Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - 6 month subscription of Pandora One at 46% off. ×

Comment Re:what about OS's or small footprint? (Score 1) 437

Bjarne Stroustrup has always maintained that the ability to do systems programming is an essential feature of C++. It was designed that you should be able to write very resource-constrained, performant code when necessary.

Not too long ago he wrote a very good essay on the benefits of languages like C++ for infrastructure programming, and how it can save memory (and electrical power, even).

Comment Re:s/April/August (Score 1) 50

Why would they post updates on the Kickstarter page? They have their own website.

The current patch notes and development status can be found here. The FPS mode was never cancelled. Again, there's plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize RSI (like, for instance, why it seems every patch requires downloading ~27GB of data) without making crap up.

Comment "Hate Speech" has no definition (Score 5, Insightful) 467

Hate speech is when you *know* how hurtful your words are **and that's the entire point of why you say them.**

By your definition, insults are hate speech.

Hate speech is like pornography/obscenity: No one can define it, and it's usually strangely close to "Stuff I don't like."

Comment Re:She has a point. (Score 1) 628

So what? Just like it's not the role of the school to fix your attitudes towards sexuality it's not the role of the CS class to "fix" theirs.

No one brought 'sexuality' into the classroom. It's a picture of a face.

And it's very disingenuous to say it's just a picture of a face, kids aren't morons, someone will figure out the source and spread the news.

Then that's their problem. It's still just a picture of a face.

And even as just a face it's very obviously a sexualized picture.

I'm being trolled here, aren't I?

What are you, some sort of weird face fetishist?

Comment Re:The FAA Tried to Study This (Score 1) 36

I don't know why the controllers union would be against it.

Because they're dumb and shortsighted. It was obvious to us that it would mean more controllers being hired (and, even better, controllers that could live where it was cheap and the weather was nice, due to remote capabilities). However, the study included a concept for a fully automated control system for airports that don't see enough traffic to even warrant remote tower control, which would interact with aircraft over the radio (kind of like how unattended runway lights are triggered by keying your mic on the right frequency). In addition, only the big airports are staffed by FAA controllers. The small towers are run by (non-unionized) contractors.

As soon as any discussion of some sort of control system that didn't involve warm bodies, or possibly increasing the number of non-union controllers came up, they torpedoed it.

A failure will not appear until a unit has passed final inspection.