Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:I am amazed (Score 1) 136

by jc42 (#49784229) Attached to: A Text Message Can Crash An iPhone and Force It To Reboot

People keep arguing that /. doesn't support Unicode, when it really does - it just uses a narrow whitelist of characters. The reason for this is obvious if you think about it - to prevent situations like this from happening.

Heck, there might be strings out there that will crash any Unicode library implementation, just we haven't found them yet because the search space is huge.

Hmmm ... That tempts me to try a test using a couple of file names on this machine that are two of the names for a Mandarin-English dictionary: .html and Ptnghuà.html (and also Pu3Tong1Hua4.html for systems that can only accept ASCII ;-). Those names aren't in any sense obscure or tricky; they're strings you'd expect to see in online discussions of text handling in various languages. If you can't handle at least these trivial Chinese strings, you've failed pretty badly. Of course, they look findin this Comment: panel, and will likely survive the Preview button.

Let's see how /. handles them ...

Nope; the 3 Hanzi characters didn't show at all, and only the à showed correctly in the second name. But both everything looks correct in this second editing widget. This proves that /. hasn't damaged the actual text in the Preview. Let's see what happens when I try to post it ...

Comment: Re:reasons (Score 1) 303

by squiggleslash (#49781275) Attached to: Why PowerPoint Should Be Banned

It's not the same thing three times though, and the context of this very discussion should tell you that.

Each of the three components is radically different, but there shouldn't be much redundancy - each of the three serves an entirely different purpose and only one actually contains the core information you need to remember.

The introduction ("you tell them what you are going to tell them") is warning you what's coming. That means giving you context and a road map for the information that follows. Think of it as, say, the marketing blurb for the book you're about to read.

The second ("You tell them") is the information. This is long, and your brain under normal circumstances isn't going to be prepared for that information. Hence the warning and roadmap.

The last ("then tell them what you told them") is the reminder, the overview that makes it easier to remember the information. It's the roadmap for returning here, rather than the simplified roadmap for finding your way there for the first time.

If someone is repeating the same thing three times, they're doing it wrong. As you saw, it's easy to set context without being overly redundant, and a reminder of what you just heard is always helpful.

Out of interest, while this was a little TL;DR (doesn't matter if you're stuck in a meeting ;-), did you feel it was overly redundant? The "Each of" paragraph was "you tell them what you are going to tell them", the "If someone is repeating the same thing three times" was the "then tell them what you told them". The bit in the middle was the core information. I'm not a great communicator, but I doubt you spent the entire thing saying "Why does he keep saying the same thing over and over again? What a jerk!" But if I'd launched into just that middle part, and not provided context, it wouldn't have immediately clicked as to what relevance it has to your concerns.

Comment: Re:Surprised those edits weren't reverted (Score 4, Informative) 117

I think there's a sense of defeat amongst most Wikipedia editors right now, that if they revert the removal of sourced, no-BLP-problems, negative information from Wikipedia, they're going to end up in a fight that leaves them banned for "edit warring" or "incivility" by admins and arbs more keen on the appearance of dealing with conflict than on resolving real issues with off-site organizing of vandalism and harassment.

I wouldn't recommend anyone get involved in that hole for a while, and as such I reluctantly discourage anyone from reading Wikipedia for anything but the least controversial articles - unless they're also willing to put the work in and examine page histories, checking references, etc.

Comment: Re:Ho hum (Score 1) 240

Actually the legal difference between hard core and soft core, is that the latter is simulated, the former is technically "real". That is, for example, showing an actual erection would count as hard core pornography.

But yeah, porn is inherently unrealistic: the pizza delivery guy never arrives that quickly after you place your order...

Comment: Re:Why do this in the first place? (Score 1) 90

Because of the three existing mobile platforms, two have gatekeepers with a veto on what can and cannot be installed. This makes it exceptionally difficult for Mozilla to make mobile browsers with any chance of success.

This is only not important if you think:

1. Mobile devices will never become the most common way of accessing the Internet
2. Android (the sole platform that allows the user and only the user to ultimately decide what's allowed to be installed on their device) will always have a huge market share, so big that iOS and Windows Phone/Mobile/whatever it's called today will always have a negligible marketshare.

I suspect (1) is already false. (2) is laughably false. So this is important for Mozilla.

Comment: Re: Great Recession part II? (Score 1) 732

by Cyberax (#49772733) Attached to: Greece Is Running Out of Money, Cannot Make June IMF Repayment

The Fed has caused a series of bubbles by fucking with interest rates. Latin American debt, the dot-com bubble, and the most recent real-estate bubble are just three in a series going back to the Fed's inception.

Prove it. Prove that Fed's action have directly caused the recent bubble. So far the evidence that the cause was your child-raping activities is so much more plausible.

Also, anyone who provides links to Mises to explain something is a moron.

Comment: Re:females operate on emotion, not logic (Score 1) 415

I actually know something about the material at hand. The meta-studies of sources reveal that most of the data about who initiated the conflict is BS: http://www.domestic-violence.m... see page 20 (table 5) and further. It turns out that men under-report it (duh) and so you can't rely on that data.

And even your article shows that men are more likely to inflict serious injuries or use weapons.

Comment: Re:females operate on emotion, not logic (Score -1) 415

No, I haven't made it up. For example, see here: http://www.strengthenoursister... I've seen this number lots of times in various studies and have little reason to doubt it.

And 'initiated by women' is so fucking bullshit, that you should be ashamed of yourself and crawl back into your cave. If a woman berates his boyfriend for being drunk and he beats her in turn - that still is 'initiated by women'.

Comment: Re: Great Recession part II? (Score 1) 732

by Cyberax (#49770531) Attached to: Greece Is Running Out of Money, Cannot Make June IMF Repayment

Coming from you, that carries no weight at all.

Unlike you, I actually understand the economy. How that hyperinflation that you predicted is going so far, by the way?

All enabled by the Fed. You really weren't paying attention, were you?

No. It was not 'enabled by the Fed' in any way. Not even in the 'it failed to regulate them' way.

Without the Fed holding down the interest rates by inflating the currency, rising rates would have limited the pyramiding of debt on debt.

Dude, if you had at least two brain cells you could have checked this hypothesis easily. The only way Fed could 'keep rates low' is by buying securities using newly created money. This kind of intervention should be easy to check.

So let's check the evidence: - there was no explosive increase in the M1 aggregate until the QE policies started post-2008. And even M2 aggregate shows nothing unusual:

Actually, I believe that you caused the 2008 crisis by raping little children in a DC kindergarten. That theory has about the same connection to reality as your ramblings.

It's not so hard to lift yourself by your bootstraps once you're off the ground. -- Daniel B. Luten