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: Re:Hardware Decode (Score 1) 104

by LordCrank (#44366063) Attached to: Next-Gen Video Encoding: x265 Tackles HEVC/H.265

I had a laptop that would barely be able to do hdtv, and couldn't handle 720p content without significant stuttering. I believe the issue was that I had done enough research to know its graphics card supported decoding, but not enough to know that the particular brand making the graphics card had a long history of terrible linux support.

As far as whether hardware decoding is even necessary, it's something that I'd look at as an issue for set top boxes/low power media centers. It seems XBMC has generally been able to get linux drivers for these released fairly quickly in recent years, since the hardware manufacturers are aware that a significant portion of their potential customers are looking for a device to run XBMC.

Comment: Re:Uhhhh (Score 2) 204

by LordCrank (#42492417) Attached to: What 'Negative Temperature' Really Means

This doesn't really help. I pondered this for a while the other day when I read that first and gave up trying to wrap my head around it. I was always under the impression that 0 kelvin (absolute 0) meant a state at which there was no movement at the atomic/subatomic level. It would seem as though to reach a negative temperature, one would have to slow a substances particles to less than 0 movement. Then I realized they were talking about a quantum state and I pretty much gave up trying to understand it at that point, because anything which has the word 'quantum' in it suddenly defies all the rules I'd ever been taught about anything at all. :o)

As far as 'quantum' goes, if you're okay with the idea that a particle can have either a positive spin or a negative spin, even though spinning would always seem to imply a positive amount of spin, that's halfway to understanding what's going on here.

The way that temperature is defined, (1 / Temperature) = (Change in Entropy) / (Change in Energy). By this definition, absolute zero would mean that there is an infinite decrease in entropy for any decrease in energy, i.e. going to absolutely no movement of particles as energy decreases.

What happened here is that scientists developed a system where increasing energy decreased entropy, so (Change in Entropy) / (Change in Energy) had a negative value. This naturally involved a vacuum and a lattice of lasers and anything else a Bond villain could ask for, with the end result being that the particles could continue to take energy while decreasing the entropy in the system.

As far as this particular article being easy enough for a layman to understand, if it were I wouldn't expect to read "researchers getting a quantum gas to go below absolute zero" in the summary, because:

tl;dr: A quirk in the definition of temperature allows for it to be negative without having to remove energy from a system that is at absolute zero, meaning the temperature never 'goes below' absolute zero.

Comment: Re:Doesn't intent matter... (Score 1) 101

by LordCrank (#40433033) Attached to: IP Lawfirm Sues Typosquatting Security Researcher

By registering these domains he prevented the senders from getting a message that the url in the address they were sending to did not exist. Presumably he also made it so whatever catch all for the typoed domains wouldn't report an error. If he hadn't set up these domains then the senders would have received automated messages informing them their emails weren't delivered. While he didn't violate the law in stopping these emails from bouncing with errors, his behavior certainly wasn't ethical and did disrupt the intended communications.

Comment: Re:Paywall sites are going to be hit pretty hard (Score 1) 345

by LordCrank (#35206092) Attached to: Google Goes After Content Farms

The classic example is JavaScript-rendered dynamic content. This tends not to work so well when you're dealing with search engines. However, if you can serve them a static page that contains the text of the page minus all the rendering, then it can index the content without choking on the JavaScript. I'm not sure how important this is these days, but it certainly was a problem at one time.

That's what the noscript tag is for

It's also useful to serve modified versions for search engines so that searches for content within your site can return more relevant results. For example, you might insert certain keywords that describe the content of the page using terms that don't actually appear. Case in point, your page talks about Airport, but you serve a copy to Google that inserts the terms 802.11 and Wi-Fi.

That's what the meta name=keywords tag is for

Finally, there's the question of bandwidth and CPU overhead. If your site changes a lot, Google beats on your servers rather frequently. You can reduce the bandwidth hit by stripping JavaScript, CSS, images, etc. from your content before serving it to Google. This won't significantly change the searchability of the content, but will reduce the bandwidth overhead. And, of course, if there are static versions of content that you can serve instead of a server-side-dynamic version, this also saves on CPU overhead.

Google spiders text, not images. It also doesn't spider the text of css or javascript files. Also, I question how effective it is to dynamically decide to serve a static page based on a user-agent as opposed to merely serving everyone the dynamic page.

Have you ever noticed that the people who are always trying to tell you `there's a time for work and a time for play' never find the time for play?