hanging around the water cooler all day. At the cube farm I'm in now, I have a 7-foot wall between me and a main corridor; but people stop in the corridor junction and schmooze to the point that I can't hear myself think.

I'm glad there is someone referenced _Peopleware_. Honestly, it is ironic to me that between that book and _The Mythical Man-Month_ everything you need to know about managing software development from a personnel standpoint was written before most code grunts, indeed most managers, were born. Yet the good advice is universally ignored.

Makes me glad that I am retired, honestly.

Comment Re:What does it change? (Score 2) 290

The game changer for nuclear weapons is not a faster delivery system, it's an effective shield. That was why the Soviet Union was so worried about Star Wars. If it had worked, then it would have meant that the USA could have launched a first strike without worrying about the USSR's second strike capability. Hypersonics just make it harder to develop any kind of active shield (it's hard for an interceptor to hit something travelling at Mach 5-25).

I think the Soviet Union was afraid of more than Star Wars. I remember in the late 1980's there was an article (I think in _Foreign Affairs_) hypothesizing that a very small number of conventional cruise missiles, launched from submarines in the Barents, Baltic, and Black seas, could completely disable the command and control network for a nuclear launch as well as the early warning systems used to activate the ABMs around Moscow. All while causing very few casualties. The article was probably quite a ways out there, but I am sure the same ideas occurred to American and NATO planners.

Comment Has NASA done all that badly? (Score 5, Interesting) 156

I wonder sometimes.

NASA has sent spaceprobes to every planet in the solar system. And turned those places from lights in the sky into worlds.

NASA has discovered volcanism on Io, Enceladus, Triton and probably Venus.

NASA has discovered thousands of extrasolar planets with the Kepler probe.

The various CMB probes have mapped out the very early history of the universe.

All of this in less than fifty years.

You could argue that NASA has mapped more land area than all of the explorers in history, combined. Until we visit other stars no one will beat that record.

Really, has NASA done that badly?

Comment Re: 10th amendment (Score 1) 484

Another ignored amendment: the 2nd. And just about every other recently by the Obama administration.

Say what you want about republicans, but they don't shit over the constitution like the dems do.

Yeah, because suspending habeus corpus indefinitely is so constitutional. And reading everyone's email doesn't violate the fourth amendment. I'm also pretty sure that torture violates the fourth and fifth amendments.

Please.

Comment Re:How about ignoring it? (Score 3, Informative) 484

How about not enforcing the laws there since doing otherwise is a stupid waste of law enforcement time and resources? I can't believe anyone can be stupid enough to think cannabis is dangerous enough to merit criminalization. You have to be basically live up your own ass for decades to come up with that opinion.

There are lots of examples of this in action. Many states have laws against adultery, cohabitation, and consensual oral sex. Yet when was the last time someone got a felony rap for carpet munching?

On a even less serious note, many states have ridiculous laws which were put on the books back during the Jurassic period of American jurisprudence. So, as an example, in Washington state it is illegal to sell bedding or meat on a Sunday. You will recall the wave of busts against Bed Bath and Beyond, Pottery Barn, and Safeway. Yeah, right...

Comment Re:How is that startling? (Score 1) 413

Someone has already implemented a pretty good algorithm for generating congressional districts.

http://rangevoting.org/SplitLR...

While it does ignore geographic features, the algorithm has the virtue of extreme simplicity and does seem to produce quite reasonable results in all but a few cases.

Comment Re:10x Productivity (Score 1) 215

The "10x productivity" idea is somewhat silly anyhow - sure, some people are quite productive, but mostly if one guy is 10x another, the other guy just sucks.

It is more like 10000x rather than 10x.

First off, we humans are just barely intelligent enough to write nontrivial computer programs in the first place. I believe strongly if humans were on average ten percent less intelligent we would still be stuck on the towers of hanoi and bubblesorts. Of course, what "intelligence" means in the context of computer programming is highly idiosyncratic and not very well understood. Finding those people with the right cognitive toolkit for solving a particular set of coding problems can make a huge difference in the success or failure of a company. Or at least a product.

Second, I've lost count of the number of times where I've ran into someone (or some enormous team of people) who labored on some project for years and then ran into some dude (nearly always a dude, sorry ladies) who solved exactly the same problem in a few weeks. Or less. For an infamous example consider the history of the Xanadu project versus the early http servers and Mosaic. Yes, yes, I know Xanadu was trying to do something totally different than the WWW did. Of course, WWW worked and Xanadu never did.

Third, a lot of the real value add is the "Aha!" type of insights that translate large, intractable problems into easily solvable ones (see again Xanadu/WWW). The people who can provide those kinds of insights are rare and precious. The whole purpose of the enterprise is to solve problems, and if you aren't finding and taking vicious shortcuts to solve those problems you aren't doing your job.

In the end I absolutely agree in the sense that writing software is largely a creative enterprise, not an engineering one. And the people who write software need to be managed and compensated as creative people are, not like they are replaceable parts. Because that is the other point where software authoring is so different from other enterprises -- coders are often extremely specialized, to the point where managing coders, especially talented, productive coders, becomes largely a problem of matching tasks to appropriate talent.

Comment Re:good to have backups (Score 1) 139

I don't think either Iran or North Korea has the launch capacity to put the 1000+kg that they would need to put a nuke into orbit.

Agreed that a nuke in LEO would play merry hell with GPS and lots of other satellites. But I can't really see North Korea or Iran being crazy or stupid enough to piss off their remaining allies (or sort-of-allies) like China or Russia. Of course, we are talking about North Korea and Iran...

Comment Re:good to have backups (Score 1) 139

The GPS satellites are in pretty high orbits (around 20000km if memory serves). I don't know if anybody has an anti-satellite weapon that can target a satellite that high. For that matter, the WAAS satellites are in geosynchronous orbit and even harder to shoot down.

You would also have to shoot down several GPS satellites in quick succession to produce a significant gap in coverage. Since the Chinese and Russian anti-satellite weapons are based on orbital launchers (for obvious reasons) the countries in question would have to do five or six satellite launches in a relatively short time window.

It would probably be far, far cheaper to jam GPS signals than to shoot down the satellites.

Slashdot Top Deals

"May your future be limited only by your dreams." -- Christa McAuliffe

Working...