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


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment Re:Short FPC history and goals overview (Score 1) 78

Twenty-three years ago, development started on the first version of the Turbo Pascal and later also Delphi-compatible Free Pascal Compiler

No, Turbo Pascal is not 23 years old ... the grammar suggests that, but reality doesn't.

I know this, becaise 23 years ago I had a second hand 286 PC with Turbo Pascal on it. And it wasn't exactly new even then.

Turbo Pascal has been around since 1984 .. that would be 31 years ago.

So, you can argue the sentence should have read as "Twenty-three years ago, development started on the first version of the Turbo Pascal (and later also Delphi)-compatible Free Pascal Compiler".

But what you can't do is argue that Turbo Pascal is 23 years old. Because that's utterly incorrect.

Comment C vs Pascal == Perl vs Python (Score 3, Interesting) 78

I remember despising C for its absurd syntax ("==", "!=" etc.).
I still do.

And I was the opposite, I despised the vebosity of pascal (begin/end/etc.) and it's tendency to try to hide some low level details on the grounds of making it easier to learn.
To each his own preferences.

That's a definitive proof that the Perl vs Python debate didn't actually need theese language and the whole concept dates back much further in computing history.

Comment What's that? (Score 4, Insightful) 40

What's that? The companies who make consumer electronics do a terrible job of security and routinely deliver products with little or no security?

Well, golly gee, I'm totally shocked.

No, wait, the other one ... where I think it should be self evident that probably 95% or more of all devices which want to connect to the internet should be presumed to be utterly insecure and not used.

It's pretty clear that without some penalties and liability, the companies who are trying to bring us the connected world are either incompetent at, or indifferent to, any form of security.

If it isn't a computer, I pretty much don't trust it with any form of network connection.

Comment Re:So... (Score 1) 89

Now that the Steam Box is on the market, there is a growing demand for high-end gaming graphics on Linux. That sound you hear is nVidia laughing all the way to the bank.

They've already been there counting and laughing ever since the GTX 970/980 launched. They fell over laughing when they learned that the Fury would be a $500+ card only. Steam boxes would just be the cherry on top.

Comment Re:he should know better (Score 2) 239

If you made some kind of public statement and your employer/landlord/bank called you up and said it's not compatible with being an employee/tenant/customer of ours anymore I think most people would call it a free speech issue. Granted, we're not really being consistent because half the time we want to protect dissenting opinions from the wrath of the majority and the other half we want obnoxious and offensive speech to have consequences. Like when Brendan Eich was forced to step down as CEO of Mozilla, was that right or wrong? Some think it was right, that the LGBT community had a right to cause a shit storm. Others think they blatantly silenced an opposing voice by harassing his employer. But the government wasn't involved, so there was no free speech issue right?

Comment Re:Uh? How does the DMCA apply to an ISP? (Score 3, Interesting) 100

Assertions of violation should come with a cost when they are wrong.

Ahhh, but the DMCA has been carefully crafted to prevent that.

See, as much as they are supposed to be making a sworn statement subject to perjury, all they have to do is "ooops, we though this but we were wrong".

The DMCA was bought and paid for by the copyright cartel to ensure they can bully and bluster all they want, everyone else has to jump and say "yes sir", and they bear absolutely NO penalty or cost with being wrong, and the ISPs have to do this shit at their own expense.

What the copyright cartel did when they bought the DMCA was to ensure it was such a lop-sided law that they can misuse it all they want and nothing will ever happen to them.

The entire DMCA is defective by design. Because that's what the people who paid for it wanted it to be.

Comment Re:So... (Score 1) 89

You laugh ... but years ago at a different job, the marketing people decided to rename/re-brand a product.

We literally had to stop everything, and build an entire release which had the name changed; which ended up having to finalize other things or roll them back to add later.

Never underestimate how much marketing can screw up a dev schedule.

Comment Re:Well thats odd (Score 1) 106

I'm not sure how uber gets around the disabled access regulations

The exact same way they get around regulations everywhere they operate: by pretending the regulations don't apply to them.

My city has mandatory cameras in cabs -- because cab drivers have committed sexual assaults, and because cab drivers get robbed. The fought it tooth and nail until one of their own was violently robbed and the camera would have helped with the conviction.

Uber, like with insurance and proper licensing, doesn't adhere to this. Uber's entire business model is being an bootleg cab dispatch company which ignores the rules and regulations. That's kind of that they do.

When you ride with Uber, you're just getting into a stranger's car. And that doesn't always work so well.

Everyone whinges about Uber undermining the taxi monopoly ... the reality is, Uber is pretty much ignoring laws around proper licensing, insurance, background checks, and anything else.

So you really have no idea of what the hell you'll get.

Comment Re:Well thats odd (Score 3, Insightful) 106

Ever had a cab driver who had no idea of where they were going but relied on a GPS?

They end up taking the stupidest possible routes because they have no idea of where they're going. I once had a cab driver who ended up taking what seemed like the most ass-backwards route because he knew less about the city than I did.

Sometimes, GPS routes are utterly ridiculous.

I don't want to pay some clown a bunch of extra money because he got stuck in traffic or took a longer route because he had no idea where he was going.

Some bumbling idiot with no idea of where he's going and hopes the GPS will get him there ... sorry, I'm not paying for that experience. I've seen how that can turn out.

Comment Re:Well thats odd (Score 1) 106

Let me preface this by saying: I've never been to London.

But, as I understand it, the London cabbies have to take a test they call "The Knowledge" which ensures they know a lot of the details of the layout and how to find your way around in a complicated city like London.

Apparently this test requires so much actual knowledge and spatial awareness, the cab drivers end up with measurably larger hippocampus afterwards.

So, my completely unfounded (except for what I've seen on TV) 'understanding' is the amount of studying and training required to be a London cabbie is really extensive, resulting in people who can navigate around an apparently very confusing city.

Comment Re:Uh? How does the DMCA apply to an ISP? (Score 2) 100

Previous slashdot story: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/...
Cox's response: http://ia801407.us.archive.org...

Their response is actually kinda fun to read.

It's even more fun if you mentally replace the redacted sections with uninterrupted cussing! Some of the sections are quite long, so get creative! ;-)

Comment Re:Following a ruling from a Virginia federal cour (Score 1) 100

Because the copyright cartel have bought laws from lawmakers which effectively give them the ability to decide who can use technology and how.

The DHS is now responsible for copyright enforcement, and the US foreign policy on copyright is now being directed by corporate interests.

All of these things have combined to mean that the accusations of corporations are being interpreted (by them, and by the idiot judge in this case) as meaning that they get to decide if a person should be removed from the internet due to being suspected of piracy.

Have you not been paying attention at all? Between the DMCA, the horrible extension of copyright, and the increasing extent to which protecting the profits of multinational corporations has driven US foreign policy ... it's not the media corporations who make such decisions.

Oh, and did we mention they do this with a reduced standard of evidence, no requirement of proof, and little or no recourse for lying? (They can just call it incompetence and suddenly there is no penalty.)

What the copyright people want is a full veto over how all technology is used, and the ability to deny people the ability to use the internet because they say so.

The person paying for the internet service? He has no rights. He has the right to use the internet as long as the media companies haven't accused him of piracy ... in which case, the media companies feel that accusation is sufficient to block further access.

You now live in a world in which probably 25% of all global treaty talks are specifically geared to entrenching into law that copyright owners have increasing powers.

The US has sold out to corporate interests, and then have subsequently championed them globally and foisted them on everyone else, and then used that to strengthen domestic controls.

Honestly, have you slept through all this?

The trouble with a lot of self-made men is that they worship their creator.