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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:When did validation actually help anyone? (Score 2) 132

Yes, I was, and I respectfully disagree. Browsers today do a lot more, but frequently the support for newer features is so specific to each browser and in some cases so unstable that it is completely useless for real world projects

Correct. That's why you don't use newer features until they're absorbed by the standard.

But the point is that these non-standard-compliant implementation techniques don't break anything in practice, because every browser is tolerant of them and will always remain so because far too much would break otherwise.

What I meant was: if they don't validate. I didn't mean "break" in the sense that they don't work.

You may not care for the practice, but nothing leaves my hands into production until it validates, except when the stakeholder insists on using something that won't.

Comment: Re:Legal (Score 1) 122

by PopeRatzo (#49362345) Attached to: Commercial Flamethrower Successfully Crowdfunded

Is anything legal in California these days?

Medical marijuana, gay marriage, conceal/carry.

Say you're not really pissed that fucking flamethrowers aren't legal there, are you? I don't know if you've gotten a look at your fellow man in the United States lately, but are these really people you want to be able to have flamethrowers? Geez, louise, there can't be more than maybe 1 in 100 that I think should be allowed to drive a car. Maybe 1 in 10 should be allowed to have shoelaces for chrissake.

Although I'm sure we can find someone reading this that believes "More flamethrowers = Less crime".

Comment: Re:I'd put a 'may' there (Score 1) 39

by Jane Q. Public (#49362289) Attached to: Taxpayer Subsidies To ULA To End
I have also had business experience with government contracts. One of the problems there (though it was in a somewhat different field, so doesn't apply as much here) is that those who couldn't properly make it in the engineering business ended up going to work for the government... and became the regulators. Rather the opposite of the "corporate capture" idea, but still a kind of revolving door.

As a result, the bureaucrats and regulators were not respected by the industry they were regulating, and were widely (and appropriately) vilified for interfering in efforts to just get the job done properly.

Comment: Re:I'd put a 'may' there (Score 1) 39

by Jane Q. Public (#49362261) Attached to: Taxpayer Subsidies To ULA To End

I don't know if SpaceX is leapfrogging ULA. The Alliance (why does that just sound wrong?) is responsible for a number of different booster programs spread out over time and territory.

Yeah, and was so "successful" at it that when there were problems getting Russian engines, they were temporarily grounded.

That said, some pressure on the behemoths to tighten up their act might be helpful - but remember although the ULA is presumably private, it is very much beholden to the Military Industrial Complex which means it is very much beholden to the Congress which means different booster programs spread out over time and territory as much time and territory as is possible.

Then where are they?

Granted, they are starting to produce some decent stuff again, but only really started doing so when SpaceX and a couple of other upstarts threatened their warm fuzzy government cocoon.

NASA has become too big and bureaucratic to get much done in any kind of hurry. Yes, that is partly, or perhaps even mostly, Congress' fault with its budget shenanigans. But it has gotten so bad that when the Space Shuttle was grounded, they didn't even have a replacement. Shoddy, short-term thinking. It's not possible to run a decent manned space program that way.

NASA was ordered by the President to clean up its crony-bureaucratic act after the Challenger disaster, clear back in '86. It never did. It was ordered to do so again after the Columbia disaster. It still hasn't.

If it finds itself unable to do so, inevitably it will be replaced.

Comment: Re:When did validation actually help anyone? (Score 1) 132

Unfortunately, most of the major browsers today do not do this at all consistently. Even some of the people writing the standards have basically given up.

Were you doing websites 10 or 15 years ago? I was. Browser compatibility today is phenomenal in comparison. No, it's not perfect, or even wonderful... except when you compare to then.

HTML5 "living standard"? Seriously? If it changes arbitrarily then it's not a standard.

I agree. Please remind Congress about this in re: the U.S. Constitution.

Another common case is trendy MVC frameworks like Angular, which often use non-standard attributes on HTML elements for their own purposes. They could use standard "data-*" attributes, but once you've got a few of those sitting on many elements in your mark-up, it's just noise and excess weight, so they use their own prefix for namespacing instead. And yet, I don't see anyone claiming that either Google's search engine or Angular as a JS framework have failed as a result of these heinous crimes...

If it breaks my JS or CSS, I won't use it unless the stakeholder absolutely insists. And then I'll try to talk them out of it.

Comment: Re:It's good if they don't code like 90s C++ devs (Score 1) 273

by drinkypoo (#49360941) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Makes Some Code Particularly Good?

