Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Probably 15.0 kW, not 150 (Score 1) 100

15kW per house? This is Africa, not America - typical usage in Europe is 4kW per house. It is probably 40W per house in Africa. Only 0.001% of houses have A/C.

And, as pointed out elsewhere, most electricity comes from Diesel in Africa (The rest mostly from Hydroelectric).

I'm South African. You're wrong. Usage per house varies from between 1kW to 4kW. Running a house on 40W basically lights a room dimly for an hour. Also, we have AC everywhere - I certainly have AC at home, at work and in my Mercedes-Benz.

Oh, wait! You thought Africa was a poor *country*... silly you.. *South Africa* is a country in *Africa*, and we're more first-world than third-world.

Idiot.

Comment Re:Very sad - but let's get legislation in place N (Score 1) 705

Their private servers got hacked. In much the same way if I were to get mugged

Lots of people conflating individuals with corporations here.

If you leave the back door open and your customers' stuff gets stolen, you should be liable, criminally and civilly. Just as if you don't maintain your underwater oil rig properly, and there's a catastrophic blow-out and millions of gallons of crude get dumped into the ecosystem, you should be criminally liable.

The situation in this case is more analogous to there being no blow out, but deliberate sabotage. Seriously, you, at some time in your life (maybe even right now) have had under your control at least one machine with a zero day exploit that you did not know about. Should you be penalised when someone actually exploits the ...erm... exploit?

Comment Re:Very sad - but let's get legislation in place N (Score 1) 705

What makes a system insecure? The system integration/networking? The software, especially third party software with its disclaimers about "no liability for implied merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose"?

None of that matters to the legislation. It can be very simple: If you expose people's private information, that your company has collected, then the CEO and board of directors do jail time.

If that was the letter of the law, then the company officers in this case wouldn't be liable - they *didn't* "expose the data". Their private servers got hacked. In much the same way if I were to get mugged, I didn't "expose my wallet", the muggers simply took it by force.

Perhaps if you reword it...

Comment Re:Laugh (Score 1) 189

is so grossly higher than the actual price of a life

what about the life of Steve Jobs, would that be worth $10 million?

Not at all. You appear to believe that if he wasn't aruond to bring us iShinies then no one else would. The talent that is needed to bring the world iStuff is so common someone else would have done it if he wasn't around.

Comment Re:Let's wait until al Quadia discovers it (Score 2) 189

and thousands of people die the same moment because some terrorist pressed a button.

The US military is the only entity that has actually ever carried out attacks like this

You're missing the word "capable". Many many organisations and countries would love to have the capability, and they have every intention of using it as often as possible.

Comment Re:Well-regulated militia (Score 1) 684

there are five people on the supreme court that make words mean whatever they want them to mean

maybe you can ask them what the word "limited" means when it comes to copyright

You keep saying this. Crack open a thesaurus - you'll see a big difference between "well-regulated" and "state-regulated". Regulated, derived from regular, always meant "in working condition".

I understand that you want the word "regulated" to mean "state-controlled and limited", but no amount of whining is going to change the fact you being regular doesn't in any way involve the government granting you permission to dump your daily crap into a toilet bowl.

Regular means many things - ordinary, common, normal, etc. *You* are trying to redefine the word to mean state-controlled and/or state-limited.

Comment Re:He lost my vote (Score 1) 494

I consider him "mostly harmless" by comparison.

Yeah, about 90 years ago, many Europeans were saying the same thing about another crazy person. Boy, were they embarrassed!

And since then, it was said millions of times about millions of other crazy people, and those proclamations were correct. Are you really that afraid of odds smaller than getting struck by lightning?

Comment Re:No generics (Score 4, Informative) 221

Neither do you, apparently. C++ (the language, not the library) is the largest programming language in existence. Nothing is larger.

[citation needed]

A clue: there is no citation because you're making it up.

