Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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: Firefox: Swiss army knife unusable as browser. (Score 1) 300

by Foske (#49199775) Attached to: Mozilla: Following In Sun's Faltering Footsteps?

Sorry guys, but I am not waiting for a Firefox specific in-browser chat tool. I got better chat programs that are compatible with the rest of the world. And if I want to chat with someone I enable my chat program. What I am waiting for is a browser that starts fast, loads pages fast, allows me to switch tabs and kill a tab instead of showing when a flash ad kills it's performance. I used to pay Mozilla some money. A long time ago.

Comment: Stop being everything, start being a good browser (Score 1) 296

by Foske (#49004461) Attached to: Firefox Succeeded In Its Goal -- But What's Next?

If I use a chat program, I use a chat program that everyone uses not one that happens to be integrated with whatever browser I use. If I use a pdf reader, I use a pdf reader that's good and not integrated in my browser to the level that it is annoying me. If I use a browser, I want the browser to be fast, responsive and not stuck all the time because some slow loading pages or slow plugins.

Seriously. Remove half your code base and FF might stand a chance in the future.

Comment: It needs to have the camera removed (Score 1) 324

by Foske (#48873031) Attached to: What Will Google Glass 2.0 Need To Actually Succeed?

I don't care if you think you are cool by reading your emails while I think you are having a chat with me. I will simply ignore you and remove you from my friendzone. I do care that you are secretly recording our conversation. I want to punch you in the face for that, destroy the device and make sure you never do that again. Just remove the camera and I see a market for it. Not my market, but there are plenty of idiots who will like it.

Comment: Re:MORE SHIT??? (Score 1) 177

by Foske (#48809431) Attached to: Firefox 35 Arrives With MP4 Playback On Mac, Android Download Manager Support

Not intrusive, maybe. But still: Firefox Hello is not good.

It is is Firefox specific, and since they have little market share chances are small that I can use it with whoever I would like to use it with.
It is doing something that has nothing to do with browsing the net
There are already way too many standards for chatting with or without video, and this one requires Firefox while till now I could get away with pidgin and skype.
It is not an extension I choose to install, and I am sure I will never use it. Therefore it only makes my Firefox bigger and more bloated.

I wouldn't care if Firefox were a small and fast browser, but it is a big, slow piece of junk and they added more crap to it, instead of fixing that.

Comment: I used to (Score 1) 488

by Foske (#48504585) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Non-Coders, Why Aren't You Contributing To Open Source?

But I got so fed up with the big egos that I quit. Linus Torvalds himself once trashed the project I was working on because of a few lines of debug code that were checked in, refusing to listen to our arguments. Later, similar projects -invented by others- made it to core functionality in the linux kernel. I'm talking about the old Kernel Graphics Interface project, which did the same as DRI and KMS, except that it also worked on other platforms. I tried again with Scribus. Their response: Welcome, but don't touch our code. I was involved in Mandrake, but quit when the core developers refused to listen to the community. We all know what happened to Mandrake...

Comment: Why don't they study the cause of the pain ? (Score 3, Interesting) 83

by Foske (#48478297) Attached to: Researchers Discover an "Off Switch" For Pain In the Brain

I am the last to say chronic pains are not real, but I do know that chronic pains are most of the time a symptom of something else, and way too many people are diagnosed with chronic pains. Doctors say they can't treat something and you have to live with it, though many times that is simply wrong. My wife was diagnosed with 'chronic pain' by 6 independent doctors. Number 7 said she should stop drinking milk. Pain is almost completely gone. I myself have been walking around with Irritable Bowel Syndrome for years. Stopped eating Gluten and the Syndrome is gone.

We have way too many "diseases" which are nothing but a name for clueless doctors and a failing medical system. My basic rule is: If you broke something: Go see a doctor. If you have something that's a bit more vague: See someone who understands how the human body works. And yes, I now refer to for example good acupuncture, chiropractic or homeopathic doctors. Unfortunately you also have a lot of crap there.

Comment: He has a point, but is oe of them himself (Score 1) 993

by Foske (#48080567) Attached to: Lennart Poettering: Open Source Community "Quite a Sick Place To Be In"

If you look carefully, mr. Poettering is the guy behind many problems in the current Linux world. He is the guy behind Pulseaudio, the audio system that destroyed everything that was good about ALSA, and didn't properly fix anything that was bad about it. He is the guy behind systemd, the swiss army knife that is good at everything except what it is supposed to do, reinventing all the wheels that used to be the base of a Linux system. He is complaining that Linux is still too fragmented, and fixes that by adding more fragmentation on the one hand (Pulseaudio, yet another audio implementation) and reducing fragmentation to the level that it's insane on the other (systemd).

And, mr. Poettering. Sometimes listening to others is not a bad idea. There is no excuse for binary log formats. The fact that you still refuse to listen to this message (and others), brought to you by many, makes you nothing better than all the people you are barking at.

Comment: Benefits ? What benefits (Score 4, Interesting) 213

by Foske (#47572737) Attached to: Vint Cerf on Why Programmers Don't Join the ACM

Most of these organizations and associations completely fail to understand how they would be able to create added value for their potential members. As an electronic engineer I'm supposed to be a member of IEEE. I can't think of a single reason why I would subscribe, and the people and letters of IEEE didn't make things better. On the contrary.

Comment: A better world starts at yourself, but... (Score 1) 710

by Foske (#47455083) Attached to: People Who Claim To Worry About Climate Change Don't Cut Energy Use

* Replacing five lightbulbs with fluorescent lights which cost more energy to produce and contain way more toxic materials will not save the world. Especially because many of them do not last longer for the simple reason that we switch on and off the lights way too often.

* If you reduce the power consumption of 10% of the users with 50%, you still only won 5%.

* Solve the real problem: The fact that I switch off one TV won't save the world. Samsung should make TVs with ultra-low stand-by power. They make millions.

Don't get me wrong, I am very worried about the future of our planet. I just don't think that environmentalists shouting at people that they should replace their lightbulbs get the whole picture. With 7 billion people, you will never be able to shout at everyone. Shout at the CEO of General Electric, Samsung, Philips, LG. THEY can make a difference.

Comment: Re:Because peers aren't magical (Score 4, Interesting) 109

by Foske (#47382013) Attached to: How Did Those STAP Stem Cell Papers Get Accepted In the First Place?

As a former reviewer working for a very renowned research institute in Europe I can say: Peers typically don't get/take the time to do their job right, and often outsource the job to less experienced people. Reproducing results is a very expensive and time consuming job, which means: unless it is it won't happen. You must be lucky if the reviewers have at least read the paper till the end. Quite often the review happens by people who are "no experts" in the field of the paper. For many conferences, papers with a bad rating still pass because there are not sufficient good papers, or if it is easy to guess the institute the authors work for, the paper passes without proper review.

Once our institute had a paper rejected, but my boss -who was in the review team- managed to get the paper accepted anyway. High profile conference in Electronic Engineering.

As a former paper author I can say: If your paper is rejected for one conference, you simply resubmit to another until it is accepted. Publish or perish is the holy grail of research, something many bosses will make very clear to you, and quality is less important. You don't write a paper because you have results, you write a paper because this or that major conference has a deadline in two weeks. I have a few paper on my name I am ashamed of: Omitting the bad results in the measurements, compare with competitors only on the features you know you would win because the comparison doesn't make sense at all, bragging about results which are very bad, but you hide that by not comparing to (avoiding any reference to) competitors which are better.

As you might understand, I quit the job. I left research and never ever want to have anything to do with it anymore.

How can you work when the system's so crowded?