Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:They do run 'cleaner' when they're not sabotage (Score 1) 496

They are not. Many independent organizations since then did the tests to confirm just that.

One German magazine made a test of several diesel cars, and threw in one benzine one. In their test, only one - diesel! - car complied with the advertised emission standard. (Don't remember the brand (not BMW). What was surprising to me is that even the car running on benzine produced the NOx.)

Another German magazine did a test too, and IIRC only BMW diesel emission was within the advertised emission standard.

The larger problem behind the scenes is that the manufacturers have promised too much to the regulators but couldn't deliver. Thus the existing Euro 6 emission standard, established on the said promises, is simply not implementable at the moment. The industry insiders told that the emission limits should be raised by at least 70% to be in alignment with the current level of technology.

Comment Re:Perl6 greatest failure (Score 1) 145

discussions of variable sigils are so far down the list of relevant considerations when discussing a programming language, I can't fathom why anyone who has coded for more than a week would actually bother mentioning them.

You probably never had to code couple thousand lines of code in a day, have you?

Perl5 is otherwise fine language. I'm using it now for more than 15 years, including using it 2 years full-time professionally.

In the past, on smaller things, Perl's syntax was not as cumbersome. But for newer code, especially OO one, the denser code is just overflowing with the sigils (and dereferences). In the older times, for small/medium stuff, one often resorted to the built-in variables. In OO code, literally everything is a user variable, and a reference more often then not. Sigils and the -> are the most typed characters and are the most annoying ones, since they are hard to type by touch. Modern Perl5 iteration lessen the burden by allowing to skip the -> in more cases than before. But the sigils have remained untouched.

Comment Perl6 greatest failure (Score 1) 145

Over the years of using Perl5 I have realized its greatest shortcoming: I have to type $/%/@ characters too often, what sometimes gets me - especially if I try to do something OO in Perl.

I have looked (again) at Perl6 recently, and was appalled to see that it used even more of punctuation than the Perl5.

As a way forward for Perl5, a special mode which allows to omit the $/%/@ qualifiers would be really nice. After all, Perl already has the "bareword" error handling: it shouldn't be too hard to make the qualifier optional.

Comment Re:The crux of the Pseudoscince Issiue (Score 1) 344

The problem isn't the theory itself but that no establishment scientist dares to criticise it or debunk it.

Some scientists bear a lot in common with religious people. Few psychologists and philosophers claim that we, humans, naturally predispositioned to have blind believes, aka religion.

Or let me put it in a different perspective. Some scientists believe that laws of physics control the world - while others know that laws of physics are just loose model describing our knowledge about the world around us.

This really is the crux of the whole argument and the whole problem here, from a different perspective. Fear of ridicule. Loss of reputation, loss of career.

And that's what we call "herd mentality". And how it is enforced: with the fear of social exclusion.

Comment Re:Germany (Score 2) 263

Let's not forget Germany already has the oddest photography laws of all western countries. It is the only country that effectively makes the art of street photograph illegal: you should have consent of all people in your picture, even in public places. All pictures of the Berlin Wall being taken down would be illegal if taken today. There's a reason Germany doesn't have Google Streetview.

That's just nonsense.

The "you should have consent of all people in your picture" is a new prevailing legal paradigm how to deal with paparazzi and such. Otherwise, the person in a photograph simply has no rights whatsoever: authorship belongs to the photog, the copyright to the organizer/etc, while bystanders have no place in the copyright scheme whatsoever.

Germany and most Europe has extended it to public places mostly because the most visited public places - the sightseeing hotspots in the Europe - are also the places where local people live and work. And they lived and worked there long before the shitty tourist epidemic.

In most countries, photographs are the property of the photographer and he can do with them whatever he wants (if it is not obviously damaging to the subjects). In Germany, that's not the case; photographers need consent not only to use pictures but even to take them. In that regard, Germany is unique and against that background, this ruling is no surprise. In fact it is completely consistent with the way Germany deals with photography in general.

First. It's not only the Germany. Lots of countries - and some states in the USA - have similar laws.

Second, the need for consent in Germany has nothing to do with the law. It is just the local tradition to ask permission if person(s) feature in your photograph prominently. It was like that even before the laws made it official.

Otherwise, in a public place one generally does not need a consent. But if somebody sees that you making pictures of them, with the help of the law, they have legal standing to request the deletion of the unwanted images. And that's normal: people on the street are not pro models, why should you be able to profit of their images, if they do not want it?

Comment Re:Ads are not acceptable. (Score 1) 523

Ads are the reason why a lot of good content can stay afloat on the web without asking for money directly, I get that. I wouldn't mind decent, simple text or image ads on the Internet. As long as they don't try to force feed me their ads down my throat, shove distracting, animated shit in my face or potentially harm my computer with uncontrolled Flash ads, I don't see why we couldn't all get along.

You comment doesn't make sense. First you say "ads are needed!" but then you go and say "unless" and list all the reasons why people install the adblockers in the first place.

That thing people call "acceptable ads" is as old as the internet advertisement itself. It didn't work 20 years ago - I do not see reasons why it would work today. Greed always wins and all "acceptable ad" networks, however good their intentions initially are, turn to shit sooner or later. Or die, because the toxic competition always outbids them.

