Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


+ - AngularJS Releases Version 2.0; Rebranded to CircleJS

Submitted by eldavojohn
eldavojohn (898314) writes "Popular JavaScript client-side MVC framework AngularJS has announced a new release and rebranding after days of hard work and midnight development. Version 1.3 (codenamed AcuteJS) was shortly followed by version 1.4 (codenamed ObtuseJS) and now the project has finally come full circle. "Moving to TypeScript has allowed us to implement four-way data binding between the keyboard and database," the sole developer who devotes 17.2% of his time to maintaining AngularJS said, "a keystroke is now just a few hundred thousand digest cycles away from being stored through your browser to the server — of course your printer will receive a promise." Despite criticism of event listeners triggering other event listeners that then, in turn, trigger the event listeners that triggered them, CircleJS looks to be a forerunner in the race from micro-MVC to nano-MVC architecture."

Comment: Re:PHP is fine (Score 1) 179

by Bogtha (#49367843) Attached to: Modern PHP: New Features and Good Practices

Absolutely and evidence of this is always only a Google search away. Search on how to do something with a database and the results you get are riddled with things like SQL injection vulnerabilities, even when the source of the official documentation.

To follow on from this: Language Community Litmus Test: Database Placeholders. An informal survey shows PHP joint bottom, with all but one of the top 5 hits for "PHP database tutorial" promoting insecure methods.

And, as you mention, the official PHP tutorial had beginner-level security holes in it for YEARS. The whole community is riddled with this crap.

Comment: Democracy in action (Score 5, Insightful) 68

by Dunbal (#49350681) Attached to: PayPal To Pay $7.7 Million For Sanctions Violations

That's the nice thing about lists. The government says you're on it, and that's that. No proof required. No means to defend yourself or prove your innocence. Nope, you're on the list, and now we're going to bully everyone and cut you out of all the conveniences of modern life. Those who don't co-operate, well, you wouldn't want to be "aiding a terrorist" now would you?

The "free" world has gone insane, and I despair when I see a whole new generation growing up that doesn't seem to have a problem at all with this modus operandi.

Comment: Re:it could have been an accident (Score 1) 737

by Dunbal (#49344617) Attached to: Germanwings Plane Crash Was No Accident

Or if that is not possible then there has to be a mechanism for the pilot outside the cockpit to enter irrespective of what the other pilot does.

Agreed. The problem is how do you prevent someone unauthorized from getting hold of this "foolproof" entry method into the cockpit by any number of means, including the low tech solution...

Comment: Re:it could have been an accident (Score 5, Insightful) 737

by Dunbal (#49344573) Attached to: Germanwings Plane Crash Was No Accident

No. You are trying to explain a mechanical failure of a door right at the moment when the aircraft suddenly starts descending into mountains all the while during which the copilot also does nothing to try to correct this unscheduled descent and also ignores air traffic control. Seriously if it has wings and floats on the water and looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck. Your version requires many, many things to go wrong at once. The simple answer is, of course, only one thing went wrong - the co-pilot locked the door and set the plane to descend. Occam's razor, and all that.

Adding fuel to this theory is that the co-pilot was detatched and monosyllabic when receiving the briefing about landing in Dusseldorf - he had already made up his mind that he wasn't going to reach Dusseldorf. If the pilot wasn't going to go to the bathroom he probably was planning on killing the pilot anyway.

Comment: Re:Yeah! (Score 1) 197

by Dunbal (#49344429) Attached to: Japan To Build 250-Mile-Long, Four Storey-High Wall To Stop Tsunamis
You're thinking of a wave not a tsunami. Think about rapids in a river, and the standing waves you get over those rocks that are much higher than the surrounding water. A tsunami has a waveLENGTH of several km at least. That is a LOT of volume of water that is going to move up and over the wall.

Comment: Re:Will that be enough? (Score 1) 197

by Dunbal (#49343445) Attached to: Japan To Build 250-Mile-Long, Four Storey-High Wall To Stop Tsunamis
No and no. This is a "feel good" project so that politicians can convince people they are doing something effective while not actually addressing the problem at all. In the meantime I'm sure that the politician's cousin/uncle/brother-in-law who surprisingly "won" the bid for construction is very happy. Politics as usual.

Nobody's gonna believe that computers are intelligent until they start coming in late and lying about it.