Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Deal of the Day - Pay What You Want for the Learn to Code Bundle, includes AngularJS, Python, HTML5, Ruby, and more. ×

Comment Re:Those who can, program. (Score 1) 90

I'm a professional developer with a post-grad degree in Mathematics.

There's an ounce of truth in what he says, not the part about computer scientists or software engineers somehow being better than scientists, on the contrary, you're largely right because most programmers decry maths and claim it doesn't matter to them, but they're really just the dross of the industry. Maths is what separates someone reinventing the wheel by condemning themselves to produce CRUD applications for all eternity from someone who comes up with genuinely new and novel bits of software. Those with an understanding of maths are the ones who give us everything from the highest quality programming languages to Google search, and increasingly beautiful game engines to AI solutions like Siri.

But I digress, the point intended on making is that the fact is that those with computer science have been the ones helping push the largest gains in science in recent years, whether it's the type of data handling required at the LHC or entire subjects like bioinformatics. We've long passed a point where much scientific discovery can come from lone individual geniuses, and are entering an era where many problems are impossible even with merely teams of people. We're at a point where leveraging computing power is essential to much further scientific discovery, and for that you need computer scientists who both understand the science, and the machines needed to drive the discoveries in said science.

In this day and age I'd pity the scientist who looks down on computer scientists, because frankly in most areas of science it means they're building their own path towards irrelevance and failure. It's unlikely they'll ever achieve anything in most scientific fields if they're not willing to work with those who understand how to command the machines, or who do not learn themselves to command the machines and themselves become computer scientists in the process.

Comment Re:Legality? (Score 1) 314

Agreed, I don't see a legal issue with this, they have the right to serve what they want from their servers assuming it isn't outright malware.

Similarly though, users have every right to use countermeasures to bypass this because they also have the right to do what they want in terms of manipulating any content served to them for display. It's one of the key design features of web standards dating back to even the earliest versions of HTML - the idea that a user agent can process data in a manner that best suits the end user whether that's ripping out style sheets and images, applying high contrast style sheets for better readability, or refusing to accept certain additional content from the server or referenced servers.

Yahoo can do this legally all it wants, but it's just entering an arms race it can never win - the end user has control of their user agent which means the user can always determine what is and isn't rendered to screen at the end of the day and nothing Yahoo can do can ever override that.

Comment Re:Budget (Score 1) 63

It was the Foreign Office but in 2011 they started shifting it onto the license fee and closed a load of services as a result.

Now that they're reversing some of those closures I don't know if that means it's being moved back to the Foreign Office budget or not but I can't see how they can foist the expense of this onto the license fee given that they've already moved some welfare for pensioners onto the license fee. Normally you'd hear the BBC vocally complain if they were, but they seem silent on the issue so far, so I think in this case to be fair it's probably coming from central government again like it used to and not the license fee.

Comment Re:Good (Score 4, Insightful) 118

"Space travel and exploration are the future of the human species."

Oh, bullshit. Not for the next presidential term, not for the next century, probably not for the next millennium. If you think investment in space is more important than, say, ensuring the future habitability of Earth, you are foolish, or simply don't care, in which case you are psychotic.

Comment Re:Annoying (Score 1) 329

And that is probably one of the biggest mistakes the losing side of just about every war has ever made - underestimating their enemy.

You're also talking about the sorts of people who have concoted some rather clever IEDs, who have managed to intercept predator drone feeds, and who have been managing to survive in bombarded cities cut off from all food and water supplies for years.

Some, such as the Glasgow airport attackers are even Phd students/graduates. Their explosives experts put together bombs and detonators that take a wealth of scientific knowledge and can counter some of the most advanced jamming tech the world's leading military - the US has been able to research and deploy.

You're talking about people who have been able to create a defacto nation state in the middle of the sovereign territory of two nations that have themselves struggle to even build something loosely resembling a stable state.

Yes, there are a lot of stupid jihadis, the ones who kill themselves are frequently dumb drones who fall for the crock of shit about dying to get a hundred virgins. But behind each of those dumb fuck suicide bombers are incredibly intelligent explosives experts, incredibly clever and manipulative recruiters whispering in their ears and telling them what to do.

So tell me, who do you think goes out buying their equipment, do you think it's the suicide bomber drones themselves, or the people who kit them out in the first place?

To pretend all islamic extremists are merely dumb is dangerous and naive. Even Sun Tzu all those centuries ago understood that you should never underestimate your enemy - and that holds true to this day. To simply write them off as dumb is the surest way to get more of our soldiers and civilians killed.

"Sometimes insanity is the only alternative" -- button at a Science Fiction convention.