Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: As a Java/C/Python Multiplatform Programmer. (Score 1) 250 250

No. Its not an the decline. It's a rock solid language and in a few cases i had to bind complex functionality on windows systems in a controlled way, and used C# and it was a very good experience. I donâ(TM)t see any reason that the language will decline soon. maybe it wont have explosive growth, but Java did neither grow from one day to the next.

Comment: That must be a joke. (Score 1) 1067 1067

I take that the OP is neither a mathematician nor a physicist (as i am). NaN is a reasonable "Default" value for 1/0, and has the advantage that it propagates without you checking for it.

A physical or engineering simulation which divides by 0 should return NaN or terminate.

And yes, the serious reason would be that if an engineer uses ANSYS to validate if the bridge is structurally stable, i donâ(TM)t want that some asshat intentionally accepts bad meshes (i.e. meshes with "empty/zero sized cells" without errors.)

Comment: Re:You'll get ignored. (Score 1) 479 479

I agree. the only thing which you can do is follow the instructions a little bit better than the idiots (i knew people who were not ablt to plug in the network cable at the end from where they pulled it from the router....), thus achieving the "go ahread messages" in theyr sheet a little faster.

Then try to extract information from them. For example i could verify during the fixing of the router if they really were doing something or just acting, since i asked very specifically about what has happened, and always looked if they included definitive information.

In that way you can make cure that they dont get stuck in some state (like waiting forever for a service of a subcontractor) and you can estimate the chances and the expected time of success...

Comment: It may be opque... (Score 2) 22 22

but i think it is far from worthless.

We can derive some facts from it:

a) the majority of access by the government and courts seems to take the legal route (which does not mean these accesses are completely ok with me)

b) a significant part is beyond control

c) I wont be affected; if the number of intransparent requests is less than 250, they are most likely not targeting me.

Comment: In my experience (Score 1) 538 538

Old chemistry university textbooks (even for beginners) contain everything you need to know about how to make explosives.

It may be less condensed (you actually may have to read 100 pages), and it may not be in the form of "mix a and b and cook on the oven at 200 degree", but I would not follow some simple recipe withou understanding every step anyway (i actually dont play with explosive chemistry at all, too many stupic kids blew off their fingers).


Comment: Re:Quantum Computing Required? (Score 1) 294 294

Former quantum computing researcher here:

Linking High-level Brain functions to Quantum Computing is BS. Long before we reach the technology to build a QC big enough to compete here, we will have the technology to build a calssical computer simulating the brain. As a matter of fact, since the brain is mainly associative and works in by throwing away lots of infromation, which is something which is not good for QC.

Gosh that takes me back... or is it forward? That's the trouble with time travel, you never can tell." -- Doctor Who, "Androids of Tara"