So let's consider languages where actual formal specifications exist because they have to be written in excricuiating detail because the asusmption there is no reference implementation that people can refer to if in doubt.

[snipped...]

So there you go, there are 4 standardised languages I've given you which have longer specifications than C++.

Well Done. Now, where exactly did I claim that the english-language specification for C++ is larger than the english-language specification for other languages? I claimed that the language "C++" is larger, but only a moron would use number of pages of english text as a measurement.

The C++ language, as defined by its grammar rules in BNF, is larger than any other programming language, as defined by their respective grammar rules in BNF. This is well-known and is taught in almost every introductory compiler class I've reviewed.

Go ahead - look it up. Here's the BNF rules for java, 48 general rules for the programmer to remember, very few depending on context. Here's the one for C++, 80+ rules for the programmer to remember, many of them depending on context.

I'm not going to do your homework and search for the grammar rules for the other languages which you claim are bigger than C++; just refuting the one you listed is enough for you to ask yourself "Whats a BNF and why does it determine the size of a language?" If you do not get the relationship between "this is how much language a programmer needs to keep in their head to program" and "this is how large the BNF for the language is" then I'm afraid you are beyond my (and most professional) help.

(Hint: maybe register for some CS course in programming languages and compiler design? Or write a compiler or two yourself? You would do yourself a favour and learn enough to not use "number of pages in spec" as a measurement of a languages size (and/or complexity, but I didn't even start on that))

Given your propensity to simply make shit up about C++ [citation: see above], your statements lack credibility.

Your nerdrage whenever you perceive an attack on "your" language is laudable, however I suggest you stop being so unreasonably attached to what is only a programming language (albeit a very large one). C++ is what it is. Your insults won't change that.

Comment Re:No generics (Score 2, Interesting) 221

I can look at a snippet of C code and figure out what it does, but any snippet of C++ code is likely gibberish without looking at numerous macros, class definitions, and documentation for subsets of the language I've never seen before.

Nonsense. You hate C++ because you don't know it,

Neither do you, apparently. C++ (the language, not the library) is the largest programming language in existence. Nothing is larger. If you think you know C++ then you're way too dangerous to be on a team. The best C++ devs I've managed were those who openly acknowledged the fact that it is too large and too complicated to be used without sticking to a strict subset of some sort.

Comment Re:As much as possible (Score 1) 350

> Replace these with just one straight "var" variable and let the runtime increase the size of the variable if the number would overflow.

This would break so much stuff:

* Various bit masks, like IP address subnet mask; * All the code that shifts bits to the left, and just assumes that the ones that overflow simply disappear; * Various “-1” hacks;

I'm with you on the rest, but -1 (int8_t) can be equality compared to -1 (int64_t) with no problems.

[snipped] * If you try to invert all the bits in a number, you get what, infinity?

Currently you get -1 no matter the bit width of the integer.

Comment Re:Yeah, right. (Score 1) 319

Besides, humans aren't really wired very well for monogamy. I mean, some people find that their completely natural state, sure, but most of the way we view the topic is due to societal expectation. Throughout history, the powerful have had mistresses or consorts or even kept harems, there have been entire societies that practiced polygamy at all levels, and various forms of consensual non-monogamy have been practiced more-or-less in secret for centuries even in "modern" culture.

You're talking about societies in which women had few to no rights compared to men.

Cheating may feel inhumane, but it is very, very human.

Agreed. But note well that while we are free to exercise non-monogamy, once we make a monogamy choice we are punished if we deviate from it. Sure, you can leave your wife/husband of 10 years if they decide not to "be okay" with your new choice to have many partners, but a divorce (for a man, anyway) is a very punitive experience.

So, while you are correct that humans are monogamous, and it is also correct that we are not forced into monogamy, it is also true that monogamous breakups exacts a very punitive measure.

Seems like we can't have our cake *and* eat it too.

Stellar rays prove fibbing never pays. Embezzlement is another matter.

Working...