Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:What is wrong with SCTP and DCCP? (Score 1) 84

...and good for that. Bad standards arise from committees sitting around spit-balling ideas. Good standards come from committees blessing existing practices already proven in the field. Maybe you smooth out a rough spot or two, but ultimately it ought to look for the most part like what's already out there working well. "Not in scope" was precisely the right response for most of the junk people wanted to throw into HTTP/2.0. Alas, it does give people who didn't their favorite feature thrown in ample opportunity to whine. Kamp's whining has the wonderful virtue of being amusingly self-contradictory. "History has shown overwhelmingly that if you want to change the world for the better, you should deliver good tools for making it better, not policies for making it better." Exactly. Trying to improve the world by setting policy via IETF standards, though, is exactly what the IETF did not do in this case, by not adding those things he thinks should be used as a matter of course, and that's what's making Kamp so mad.

Comment Re:I'd put a 'may' there (Score 2) 42

Snort. Because the democrats who dominated congress up to now have done sooo well at eliminating graft & pork. Hell, we can barely remember what those are thanks to the wonderful dems taking care of all that is wrong in the world and sprinkling fairy dust in our morning cereal...

Find a new axe to grind, your old one is worn out.

Pot, meet kettle.

The difference here, of course, is that neither side refrains from indulging in fatty pork products, but only one of them is claiming government spending is bad while doing so.

Comment Re:GCHQ Does Something Retarded (Score 1) 68

Buy a single damn video card. [...] That's likely why he thinks it's retarded... it doesn't solve any problems that aren't better solved by other solutions.

I'm not seeing how a single video card will help solve the problem of teaching how to build a cluster out of multiple networked computers. Nor would it look nearly as cool, which is directly relevant to the purpose of (to quote TFA) "getting children interested in science and engineering". It sounds like what GCHQ came up with succeeds much better at achieving the goals in question.

Submission + - Technology's Legacy: The 'Loser Edit' Awaits Us All (nytimes.com)

An anonymous reader writes: The NY Times Magazine has an insightful article putting into words how I've felt about information-age culture for a while now. It's about a phenomenon dubbed the "loser edit." The term itself was borne out of reality TV — once an outcome had been decided, the show's producers would comb back through the footage and selectively paste together everything that seemed to foreshadow the loser's fall.

But as the information age has overtaken us, this is something that can happen to anyone. Any time a celebrity gets into trouble, we can immediately search through two decades of interviews and offhand comments to see if there were hints of their impending fall. It usually becomes a self-reinforcing chain of evidence. The loser edit happens for non-celebrities too, using their social media posts, public records, leaked private records, and anything else available through search.

The worst part is, there's no central place to blame. The news media does it, the entertainment industry does it, and we do it to ourselves. Any time the internet gets outraged about something, there are a few people who happily dig up everything they can about the person they now feel justified in hating — and thus, the loser edit begins.

Comment Re:Science,much? (Score 5, Informative) 33

we can only see 50% of it's surface on any given night

So which nights can we see the other side? Oh, never.

Actually, on any night other than the one precisely a lunar month from the given night, you can see some of that other side (the 50% you can't see tonight). That's what libration does -- expose some of that other 50% that you can't see tonight. Not all of it, sure, but some. You can only see 50% on any given night, but you can see 59% over time. Thus, 18% of tonight's "other side" will be "this side" on some other night.

Comment Re:GUI apps vs. desktop components (Score 1) 134

Huh. The glitchy desktop is the thing I hate most about Windows. I need Windows for some of the software I need to run under it, but gods I wish I could replace the buggy platform I'm running them on with one of the stable, spiffy desktops I use when I boot into Linux (and still have them run well; sorry WINE).

Slashdot Top Deals

The hardest part of climbing the ladder of success is getting through the crowd at the bottom.

Working...