Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

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: 'Resource constrained era' (Score 1) 368

by DavidR1991 (#37001852) Attached to: What Today's Coders Don't Know and Why It Matters

Comments/phrases like these completely fail to grasp that things like this are RELATIVE. What is 'resource constrained' today isn't what was seen as 'resource constrained' 20 years ago. Likewise, many young programmers _today_ (including myself) DID in fact learn to code in what would be seen as resource constrained environments compared to today's machines. I cut my teeth on an 8MB Win95 machine and later a 32MB machine. Sure, that amount of RAM to play with is an insane luxury if we're thinking back to early/earlier 90s or 80s. But compared to what we have now it IS resource constrained. And heck, even mobile devices have more than 32MB to play with these days.

20 years from now 2 or 4GB of RAM will look like 'resource constrained' environments, and all of us who are 20-year olds now will be thinking "Herp derp, this new generation won't understand the resource constrained 32MB days!". And then 20 years from that, their experience will help them operate in 'resource constrained environments' when several TB of RAM is the norm or something

TL;DR: This is all a stupid circular pattern where each generation seems inferior to the last but still has some useful knowledge relative to specs of modern machines

Comment: Not a mistake, just badly executed (Score 0) 688

by DavidR1991 (#36977426) Attached to: Was<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET All a Mistake?

As per my comment title. My major issue with using .NET for any project is the fact the framework is massive, many people still don't actually have it (or a recent version of it) - but most importantly, there is no 'must have' .NET application that spurs people to install it themselves. MS didn't even use it for their own products

Comment: Eh? (Score 3, Insightful) 127

by DavidR1991 (#36463164) Attached to: Facebook Taking On Apple?

I read the article, but I don't really understand why this is 'taking on Apple'. Yeah, it's trying to undermine the app store via Facebook apps, but if that were a huge tactic against Apple, surely it would be working already? (Surely Facebook is accessible and usable with apps as-is without this 'Project Spartan'? In which case if HTML5 apps via Facebook were what people wanted, surely they would already have a big stake in the iOS audience?)

Comment: Re:Norway isn't a member of the EU. (Score 1) 350

by DavidR1991 (#36273676) Attached to: Nintendo Pulls <em>Dead Or Alive</em> Over Porn Fears In EU

I love the way you say you live in the EU under some kind of crappy assumption I don't. I live in Europe too, and I'm aware that EUR is also the Euro. What I was saying is that it's not unheard of for people to (wrongly) refer to Europe as EU or EUR as a form of 'country code', even though it refers to the European Union or the currency.

My mistake here is that I skimmed over where the summary said 'member state' and missed it. Clearly the summary was referring to the actual EU and not the country code. So the summary writer is a moron. My mistake.

Even if that is the case, you're still being a pedant because if you RTFA EU or not EU has squat to do with the issue - the article never mentions European Union or laws against up-skirts at all. What the articles and summary presumably meant to say is that these countries share common conservative outlook on this kind of content or something (because if it was an EU directive then all member states would presumably be effected)

Comment: Maybe trying to solve it the wrong way? (Score 2) 167

by DavidR1991 (#36123058) Attached to: Invent the Medical Tricorder, Win $10,000,000

When I think of this kind of thing, I get the impression we're trying to solve the wrong problem. Would it make more sense to develop chips and systems that could be embedded _inside_ people? That way they could continuously monitor the person (somehow) and a 'tricorder' would simply extract data out of the systems inside the person

"You know, we've won awards for this crap." -- David Letterman