Comment Re:what about git? (Score 1) 87

Why can't git be updated to just use another algorithm?

First off, Linus on the topic of SHA1 safety: (SO link, as the git mailing list links are flaky on me today)

The Linus' comment is somewhat outdated.

For the first type of collision - the inadvertent kind - a check was added to the git very long time ago. It will not let you commit, if there is a hash collision. The time-stamp is also part of the commit, and as such, the workaround is to simply wait one second and try to commit again.

Comment Re:Learn your mathematical operators (Score 1) 117

But that is true for all modern developers and all modern platforms.

IMO blaming developers is useless.

Or think of it in terms of the desktop software development: one does not have to bundle megabytes of libraries and frameworks with you desktop application, because they are already preinstalled by the OS.

Web? The mindless application of the "because security" argument made it impossible to even bundle something like jQuery with the browser. All sites use their own (often identical) versions and fetch them every damn time anew. Even in case of desktop browsing, this is shitty practice. Alas, "because security", browser makers decided to completely remove the responsibility from themselves.

They promote Web as a platform, but the sad reality is that making web-sites without the 3rd party libraries often reminds me of my younger days, coding in assembler: yes, you can do anything and everything efficiently and beautiful, it just takes so much time that it is simply not viable for any commercial development.

But I know, I know, "because security" nothing can be really improved or changed. "Because security".

P.S. The most profoundly ironic moment is the origin of the cross-site scripting vulnerabilities: they do exists largely because of the advertisement. Very few sites actually need multiple domains and would do fine in a sandboxed environment. If not for the web ads, the web security would have been a truly minor problem, paving the way for the much needed "web as a platform" changes.

Comment Re:Why does anyone care? (Score 1) 323

keep in mind, their cars are 100% legal in the much stricter European market

They are not. VW lied about the EURO6 compliance. The court cases are popping up all over the Europe.

IIRC, as a rule of thumb, California emission standards follow pretty closely the European ones. If VW is prosecuted in CA, then it is likely to be prosecuted in EU too.

Also, "keep in mind" most of those 10M cars were sold in EU. US market for diesel cars is relatively small.

Comment Re:"My God, it's full of waterfalls!" (Score 1) 299

Forget good requirements, no one has them.

....

It is never really done.

... and the loop is closed.

Though on global scale, IME, another problem is that the former is relatively well accepted, but the later should be never mentioned to the customer. Or to your sales. Or to your PM. Or to your colleagues.

Most people need the certainty about the results. Because result is something concrete, while the process is something distant. Because most people spend to little time understanding the whole development process and their role in it.

P.S.

Lots of little releases to throw them a bone and to get feedback

Not all customers are OK with that. For business-critical software, installing new (even minor) release and testing could be in itself medium/major project. For example, if deployment of a new release could take a month, it doesn't make sense to have a monthly release schedule. Some customers also see the too many point releases as an attempt to shift the review and/or testing burden onto them. (And I have seen that abused in real life. En lie with submarine major architectural changes in minor releases, and later demanding money from the customer to rollback, because, duh, you should have caught earlier that the architecture was changing not the way you liked it! you have all the 123 point releases which show the whole transition in fine detail!)

Comment Re:Lies! (Score 1) 341

Add to that, there are some optimizations that can be done at run-time by the JIT that can't be done at compile time.

The problem with the statement is that it misses HUGE number of over-expensive optimizations which can't be done at run-time because, duh, they are slow and very resource-consuming.

Which is why Java's HotSpot might produce fast code - but the code typically is times larger than what normal compiler would do. (Consider a simple example: It is easy to unroll the loop - but optimizing the resulting code duplication to improve the i/d-cache usage is a no-go at run-time.) The consequence is that HotSpot has to be limited in how much memory can be dedicated to the generated code, meaning that only small fraction of the code is actually optimized, and optimized only using the methods which can be actually performed in real-time.

The myth of the "good" Java performance is perpetuated mostly because the Java these days is stuck in the server-side niche (fat niche - but still a niche) where it has literally no competition, and nothing to be compared to.

so they spent a lot of time optimizing the efficiency of their standard library, more than the C++ compiler writers of the time.

That's a load of blatant BS.

First, Java standard library is full of slow retarded crap (consider the dead horse example of the String.split()).

Second, unlike Java, C/C++ are used heavily in the HPC (High Performance Computing) and there are people whose full-time job is nothing but optimizing the code, optimizing the compilers and optimizing the libraries. And some of the people are actually employed by Intel/AMD/HP/etc, the companies which actually produce the hardware and the compilers and the libraries. The vertical integration doesn't get more vertical as in this case.

Comment A decent media player (Score 1) 889

Two things I use the most on Windows and which are missing on Linux:

A media player similar to MPC-HC. (VLC's UI is kind of crap. Nowadays - animated crap. Always was and it seems that they are not going to ever fix it. Still no click to play/pause. And some keyboard shortcuts are missing too. And the video tearing is also much worse on Linux than on Windows.)

A tool similar to AutoHotKey. There are efforts to replicate the tool on the Linux, but they are all castrated because of security and missing features and whatnot.

But in reality, though the state of the video players on Linux is as frustrating as it ever was, there is really nothing I'm missing too much.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Don't talk to me about disclaimers! I invented disclaimers!" -- The Censored Hacker

Working...