Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:How about a search function that works? (Score 1) 1836

I have been reading Slashdot since the late 90's (I didn't create an account until the filter controls switched to those slider bars and layout changed a lot and became pretty horrid -- an account gave me some preferences to turn off a lot of that crap). Never, in my entire time reading slashdot, has the search function been even remotely useful. I've always had to use google (if it was even around when I started) to do any actually useful searches for content on slashdot.

Comment Re:Can Go still not load shared libraries? (Score 2) 221

Static linking might be semi-adequate for stuff that you compile at home, but for any code that's distributed using static is a sabotage.

I think you've got that backwards. Dynamic linking is fine for stuff you compile at home, but for any code that's distributed, using dynamic linking will often cause your binary to *just not work* on another system.

Missing a shared library? Which package does it come in? Oh crap, that package requires dependencies I don't have, or are the wrong version, etc.. Or you have the shared library, but it is a different version, and the size of a structure or something changed, or a variable doesn't exist anymore, and your binary crashes, won't run with it, or produces corrupt output. Or you go through all of your dependency Hell and update all the libraries you need to install the package with the missing shared library, only to find that the libraries you updated caused other programs to break for similar reasons to why yours wasn't working with your current library version. Newer versions of libraries do not always maintain binary compatibility with older versions.

Some programs should just be statically linked, so that they will always work on any version of any distribution. Otherwise, there may be no avoiding a recompile and its associated dependency Hell. Static linking is a compatibility God-send.

Comment Re:They _ARE_ strangling (Score 1) 258

People could try voting for different politicians I suppose, but they seem unwilling out of the irrational fear of losing what they have.

I keep seeing this solution trotted out from time to time on Slashdot, but the reality is closer to the South Park episode, where we a given the choice between voting for a Giant Douch or Shit Sandwich. It's not that we are unwilling to vote for different politicians, it's that there are no different politicians presented to us to vote for.

Comment Re:Now get Pluto designated a planet (Score 2) 68

Schoolchildren are bing taught there are eight planets

Actually, Bing-taught kids are learning that there are 13 ;P A search for "number of planets" returns the following quote from

"For those of us who believe dwarf planets should be counted as a subclass of planets, the latest status is that our solar system now has 13 planets: four terrestrial planets, four jovian planets, and five dwarf planets."

Comment Re:This sounds like... (Score 1) 421

Snowpiercer was a lot better than Highlander 2, though. The first of the movie was lame in both movies. The end of Snowpiercer was lame, too, but the middle part of the movie was full of good action and some intrigue, and at least the plot was reasonably internally consistent. I enjoyed the middle of Snowpiercer. Highlander 2, on the other hand, was lame throughout. Highlander 2 was indeed a "really terrible movie", but I don't think I'd use quite that term for Snowpiercer. Only the beginning and end of Snowpiercer were "really terrible" :) Overall, if you like action movies, then I think Snowpiercer averages out to a "mediocre".

Comment Re:ATI/AMD has had shitty drivers for 20 years (Score 1) 160

Remembering back to some long ago slashdot stories, John Carmack had some interesting comments regarding driver quality in his 2002-02-11 .plan entry:

"My judgment was colored by the experience of bringing up Doom on the original Radeon card a year earlier, which involved chasing a lot of driver bugs. Note that ATI was very responsive, working closely with me on it, and we were able to get everything resolved, but I still had no expectation that things would work correctly the first time.

When I have a problem on an Nvidia, I assume that it is my fault. With anyone else's drivers, I assume it is their fault. This has turned out correct almost all the time."

Sounds like things haven't changed all that much in this respect...

Comment Re:Remember Final Cut Pro X? (Score 1) 598

Even Woz wrote a rant (now pulled it seems) about ditching OS X in favor of Linux over the frustration of the mounting shit-pile of bugs and anoyances with OS X You can read comments about Woz' post here: []

Maybe Woz did at some point write a rant somewhere against OSX, I don't know, but this isn't it. The link you provided is to a rant by a Geoff Wozniak, not Woz (Steve Wozniak).

Comment Re:Because it sucks when you can't compete..... (Score 1) 96

Google Maps isn't a good example in this case, due to Google's ever-increasingly bad UI design (sort of like slashdot beta...). With the latest round of changes to make google more smart phone friendly, google maps became more difficult to get to (scan for non-text icon, click, search for another icon in the drop-down, click), rather than just clicking the word Maps that used to be on the top bar. I now find it faster to simply type "maps", hit return, and click the first link, than to try to navigate their more difficult to use UI. For other things, such as Google Scholar, I gave up on trying to find it in the pulldown menus entirely, and have to use google to find its own service in order to use it. So, yes, if I'm using google, and I search for one of their services, then I definitely want the google service as the first link. But this is more due to my working around poor UI design than my desire to determine which Maps site is the most popular.

Along similar lines, I have to use google to search for old slashdot stories, since slashdot search does, and always has, sucked. Same for many other forums. Also many other websites in general, where it can be difficult to figure out how to navigate/find the content that you want. I use google as a workaround to the failings of many other websites poor UI/search design. Google Maps is another example of this, so, at least from my perspective, it's not the best example to use to make your point :)

Sorry, I just felt like ranting against increasingly poor website design, and this post brought that to the surface. Not like anyone besides maybe the original author is going to read this when I'm only getting around to reading the article 2 weeks after if was posted anyways....

Comment Re:Taste like chicken? (Score 1) 107

A quick google search turned up the following paper

I wouldn't go so far as to say that chicken is the closest living relative to the T-Rex, just that it is the closest in sequence similarity to this particular collagen protein, out of all of the protein sequences known in 2007 (chicken could have been the only bird represented in the database at the time, but I am not going to take the time to look into this).

I just searched the GVQGPPGPQGPR T-rex collagen sequence given in the text against the NCBI nr database, which is pretty comprehensive. It yielded the following Collagen alpha-1(I) chain perfect matches:

Brachylophosaurus canadensis [dinosaur]
Tyrannosaurus rex [dinosaur]

Sarcophilus harrisii [Tasmanian devil]
Monodelphis domestica [Gray short-tailed opossum]

Corvus brachyrhynchos [American crow]
Gallus gallus [Chicken]
Manacus vitellinus [Golden-collared manakin]
Pseudopodoces humilis [Ground tit]
Anas platyrhynchos [Mallard duck]
Geospiza fortis [Medium ground finch]
Acanthisitta chloris [Rifleman]
Columba livia [Rock dove]
Melopsittacus undulatus [Parakeet]
Falco peregrinus [Peregrine falcon]
Falco cherrug [Saker falcon]

So, that's 11 birds, 1 other dinosaur, and 2 mammals (one placental, one marsupial). The list gets bigger if we relax the sequence similarity cutoff. Based on this single fragment of a sequence, we can infer that T-rex is generally more closely related to birds than to mammals or lizards (and no lizards made the top-hit list), since there were a lot more bird matches than mammals (and the lack of mammal hits is likely not due to lack of sampling relative to birds). This is a big inference to make from a single fragment of a single protein, but I'm reasonably confident that further analysis of additional T-rex sequences would strengthen this finding.

If more sequences have been published since 2007, then perhaps we could get a better idea of which modern bird T-rex is most closely related to, but there is no way to determine this from just the single example sequence above. We cannot say with any confidence that T-rex is more related to chicken than to any other bird, unless a much more thorough analysis is performed using a lot more data. Perhaps this has already been done, but I haven't taken the time to hunt for additional literature.

Slashdot Top Deals

"For the man who has everything... Penicillin." -- F. Borquin