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: Re: Humerous?` (Score 1) 251

by Shortguy881 (#49495905) Attached to: FBI Accuses Researcher of Hacking Plane, Seizes Equipment
Umm, huge difference between a law enforcement office joking about killing someone while on duty and any civilian joking about something non-lethal. Law enforcement agents needs to be held to a higher standard. Period.

In the case of this guy, saying something like this shouldn't be a crime. No one panicked. No one was hurt. Nothing was destroyed. Nothing happened. Had he gone through with it, that constitutes a crime.

When something can't be said out loud, we can no longer have a reasonable discussion about it. Like in this case, he had been trying to expose security flaws in the airline system for some time and was told to stop. Instead of having an open discussion about it and allowing fixes to be put in place. This just hid the problem.

The only time words should be criminalized is when it causes someone harm and the intent was to do so, ie yelling fire in a crowded area, threatening to hurt someone. I don't think his comments fall into that category.

Comment: Re:Not fully junk (Score 1) 305

Interestingly, there is research in a drug/gene therapy that uses electrical current to make a cell membrane porous but retain its structure. Something like this could, in theory, be used to stabilize cells during the thawing process. Granted this is a combination of various technologies still in their infancy, but to deny that something is possible is more foolish.

For example, you'll look like a fool when the first genetically altered horse with a narwhal horn shows up.

Comment: Re:Please (Score 1) 105

This is the future of American police:

Key things to note from the article: 120 military grade surveillance cameras, 35 microphone systems, large and continuous police presence, military grade weapons. Some things not listed in this article: Fines are passed out to people seen walking in the same area multiple times for loitering. People are told to move along if seen sitting or standing on street corners. Anyone "suspicious" is stopped and questioned. All license plates registered outside the area are sent notices that their car was caught in illicit activity regardless of why they were there (no charges are filed against them, they are just mailed a notice).

Comment: Re:Budget running dry? (Score 1) 99

Drink a lot of cool aid do you? There is no tax problem. Its a spending problem.

We brought in $3 trillion in taxes last year in the US and spent $58 billion on elementary and secondary education. That's less than 2%. I'll pay more in taxes when the government shows me they can spend it responsibly.

Comment: Re:About time. (Score 1) 407

This is why I'm not concerned with this practice. I am a good programmer. All of this "talent" they are bringing over can't program at all.

I work for a large company with a dedicated IT team. We also supplement that team with contractors for larger projects (few of which are H1-Bs) and have several affiliates that also use H1-B workers. The quality of work provided by these migrant workers is a load of steaming crap.

Guess who gets brought in to fix it. I have job security and great pay because of these people. Keep them coming. Eventually, these companies may figure out its costing them more to do the same project twice, but until then I'm ok with it.

Comment: Re:More... (Score 1) 232

by Shortguy881 (#49393551) Attached to: Why You Should Choose Boring Technology

balancing both quantitative and qualitative variables, should indicate to you that the entire concept of a "best possible solution" is absurd

Just because you don't know how to do it, doesn't make it impossible or wrong.

especially attractive because it not only can be economically and scientifically rewarding

You destroyed your own argument.

When I refer to programming as an 'art' I mean that in the sense that programming is a skilled craft.

By that definition, everything is art. Even my original statement, the quote from breaking bad, is invalid. Life is art. Pumping septic tanks is art. At that point, whats the point of even using the word?

I'm going to guess "2-year trade school" given that you claim a "formal background in programming" because I can't see that meaning anything else.

Try more formal university level education. I was being modest and only brought it up because of your continuing slight against my intelligence and qualifications on the subject. Honestly, I have no doubt I am a better programmer than you. You would look upon my work and consider it art.

Comment: Re:More... (Score 1) 232

by Shortguy881 (#49391187) Attached to: Why You Should Choose Boring Technology
No the original argument was as follows:

No, it's not science. (It doesn't even remotely resemble science!) Neither is it an application of science, for obvious reasons.

By all of the definitions you provided, programming is a science. The definition I chose was the harder to qualify for.

Take this example: Given a car with fuel efficiency x and distance y, you need to get the car to y. If I say time is your top objective, you'd just ignore fuel consumption and dive all out. If I tell you your goal is to get there the most efficient way possible, then time and fuel come into play. Your bashing of weighted variables just shows your ignorance in both math and science.

Since you clearly have a different definition of art why don't you explain it to me and why your code is worthy of such a title?

Not that you need to know my qualifications. I not only have a formal background in programming but am also an autodidact. I am a professional programmer with a good size company and I continue to take courses and work on personal projects in my spare time.

Comment: Re:Randian Dumbfuckery (Score 1) 318

by Shortguy881 (#49390949) Attached to: First Lawsuits Challenging FCC's New Net Neutrality Rules Arrive
Whether you believe the article or not, the government has not right to come into my vehicle and tell me to wear a seat belt, just as they have no right to say cave diving or base jumping is too dangerous and therefor are illegal.

Bubble wrapping citizens in the name of safety just makes us less free. That was my point.

Comment: Re:More... (Score 1) 232

by Shortguy881 (#49387903) Attached to: Why You Should Choose Boring Technology
Astronomy existed before telescopes, microbiology before microscopes, physics before particle accelerators. These are all just tools that increased measure-ability leading to a more accurate scientific approach. Things like sonar are an initial run at quantifying things like readability and rules compliance and they do a fantastic job.

You can predict with some degree of accuracy what a programs optimal efficiency would be, or did you miss that in your computer science classes? You are right that different languages/environments change the results, and while it adds a large layer of complexity it is still quantifiable. There is and will always be a "best possible solution." I work in an enterprise and not in research, so nothing I do will ever reach that point, but that doesn't prevent it from existing.

Lets take a quick look at the definition of science: systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. Everything I have said has revolved around this definition, observation and experimentation to gain understanding. Its as if you are intentionally being obtuse.

On the other side art: the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance. You don't do whats beautiful or appealing when coding. You do what is right. You don't right a recursive loop when you can do it in a normal loop, just because it looks prettier.

As for memory vs speed vs readability, you can weight requirements making them more or less important and there by altering the target optimal performance. Its simple math.

At this point you are either just a troll or are an incredibly incompetent coder. Do you honestly sit in dev meetings and when asked why you did something respond with "because its art man"?

Behind every great computer sits a skinny little geek.