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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Ah, the Planet Pluto (Score 2) 138

WTF is wrong with KB meaning 1024 bytes?

If it were just KB, that would only be somewhat annoying and confusing, like US vs imperial pints.

But when you introduce binary MB and GB they all have to be mixed, and it becomes absolutely infuriating. It makes doing the math to figure out how much stuff will fit on a drive almost as hard as using Roman numerals.

You're basically changing the radix of your numbers depending on their magnitude, for no good reason. (Disk drives have never had any capacity factor physically based on any power of two.) That's just stupid.

I can't fathom why some people get so angry because they think that drive manufacturers are trying to cheat them out of a couple of percent capacity, when it's been common knowledge for decades. But for some reason these same people don't mind having to break out a calculator to help them do what would often otherwise be trivial mental arithmetic.

Comment Re:lets just agree completely with what he said (Score 2) 381

unless you are seriously going to rewind the clock to 1970 and only allow distribution and playback of analog, concrete media,

I fondly remember my collection of concrete records. They had a uniquely gravelly sound that can't be duplicated by any digital technology. Sadly, I eventually got rid of them all because they were just too damned heavy to lug around.

Comment Re:opposite of brilliant (Score 1) 712

Make all the apples-to-monster-trucks comparisons you want

And you can make all the false choice assertions you want. It doesn't mean that we can't work to pull ourselves out of the dark ages and stop burning dirt and spewing its byproducts into the air.

if you, personally, aren't limiting your own electricity use, not only are you not serious about the environment, you don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to telling other people how they should be getting their power.

I have been limiting my use. So it looks like I'm justified in telling you that you ought to be working towards getting a better source of power, not just spouting off about the status quo being inevitable.

Comment Re:OH LOOK A TROLL HEADLINE (Score 1) 676

Just think how much you could save for yourself if you could keep 67% of your Federal income tax - and all your SSI/FICA payments - over the course of working 35-40 years... And that savings would survive to your estate/inheritors, not just disappear like SSI does, once you die.

Only if one of the financial crises that happens every couple of decades doesn't wipe you out.

The main problems are:
A: Most people don't save money without being forced.
B: Most people don't know how to invest.
C: Even if you know how to invest, you can still lose your shirt.
D: Irrespective of the above intractable problems, saving money and investments means nothing more than shifting bit patterns on some hard drives. It doesn't in any way solve the problem of supporting an millions of idle and ailing retirees over ever-expanding lifetimes. Any saved "assets" will get devalued in the markets to reflect that reality.

So your scenario does not do anything at all to address the problem of what to do with retirees in the real world, other than let a good fraction of them die in a gutter.

Comment Re:OH LOOK A TROLL HEADLINE (Score 2) 676

For retirement, the government has a needed roll in setting standards for "safety net" investment choices, and in insuring people actually do save, but they don't need to handle the money.

Yeah, that would be better handled by outfits like AIG and Lehman Brothers.

Charity is great, and we should all be compassionate, and again the government has a needed role in setting standards, but they don't need to handle the money.

Just imagine how much junk mail it would take to raise enough charity funds to replace every government assistance program. The USPS would be profitable again after only a few days!

Comment Re:Different Software - Same Problem (Score 1) 231

Here's one refactoring for the situation you describe, that results in more even benefits than just removing the gotos/returns:

By adding extra useless variables, as I originally pointed out. And introducing a sea of "&&"s. I guess at least it looks more like a bowl of pretzels than a dish of spaghetti.

Whilst they result in execution stopping at a line in the middle of a block, they do so using an explicit built into the language block structure, that defines exactly which section of code may do so.

In a language like C++, unless there's a "try" block within the function, they are exactly the same as a "return" as far as that function is concerned, and can be invoked from the same places. I don't see why you think that that's acceptable if return isn't.

If you look at the FAQs for the Go language, the designers explain why they think exceptions suck in general, and why they largely replaced them with multiple return values. So not everyone shares your enthusiasm for exceptions, which are really just a kind of "return" statement on steroids.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Experience has proved that some people indeed know everything." -- Russell Baker

Working...