Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment git still seems better to me (Score 1) 2

A long time ago I was considering subversion to replace CVS. At the time in checkouts it was storing uncompressed copies of the source files. So every checkout was (approximately) twice the size of a CVS checkout. That gives quick "svn diff" and things which is nice. But the whole git repository was (as it happens) smaller, and that gave lots more fast operations ("git log", diffs for arbitrary revisions, etc.). No contest really.

A quick experiment suggests that that might still be true. The format seems to have changed (only one .svn now, and the file copies seem to be in a database or something) but the size looks similar. So for libcxx (from llvm.org) I can get an svn trunk checkout for 70M, or I can get a git checkout (containing all revision of all branches) in 86M.

subversion looks like a win if you have large binary assets. That's a case that git doesn't handle well. For typical software development it still doesn't look competitive to me.

Comment Re:Who? Nobody. (Score 1) 103

There are resources for inventors. The USPTO has a page. There are startup incubators. There's Kickstarter. And then there's a bunch of slimeball "invention brokers", with success rates somewhere below 0.1%. These clowns are in that category.

Here's my idea: run two sites, the first one's like this (previously unknown to me) quirky, a good way to get candidate ideas some of which would be profitable (but as noted, a horribly ineffective way of actually doing anything with the contributed ideas), and another much more like Bennett's which can effectively filter and exploit the ideas. Then feed the latter from the former, and (with any luck) get profitable products which can then be sold. Or maybe just sell the ideas/patents (along with the list of interested customers) to third party manufacturers (or some combination).

Obviously it would be bad if people at the quirky-like site knew about the other one, so I'd want to keep it quiet (and probably vice versa). Maybe have it only operating in a foreign language in a foreign country (perhaps more than one).

(I'm not suggesting this is how quirky (or any other site) works. Seems likely they started with what seemed like a good idea and for some reason haven't been able to make it actually good (Bennett's analysis seems sound to me, what they're doing seems ineffective). And they don't care yet because they're getting press (apparently, anyway) and perhaps VC. Or maybe it's basically a hobby, or makes enough from selling the rejected ideas back to the proposers, or something else I just haven't thought of.)

PC Games (Games)

EA Editor Criticizes Command & Conquer 4 DRM 266

Command & Conquer 4's DRM hasn't garnered Electronic Arts as much bad press and fan outrage as Ubisoft's scheme, despite being very similar. Nevertheless, it's been causing problems and frustrations for some users, including EA.com's own editor-in-chief, Jeff Green. An anonymous reader points this out: "Green wrote on his Twitter account late last week: 'Booted twice — and progress lost — on my single-player C&C4 game because my DSL connection blinked. DRM fail. We need new solutions.' He continued later, 'Well. I've tried to be open-minded. But my 'net connection is finicky — and the constant disruption of my C&C4 SP game makes this unplayable. The story is fun, the gameplay is interesting and different at least — but if you suffer from shaky/unreliable DSL — you've been warned.'"

Slashdot Top Deals

There is very little future in being right when your boss is wrong.

Working...