Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Take advantage of Black Friday with 15% off sitewide with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" on Slashdot Deals (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment Re: Will Apple be able to spec/source a good OLED? (Score 1) 185

No, these arw characgeristic of OLEDs.

LCDs have their own problems:

- Backlight leakage
- "Bright" and "dark" edges (relative to backlight edge)
- Dim corners (usujally just one, due to slight LCD warping)


The iPad Air IZGO display had tons of problems at first, too. I remember seeing them at a store and thinking, "geez, there's not a single good display in this entirew row of iPad Air units."

But that doesn't absolve OLED of its problems. I think for me the big issues arew the color cast issues. The pink/green gradient is probably the worst, followed by the yellow color cast esp. when dim and the uneven whites (usually not visible in when colors are being displayed).

Comment Will Apple be able to spec/source a good OLED? (Score 4, Interesting) 185

I'm actually a fan of OLED displays when they're perfect, yes, even the bright colors.

But dammit it's hard to find a really good *actual* OLED display in an *actual* unit.

Went through five phones before I got a Note 4 with a good display. Went through four Galaxy Tab S units to find a good one new out of the box. Let's see, what are the problems encountered in the various and sundry displays?

- Strong yellow cast, like ridiculously strong
- Pink/green gradient, usually from corner to corner, with "white" only in display center
- Uneven brightness, i.e. dark "splotches" on white backgrounds or "dark gradients" at one edge of the screen to about 1-2" in from bezel
- Terrible pixelation/pixel noise at low brightness, not unlike digital camera "noise" in low-light exposures
- Burn-in (even in supposedly factory-new devices)

Either QC or the production process or both appear to be nearly fatally flawed for Samsung, and they're currently the biggest shipper of OLED screens in gadgets, and have had years of experience. You'd think they'd have it sorted out by now.

I love the *potential* of OLED, but it seems like for the most part right now, attempts to actually ship them in consumer devices leave a lot to be desired.

Comment Though there *is* a question re: interest conflict (Score 1) 453

With regard to the issue of dealers, I'm not sure that it's just electric cars they don't want to sell.

In 2013 I was in the market for a gasoline-powered automobile. Did my research, selected a make and model. It wasn't the most common car on the planet, but it also wasn't extremely rare (a mainstream Japanese car). I identified three dealerships in the metropolitan area that, according to their websites, had a model on the lot.

I could not for the life of me get them to give me a test drive. The first dealership I visited, the salesman said they'd "lost the key" to that particular car and I couldn't test drive it or buy it that day, I'd have to come back "later." (He couldn't tell me just when "later" was.) But he put on the *very* hard sell for two other models.

The second dealership, they claimed to have lost the car, period. No, not on the lot, they said. The third dealership, they claimed that I didn't really want that model, it wasn't reliable. When I pressed, they told me that their (brand new 2013) instance was in the shop, that's how bad it is. "Honestly," they didn't want to sell me the marque's "worst model." *They* were looking out for *me*, you see. Which is why they really, really wanted to put me in this *other* model in the showroom....

I finally bought one online and had it driven in from out of state. It's been a great car and performed as expected with the features I needed.

I don't know exactly what was going on when I was trying to make my vehicle purchase, but to me it screamed "conflict of interest" as they clearly didn't want to serve me, the customer, by selling me a product that I came for and that they clearly *had*.

Comment Two, both for mobile devices. (Score 2) 491

(1a) Root/jailbreak everywhere, as an easy option (not called that any longer). Rather like the security control on Mac OS. "Security" on by default, but can be turned off with a click.

(1b) An unlocked SIM socket on every device, of every size, along with a dialer/calling app for mobile networks. So that I don't have to choose amongst the limited selection of "phablets" but can instead use an iPad Mini or a Samsung Galaxy S2 as my phone if I want to.

Comment Sadly, I find the same thing. The SJW feminists (Score 3, Insightful) 291

are rather sexist and are so busy fighting against "masculinism" that they don't notice they're reifying the very gendered category system that feminists once, at the beginning, set out to make obsolete. Once again, war, labor, objectivity and striving are seen increasingly as being for men, while flowers, cooperation, peace, and "locality" (a thin veneer over domesticity) are the supposedly more desirable feminine (i.e. not so masculine) traits that we ought to promote.

It's gone gone from "women should be free to leave the kitchen and join any action they want" to "if we can move the Oval Office and the battlefield into the kitchen, we can have women present in both places as they cook!"