If that's all the variable is used for, won't the compiler optimize it out of existence anyway? Or is that too fancy yet?

I think a lot of people don't really understand how the compiler actually works. Not even at a basic level.

Well, no, I don't. That's why I asked. It sounds like the answer to my question is yes?

Comment: Re:Boorish (Score 1) 633

by drinkypoo (#49360799) Attached to: Jeremy Clarkson Dismissed From Top Gear

But as for taking production back to Wolfsberg, last I checked there were still lots of VWs made in Mexico.

Right. Don't buy them. They specifically moved the Golf back to Wolfsberg. Be careful, though, because I think they moved it back to Mexico more recently. You can get e.g. a "VAG VIN Decoder" app for Android, or just memorize which place in the VIN to look at and a handful of plant codes. Then you'll know precisely where the vehicle was produced.

Comment: Re:Isn't Government wonderful? (Score 1) 132

It may be a private company, large portions of UK (and US I believe) functions are performed by private contractors and have been since the 1980s.

That said, even if it isn't, this experience is something most of us have suffered over the last 15 years from public and private entities. Most have ended up capitulating under pressure to knock it off with the "IE6 only" BS, in part because Microsoft (yes, Microsoft!) forced the issue with IE7 and its follow-ons, itself in part because too many people liked Firefox for Microsoft's comfort.

It shouldn't surprise anyone there's still "IE only" crap out there. Especially amongst organizations that are (1) large, and (2) constantly cutting their budgets and having to apply "defered maintenance" to everything they do to stop going under.

And those budget cuts are, for the most part, the fault of the same people who insist governments are always incompetent.

Comment: Re:It's good if they don't code like 90s C++ devs (Score 1) 273

by drinkypoo (#49360541) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Makes Some Code Particularly Good?

If adding a variable aids readability, add the fucking variable! Shove all the results into a meaningful, readable variable name and then shove *that* into your function argument, not some long series of nested function. It's not the 90s. You don't have to save memory! Memory is there to make your code readable. Use it!

If that's all the variable is used for, won't the compiler optimize it out of existence anyway? Or is that too fancy yet?

Comment: Re:Wouldn't Want To Be In The Same Room With Her (Score 1) 281

I got my job just because the company I work for had over twenty developers that were all male, and it looked bad on their EEO report.

Not because you were the most qualified applicant? That means the company you work for hired you not because they should have, but because they were strong-armed into it. In fact, they should not have had to have hired you, they should have been able to hire the best-qualified applicant.

Comment: Re:This whole issue needs to be buried (Score 1) 281

The reality is that society needs children.

The reality is that you are asking employers to pay for that, but making children isn't their business. If society needs children, then society should pay for children, through income redistribution. Oh wait, guess what? We already give people a tax break for having children. I've known people who made more than me but paid no taxes because of their children. Now you want employers to pay again?

Of course the rules should apply equally to both genders. You could argue that people who don't have kids should get more time off,

Or you could argue that people who do have kids don't deserve to get paid for their time off. A person who doesn't have kids is worth more to their employer. If people can't afford to survive while they have kids (they can) and we need more people (we don't) then it would be worth it to pay people to have kids. Big problem with that is there are too many humans on this planet already, at least while we operate in our current mode. You want more people made, but that's the opposite of what we need.

Comment: Re:Boorish (Score 1) 633

by drinkypoo (#49360499) Attached to: Jeremy Clarkson Dismissed From Top Gear

If I want a car assembled correctly, I buy one which was put together in Germany

You mean like all those VWs built in Mexico?

No, completely unlike those VWs built in Mexico, which are built like shit. The only thing more embarrassing to my heritage than how shit UAW puts together cars is how shit Mexico puts together cars. It's interesting that you mention Volkswagen because Mexicans are known to be particularly bad at that. When VW brought USDM Golf production to Mexico, reliability plummeted. When they took production back to Wolfsberg, it came right back up to the German standards that we know and love.

Anyone who buys a VW built in Mexico is a moron. All of my imports to date have been built in their designing nation, and came over here on a boat fully assembled. Started with imports with a 240SX, then I had an Impreza GC5, couple of 300SDs (still have one) and an A8. That last has electrical problems but the mechanicals are good, anyway. And there's the rub with VW; their electrical is a bit garbage, even out of Germany.

The end of labor is to gain leisure.

Working...