Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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: Oh Come On, it's a Press Release (Score 4, Insightful) 70

OK, no real technical data and some absurd claims here.

First all-digital transceiver? No. There have been others. Especially if you allow them to have a DAC and an ADC and no other components in the analog domain, but even without that, there are lots of IoT-class radios with direct-to-digital detectors and digital outputs directly to the antenna. You might have one in your car remote (mine is two-way).

And they have to use patented algorithms? Everybody else can get along with well-known technology old enough that any applicable patents are long expired.

It would be nicer if there was some information about what they are actually doing. If they really have patented it, there's no reason to hold back.

Comment: Re:The kernel is GPL, you can change it ... (Score 1) 161

by perpenso (#49191725) Attached to: Software Freedom Conservancy Funds GPL Suit Against VMWare

But then they MUST offer the modified source to anyone they distribute a binary to. They also get to field all of the support issues since the kernel maintainers won't touch a bug report if the kernel is tainted by a non-free module (for good reason).

Seems a non-issue. If the bug is not in their code it could be replicated in the pristine kernel and reported to maintainers. Since the forked kernel would be used at the core of one of their virtual machines they would be the natural contact point. From the customer's perspective VMware failed, not some embedded kernel that they don't know or care about.

Comment: The kernel is GPL, you can change it ... (Score 1) 161

by perpenso (#49191125) Attached to: Software Freedom Conservancy Funds GPL Suit Against VMWare

The deciding factor is whether or not it is using the defined API. If so, it is mere use and not derivation. If the kernel has to be modified to add an API, there would be a clear violation.

That is simply a fork of the kernel. If the forked kernel source is published there would seem to be no violation.

Comment: Re:C++ important on Apple too (Score 1) 395

by perpenso (#49191021) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Which Classic OOP Compiled Language: Objective-C Or C++?

For example virtual functions require an extra level of indirection over C function calls.

You are wrong, doubly wrong actually. (1) If the class is not using inheritance you don't get the indirection.

If you're not using inheritance then you won't use a virtual function. (Did you read what I wrote?)

Yes, I'm rejecting the notion that C++ code inherently involves inheritance. Note my reference to minor use classes and templates being quite useful and not performance hindering.

You missed the point. Its not that google is using C++ libraries, its that they are writing their libraries in C++.

Portable libraries. It makes no fucking difference whether the library was written within the same conglomerate.

It however does disprove you claim that C++ isn't being used to a large degree.

Plus you are doubly wrong again since people also use C++ in Apple targets for portability.

Are you hard of thinking? That was the one exception I made. Using portable libraries. However if the library intended to be portable starts on OSX, then it's virtually always written in C.

I'm not referring to libraries, I'm referring to the app's core code itself.

Also many libraries are merely C for legacy reasons. For new code, refer to Google's use of C++ again.

+ - Conservancy Announces Funding for GPL Compliance Lawsuit->

Submitted by Jeremy Allison - Sam
Jeremy Allison - Sam (8157) writes "From the article:

Software Freedom Conservancy announces today Christoph Hellwig's lawsuit against VMware in the district court of Hamburg in Hamburg, Germany. This is the regretful but necessary next step in both Hellwig and Conservancy's ongoing effort to convince VMware to comply properly with the terms of the GPLv2, the license of Linux and many other Open Source and Free Software included in VMware's ESXi products."

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Science vs Belief. (Score 1) 453

by blackraven14250 (#49187111) Attached to: White House Threatens Veto Over EPA "Secret Science" Bills

Just because your personal identifiers were collected does not mean they constitute data used to draw conclusions. I don't understand why you would amplify such untruthful, misleading statements on this matter; are you motivated by partisanship?

They don't really have a bearing on the study. They would, however, absolutely be covered by the proposed law (HR 1030), which is the problem here. If your SSN, DOB, or anything else is collected, it's required to be publicly accessible online. It is, for the purposes of the law, a "recorded factual material" that needs to be "specifically identified" if it's "scientific and technical information" used to support any "covered action" (which is almost everything the EPA does). There is no exception for personally identifiable data in this section.

IANAL, however, I am unable to find a (legal) definition for the term "scientific and technical information" (or "technical information", or "scientific information") in Title 42. If there's no definition somewhere in there, or somewhere else applicable that I'm not looking, this bill is a Supreme Court case waiting to happen, and the EPA will lose multiple years of being able to do nearly anything beyond their current capabilities thanks to litigation. Once that's over, the EPA may still have to provide personally identifiable information, depending on how the court rules.

It looks like simple legislation, since it's only 2 pages, but it leaves open a ton of questions that need to be resolved through litigation if it is passed.

Comment: Re:Worthless Study (Score 1) 246

by readin (#49186659) Attached to: Racial Discrimination Affects Virtual Reality Characters Too
It sounds to me like this was a test to confirm that the technique gives similar results to what has been shown before. Being able to use computer games to test this stuff makes all kinds of variations cheap and easy to test. Want to see what other colors matter? Want to see if a different position, different lighting, different clothes, etc. matter? A few strokes on the keyboard and you have a new test with all the other factors unchanged. Want volunteers? The game can be distributed world-wide by the internet.

But suppose you go to the department head and ask for a lot of time and money to recruit people all over the world and run a lot of different variations and it turns out that the racism seen in other tests doesn't show up in the computer game at all. You've wasted time and money. So you start small with the people around you, who just happen to be white Italians. You get the response you expect and you've shown your technique is valid.

I'm pretty sick of PC stuff but I don't see this research as necessarily racist or anti-white. I see it as the beginning stage of a work in progress and as something valuable because it demonstrated the usefulness of a new technique.

What I see as potentially racist and anti-white is Slashdot's trumpeting of this incomplete work.

Comment: Re:And still (Score 1) 131

by readin (#49186607) Attached to: NASA Ames Reproduces the Building Blocks of Life In Laboratory

SETI found nothing .. Maybe an alien civilization is in it's dark ages .. couple of hundred years away from inventing the radio.

That is a very real possibility. Or maybe the aliens aren't civilized or even intelligent. Or maybe they're in one of the trillions upon trillions of places SETI hasn't had a chance to look yet. Or maybe they're using transmission frequencies SETI isn't checking, or the transmissions have been wave shifted out of SETI's range. Or perhaps SETI just didn't recognize the signals received.

The fact that SETI has found nothing tells us practically nothing about whether there is life out there. God may have created life (directly or indirectly) all over the universe. We don't have enough knowledge to say for certain yet.

Comment: Re:Easier to Analyze or Change == More Maintainabl (Score 1) 244

by readin (#49186569) Attached to: Study: Refactoring Doesn't Improve Code Quality

But I've certainly had cases where I needed to copy and paste a few lines of code maybe even 100 times and then tweak each instance to put in the data values or validations I want.

This leads to bugs where a tweak gets missed in one of the copies (copy, paste, do tweak 1, interruption!, forget tweak 2). It also causes maintenance problems when the person coding a bug fix doesn't know there are a bunch of other places that need to be fixed.

You're right that forgetting to do the tweak can be a problem. But as for not knowing there are a bunch of other places that need fixing, I guess I wasn't clear enough. The repetition gets centralized in a single file so that you can look over all the locations at once.

How many QA engineers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? 3: 1 to screw it in and 2 to say "I told you so" when it doesn't work.