Comment This seems unsurprising to me. (Score 1) 103

I'm no expert in human cognition or neural nets, but it seems to me that if, on average, something looks like a human face to the average human, then it must share regular correspondences to a human face. Take a few of these that vary in one way or another but all share such average correspondences and average them together, one would expect to get a human face.

I don't know, the obviousness factor is just still there for me. Maybe the profundity escapes me.

Comment First, this post is an ad. (Score 1) 145

Second, and in the spirit of my frustration, I'll encourage everyone just to hit Amazon or eBay and get better deals than big-box black friday deals. Oh, and on eBay and Amazon you can get them year-round and without having to battle large-muscled, tracksuited, crooked-teethed thugs that are in stores at 12:01 AM scooping up the total four items actually available at the uncompetitive but somehow alluring price that was advertised to millions.

Black friday is a scam. Also, Best Buy is a scam. Also, Wal-Mart is a scam.

Comment Bizarro world (Score 2) 156

Um, I would hypothesize that there is correlation between liking Sci-Fi and liking technology and coding that has nothing to do with gender.

Gosh, why don't we focus on poetry instead of tools in shop class? BECAUSE IT'S SHOP CLASS.

You might get a few unusual suspects to come to the first week of shop class if it's focused on cake-making, too. But eventually the tools will come out and at that point you'll still lose anyone that wasn't in it for the hardware and banging.

Same thing goes for IT and STEM in general. It is what it is. Geeks like it. Geek women like it. They also like films and bits of pop culture that are full of technology and physics and stuff. Downplay that all you want, but at the end of the day, it is what it is. Hanging a bunch of photos of flowers and unicorns in programmer school is not going to keep the flower-and-unicorn set there once the homework begins.

I read the Fortune article linked from the Facebook post and it's pretty flawed. It's based on simply asking teen girls if some art and flowers in the classroom would make them more likely to enroll in computer science classes. Of course they said yes. That has shit all to do with whether they'd actually do it, or whether they'd actually stay in computer science class once they got there. Clearly not. Anyone that is swayed to choose their courses by the presence of art and flowers in the classroom (or that concedes so easily to a survey like this one) is not likely IMO to stick around and become a computing professional through years of staring at a screen all day, or to hang tough through the related homework.

Silly stuff.

Comment The public knows not thing one (Score 1) 568

about civil engineering regulations. They know they want buildings to be "safe" and also that they want buildings.

I expect the same over the next 50 years in tech. They know they want tech to be safe and they know they want tech. The regulators and legislators will take care of the rest, for better and for worse.

Comment Yup. And when security is a key to operational (Score 2, Interesting) 291

goals, this is close to what happens. Where truly "hard" computing is necessary, resources are disconnected from networks, etc. People know which side their bread is buttered on, they're not fools. Sure, security is an important "nice to have" but it's not bigger than the task at hand in most cases.

Witness how the public continues to use cloud services, social media services, online commerce, and mag-stripe credit cards, despite regular breaches. They'll bitch and moan, but they're not going to stop doing their stuff.

Similarly, notice how Linux effectively rules the world as THE key component of network and mobile space infrastructure, even dominating big chunks of consumer space (i.e. Android). And meanwhile, OpenBSD is an asterisk.

People want security, sure, but they're not going to choose to martyr themselves (or their projects or tasks) to it. Linus is a pretty smart guy at the end of the day.

Comment And by the way, (Score 1) 568

as more computing systems become more visible to the public as risks (self-driving cars, autonomous drones, potentially robotics down the road, etc.) I fully expect we'll get to a point where software engineering is a tightly defined field, primarily regulated by government works, yes with a drastically limited and highly scrutinized toolset available to which hobbyists are not limited. The public will increasingly demand it, or the code will simply not be allowed in public at the end of the day (again, think self-driving cars).

Comment Not trying to say that the implementation is the (Score 1) 568

same, but rather that the needs and purposes that lead to the title are the same. The standards will have to be different (appropriate to the materials, practices, etc. of the field), but the reason for the standards is nonetheless clear: code that the public relies upon must serve the public responsibly, and the public has an interest in ensuring that this is so.

In private, for code whose execution instances will only affect one individual or family at a time, people are free to use Visual Basic code written by copying and pasting from Google searches if that's what they prefer.

Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.