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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:It's a vast field.... (Score 5, Insightful) 809 809

Indeed, it seems like if you're hiring for a very specific skill set, state that in the job req. If its a very narrow skillset and you want them to be up to speed from the get go, be prepared to pay a premium. Otherwise you might want to give more attention in the interview to what they can learn vs what they currently know. Especially in security related applications where things change all the time.

Comment: Re:The solution is obvious (Score 2) 579 579

It sounds like you've entered full snark mode here. To make the analogy complete you must include the fact that congress passed a law making them the only ones able to push out an update. It's been said before, even if Google did write a patch how do you propose they actually get it onto the vulnerable devices?

Comment: Re:More insidious than advertising. (Score 2) 196 196

XBOX Live account required for XBOX branded appliances (terms and conditions apply). Now connect with your friends in whole new ways! Achievement! You made toast today! Achievement! Dinner meals for the week planned. PLUS Voice control features available in any room with an XBOX branded appliance! *ALL XBOX branded appliances must remain connected at all times or your account may be voided.

Comment: Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton (Score 1) 1134 1134

You're clearly arguing with someone not me.

The post I was responding to said:

the media would have you believe there are millions of people out there raping women and whatnot...

I said:

I think it takes millions of rapists (mostly men natch) to reach that number.

You said:

That's still seven or eight million men in absolute terms, of course

Everything else you said was arguing with statements nobody made. The definition of a straw-man argument. There really are millions of people (eight or nine to use your number) committing these crimes. This is staggering to me. All I was trying to show was that the decimal place in the OPs thought may have been misplaced. Nobody said tens of millions or hundreds of millions, or anything resembling ALL. The name 'millions' is absolutely the correct term to use, which was my one point. As for the rest of your post, I'm not sure who you're talking to.

Comment: Re:One bad apple spoils the barrel (Score 1) 1134 1134

I think you're conflating two points. From what I've seen, misogyny in games is described where a female character is portrayed with extremely negative female stereotypes.

I think this is a vastly different issue than commenting on the lack of representation in games. Those comments are saying 50% of the population is female, 50% of gamers are female, but only a few percent of characters in games are female. The gender of a specific character is irrelevant (and not typically discussed in that context), but in the aggregate there appears to be something out of place. Commenting on that dramatic difference is not calling developers misogynistic. People wanting that difference reduced to a fraction closer to something representing the actual people playing the games is also not calling developers misogynistic.

Issues of Gender Representation and Misogynistic representation are both gender related, and often discussed together. But you can't lump them into the same thing as they have very different consequences. You could have 100% of games with female leads but still be a horrible representation of women, and you could have no games with female leads and have no outright misogynistic representations. However, I think the point people are trying to make about gender representation is this: "An overly imbalanced representation of gender in the aggregate (towards either gender) has consequences and implications which are at best neutral and at worst quite negative. Given this, can we make things better?"

Comment: Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton (Score 1) 1134 1134

Unless it happens to be a PERSON where the death threat included home address information. Regardless of gender, THAT's the line that makes a threat credible.

Tangentially, the behavior you describe is the reason I don't play those games. It's also a behavior that doesn't need to be there. Why defend it as if its necessary for some reason?

Comment: Re:Astroturfing for Hillary Clinton (Score 2) 1134 1134

This is not limited to gaming. Here's a breakdown of the statistics as they are known right now. Based on this: Wiki-link rape statistics 1/6 women have been raped in the US. Out of 150 million women in the US, that is around 25 million women estimated which have been raped. I think it takes millions of rapists (mostly men natch) to reach that number. So YES, millions of people (mostly men) ARE in fact out there raping people. No media bias needed, just knowing some real numbers.

Comment: Re:Dominion & Munchkin (Score 1) 382 382

Want a fun game? Try one where a 5 year old might beat you with a random turn of a card and absolutely no strategy, instead of one in which you can feel good about yourself by constantly beating a 5 year old.

Is that even really a game, by definition?

That's like two people roll a dice, higher roll wins. There's nothing to play, no input or decisions on the part of the player, and precious little interaction between players. I don't think that would be very fun at all.

Comment: Re:Verilog (Score 1) 365 365

To be fair, the definition of "well" I intend isn't an arbitrary X/Y value. There's already very well defined numbers for the hardware which currently runs the algorithm. To transfer "Well" to custom hardware would be somewhere in the vicinity of: less than the original general purpose CPU by enough that it justifies the design effort involved and doesn't cost MORE to manufacture. All engineering decisions are trade-offs, and if the trade-off isn't worth the effort and resource cost you don't do it. For a transfer effort to go "Well" means at the end of the day you come out ahead somewhere.

If you have to spend 3 million dollars on custom hardware development just to get performance parity with a COTS general purpose CPU... you'd be hard pressed to call that "well" by any measure. This is what is implied by the setup of the original Ask Slashdot question, asking an engineering question about feasibility and cost.

Comment: Re:Verilog (Score 1) 365 365

Not really. The biggest conversion issues I deal with (when converting algorithms to hardware) are related to how software treats RAM vs how hardware treats RAM. They are fundamentally different methods of operation. In software RAM is cheap/free, so it is preferred over CPU cycles. In hardware, the processing is cheaper (in general) and RAM is more expensive.

Buffering and holding a megabyte of data between each stage of processing is natural and very easy for software. But in hardware this is a very inefficient way to do things. Converting from one method to the other can be quite difficult depending on the algorithm.

Real computer scientists don't program in assembler. They don't write in anything less portable than a number two pencil.

Working...