Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re: 2x2 board (Score 1) 117

If your move would repeat the previous board position, you must play somewhere else.

Then I highly doubt they calculated all legal positions in the game. They probably calculated all legal positions of the board, but that's a different thing.

The number of possible positions of the board is upper-bounded by 3^(19^2), with 19^2 positions that each can hold a black stone, a white stone, or no stone at all. This exact number was probably computed by this research.

But the possible positions of the game include not just the current board position, but also the set of all previous board positions; after all, the same board position can admit different future games, and be won by different players, depending on the previously-seen board positions. Thus, the possible positions of the game is vastly huger than the number of possible positions of the board, upper bounded by 2^(3^(19^2)).

Comment Re:Technical stuff. Read if you want real info. (Score 2) 308

6) WinIoT doesn't auto-update. Again, people would be pissed off if their "things" suddenly stopped working because an update broke compatibility. Not gonna happen.

The exact same consideration applies on desktop windows, and microsoft doesn't give a crap about such complaints in that area. Why would they feel differently for WinIoT?

Comment Re:Hogwash! Poppycock! Rubbish! (Score 1) 93

I don't think anyone will dispute the claim that (for instance) platform independence is an important sysvinit feature that systemd has sacrificed, and that (say) being a single point of failure for dozens of mostly-independent subsystems is a significant architectural downside of systemd. I make no claims as to the relative importance most people attach to those downsides versus the real upsides of systemd, but downsides they be.

Comment Re:Hogwash! Poppycock! Rubbish! (Score 1) 93

Most people will agree that systemd adds a number of important features to GNU/Linux that the old alternatives didn't offer.

This is very true. Most people will also agree that it accomplishes this at the cost of significant downsides inherent to the design of systemd, and sacrificing important features that the old alternatives do offer. The controversy is about whether the upsides are worth the downsides.

Adopting systemd will over time lead to a better system.

Depending on your position regarding the aforementioned tradeoff.

Comment Re:Math doesn't approve (Score 1) 1067

Well, division by zero should never happen, but you want it to be handled gracefully in case it does.

You are aware that segfaults are there specifically as a graceful handling of error conditions, right? We could just have every invalid memory access return 17 if we preferred. You seem to be underestimating just how nongraceful not aborting would be. The alternative to a segfault is a program that could go do absolutely anything, unpredictably.

Nobody wants the autopilot in charge of a barge train to segfault.

I would much prefer that over the autopilot deciding that its current speed is [broken computation... division by zero... "zero"] and the desired speed is 50km/h, so hit the accelerator until the division by zero situation resolves itself.

Comment Re:C++ (Score 1) 173

While C++ happens to be useful for cross platform mobile development, that's not because of C++ itself is better at cross platform development.

Yes it is. Well-written C++ code will run on any platform, whereas even the best java code only runs on the java platform. This makes C++ much more suitable for cross platform development than java.

Is this sophistry? I don't think so. Java is not a cross-platform system, java *is* a platform. And I think that no matter what the initial intentions may have been, time has shown that languages that compile to any platform, while less convenient than languages that bring their own platform, are actually the more flexible and practical for cross platform development of the two designs.

Comment Re:Hope! (Score 3, Insightful) 522

In my mind, this comes down to whether we want a better functioning OS or an OS that adheres to the mindset that I think attracted many of us to Linux in the first place.

In my mind, it comes down to streamlining the common use cases for a given system, while throwing under the bus everyone who wants to do something with their system that Lennart didn't think of or doesn't care to support.

Comment Re:I disagree (Score 1) 549

What we really need is some kind of standardized identity management system-- like you know how you can sign onto various sites using either your Facebook or Google+ sign-on? Like that, but standardized. We need a true single-sign-on solution that is easy to manage, hard to screw up and lose your identity permanently, and usable everywhere.

Is there any particular reason why we shouldn't just use public key authentication as the standard authentication method to use absolutely everywhere, optionally delegated to some remote single-signon service of your choice which is not in any way visible to the service you're authenticating against? This seems like the obviously correct solution to me, but for some reason I never see it mentioned in threads about replacing passwords as an authentication scheme.

Comment Re:Not a rule - Not just the FAA (Score 2) 199

If an activity is safe for a hobbyist to perform, why is it suddenly dangerous and in need of regulation when a professional does it?

Because "commercial" is really code for "on a large scale", and "hobbyist" is code for "on a small scale". What's safe on a small scale need not be safe on a large scale.

Of course, "commercial" is only a poor approximation of "on a large scale", but it's measurable and hard to game and does a pretty good job as an approximation in practice, so that's what the law will say.

Submission + - Can I buy the Classic interface? 3

Max Hyre writes: LWN almost went under a number of years ago because its volunteer editors couldn't afford to keep it up. The readers rose up and insisted that they be allowed to pay for it.

Can we do the same for Classic?

I'm a nerd. I read. I'm the one in the museum ignoring the display and reading the description. I want text, easily accessible, clearly laid out, and plenty of it. I'll pay to keep the UI I know and love.

The Beta has none of those characteristics. The Beta site is repellent, unusable, and unneeded. I won't use it, and if ``Classic'' goes away, I won't visit /., and it'll be a pity.

How much do you actually receive in revenue for each user? I suspect I'll match it to keep the status quo. Ask us what it's worth to us. I'd certainly pay $1/month, and would think about $5/month. I bet that I'm not alone.

Submission + - Owner: Vote, your choice: Get rid of Slashdot:Beta OR everyone goes elsewhere ( 1

Ying Hu writes: Slashdot Beta is not Slashdot:
What was loved about Slashdot does not appear in the new design — those creating the latter, please fire yourself and go work for a commercial consumer site (which we never read, and never will). OUR site should work without JavaScript, and JavaScript that IS used should to do something actually desired by a reader or commenter, not waste our bandwidth and CPU, and electricity, sending CRAP onto our computers. Improvements/ plugins,, won't be enough.

Submission + - Ask Slashdot: Opinion of slashdot beta? 9

An anonymous reader writes: What are your thoughts about slashdot beta? Post your complaints here so that I don't have to see them elsewhere. Additionally, if the beta is so bad that you don't want to stay, what other news website do you recommend?

Slashdot Top Deals

"When people are least sure, they are often most dogmatic." -- John Kenneth Galbraith