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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re: ...uhh (Score 1) 183

So when you show some alien that you know a constant, you also have to show them that you actually intend to show it to them.

No. All you have to do is show intentional order. Numbers do that well before they take on roles as constants. receiving 1,2,3,4,5,6... would wake up any of our scientists. In any base.

Until we can determine that we're hearing something intentional -- which a certain (fairly minimal) amount of order is sufficient to do -- how good at math and physics some aliens are isn't much of an issue.

Although, of course, if 11110011011001 (11 1 100 1 101 1001) was resolvable on some SETI person's printout or display, I'm pretty sure the top of their heads would blow right off. :)

Comment They're all Special Butterflies, you see (Score 1) 173

Because everyone got an A+

Yes. Perhaps they should first concentrate on students achieving at least a reasonable standard of reading comprehension, writing (and I know I'm going out on a limb here) grammar and spelling competence.

Instead of passing students through like shit in a goose regardless of performance.

Comment Re:Well (Score 1, Redundant) 145

No, wait. Is this one of those "evolving language" things where "editor", which used to mean "person who corrects prose" is now the word for "person who screws up prose?"

This could all be my fault.

Although I should point out that in the current social mindset, "my fault" actually means "their fault" or "your fault" or at a minimum, "someone else's fault."

Comment Well (Score 4, Funny) 145

as an attempt to reduce the differences between Linux distributions in an effort significant effort

My effort significant effort is effectively effortless. It's the effort effect at work. So there.

"editors" -- I don't think that word means what the slashdot "editors" think it means.

Comment Wordplay -- there's fun in the whooshing sound (Score 1) 70

It's ok. I realize wordplay makes a -->hash<-- out of many people's thought processes, and they can't do something as simple as moderate well in that kind of state. Not offended at all; there's no -->collision<-- between my feelings and clueless moderation of my posts. It strikes me as sad when other people's posts are similarly abused by moderators who can't -->look up<-- long enough to see what's being said, but hey, that's slashdot, where anyone can moderate for any reason, or no reason, or the wrong reason. And does. As we have seen here. There's no -->link<-- between the -->list<-- of who can moderate and who can "get it." Even when you provide the right -->pointers.<--

It's very much of like sarcasm. Without tags, some people are just lost. But the tags take part of the fun out of sarcasm, wordplay and just about every other form of humor, so I tend not to signal that hard, except as in the first paragraph here, when it is certain I'm dealing with someone who just "isn't going to get it" otherwise. Sarcasm or humor, wordplay or not. But... if you don't get it, you don't get it. S'ok. Regrettable, but still ok. I still had fun writing it. :)


o hash - SHA1 related term, also means confusion in the mind
o collision - hash related term, also means one thing disturbing another
o look up (lookup) - hash related term, also means change one's point of view
o link+list - technique used in hashing to resolve algorithmic collisions, also a joining of items
o pointers - variables which can be used to index a hash, also an indication to something

Bonus study material:

o acrostic technique

No, no. No need for thanks. Glad to help you out. :)

Comment Re:Maybe (Score 1, Offtopic) 350

True, but if you behave like an ass when expressing your opinion you will be moderated accordingly.

Good grief. "-1 I wouldn't have said it that way" isn't a valid mod option either.

Face it. Moderation here is pitifully lame because there is zero relevant accountability. No after-the-fact hand slapping does anything at all to recover a ruined post. I almost always end up spending my mod points trying to undo asshat "I disagree", "I'm offended", "I'm republican", "I'm shedding SJW tears of the eyelash forest", "I'm democrat", "I'm libertarian" moderation malfuckery. Not to mention having to spend mod points correcting mod stalking, where those with mod points go around modding their "enemies" down. It's obvious, but it's a real waste of a very scarce resource -- there are tons of good AC posts, for instance, that deserve more than a zero. Not to mention interesting opinion and true bit, pieces and whole blobs of good information mods clearly "don't like" something about, such as your "I don't like the way you put that" concept. Another problem that arises is that when a mod point has to be spent correcting a pernicious or wrongheaded moderation, it can't be spent bringing a good post into higher profile. And mod points are scarce, so this really has an impact.

Some moderation is also astonishingly deficient in dealing with humor and wordplay (case in point, look up at first few posts in this story.)

The only *possible* way these problems can be remediated under the current system is to get someone sane, or several someone's, into a position where they can moderate continuously (and without crippling their ability to participate -- for instance, although I have the time, and I like spending time on slashdot, I wouldn't be the least interested in such a position if it meant I could only comment anonymously anywhere I moderated. I can barely tolerate it now, with it only impacting me every few days, for only one story.)

As always, the posts represent a large portion of the site's actual value; the moderation system as it stands reduces that value more often than it increases it.

My own partial solution to the broken moderation system here is to browse at -1 all the time so that irresponsible (and worse) moderation can't hide things from me. It doesn't solve the problem of good posts being excised from some (or all) of the conversation, but at least I get to read what they said in the first place.

I know, I know. First rule of moderation club is "-1 offtopic, don't talk about moderation." That's likely a large part of why it never gets fixed, too.

Comment You can't just string a hash together (Score 1, Funny) 70

Sorry, this isn't that serious. You can't just walk up to a geisha 1 day and in fits and starts
handle all the encoding black-hattery of some random pasha 1 character per line. Seriously, duh
All this won't flip anyone's ricksha 1 morning. Another thing: SSL's still safe. At best it's a
1-time (or... maybe 2) opportunity to replace someone's kasha 1 grain at a time. But probably 1

People are always available for work in the past tense.