Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:JAVA (Score 1) 414

Of course that have "real" preprocessors. I think what you are referring to are CASE tools that can be useful for any boiler-plate code construction. No matter what language you think is "real," I guarantee it is probably implemented in C or C++ or based on them.

Comment Re:Strengths and weaknesses (Score 1) 510

One of the problems the creationists and the anti-science anti-global warming people exploit is that complex scientific theories (not conjecture, BTW) can be difficult to understand and often require familiarization with a wide range of other validated scientific theories. The process of evolution is a fact. Its a done deal. Everything we find in the fossil record is also found in the DNA of a species. We can claim to know things with a degree of certitude that would be hard to defend to people who DON'T understand carbon dating, DNA, thermodynamics, etc.

Debating the "strengths and weaknesses," particularly of global warming and evolution, require a degree of education that I don't believe a high school science teacher would have.

Comment Sort of makes sense, think about it (Score 1) 317

Consider that hundreds of years ago, most common people could not read or write. It was not necessary for survival. They could speak a language and that was all that was necessary. Reading and writing became necessary. Now, most common people can read and write. That doesn't mean that they will be doing it professionally.

Maybe a better analogy is advanced maths. 99% of people need only to add, subtract, multiply, and divide. Most people live quite well without calculus. We teach advanced maths in our schools so that familiarization of the concepts will expose those with talent to see their potential. CS will work the same way. Some people will have talent and some won't. Those who don't will stop taking CS after "Introduction to CS"

Comment Not all programmers are engineers (Score 1) 568

An "engineer" is someone who "engineers," i.e. performs engineering. The guys who design dialog boxes and make things attractive, while quite valuable, are not "engineering." The guys who design stuff like motor control software, who use math and science to develop their algorithms and can "prove" their algorithm logically, they are "engineering" a solution and thus are "engineers."

Like all false choices, the "some are and some aren't" rule always works.

Comment Seriously? Come on this isn't even a hard one (Score 1) 173

You need two raspberry PI2B computers, dynamic dns, and openvpn.

Dynamc DNS service to tack B side ip addresses
OpenVPN to create the VPN
Leave the VPN on all the time using the raspberryPIs
ip route add via

(assumes your A side raspberrypi is .100, and your net is and their net is .2.0)

If you can't port-forward VPN through your ISP, you can fool it by "router hole punching"

Comment Lawrence Krauss.. With all due respect... (Score 3, Interesting) 305

I really enjoy Lawrence Krauss, and Richard Dawkins, and, alas, Christopher Hitchens etc. I am an "anti-theist" and someone who has absolutely no belief in god. That being said, I have spoken at my wfe's church, cooked for their dinners, and was friends with the last pastor. He and I accepted that we had no common ground in the spiritual world, but we both agreed that community is good, and that creating friends and being good friends and neighbours is good. How could that not be? I stood up in front of the church and said I was an Atheist and that I enjoyed the community. I got applause. This is a true story.

Lawrence, Richard, an others obviously need to continue the Atheism work that they do, but they also need to understand that this was a HUGE movement by the catholic church. HUGE. The pope is a chemist. A scientist. If you judge this pope by his words and his actions, he may be the sort of man that can lead a sizeable portion of the world population in a better direction.

I think "Atheism" and "Climate Change" are separate. If this pope did not do enough, reach out. He isn't the nazi-youth that was there previously, this is a man trained in chemistry and seems earnest. I think this is the best chance science and a major religion have ever had to work together to address a real problem facing human kind. Rather than snipe at the pope for not going far enough, holy shit guys, 1 billion people claim to listen to this guy, convince him to do better.

Comment The problem is C++ instead of C with classes (Score 1) 757

C++ is a VERY powerful system, but it is too much. The C language has 90% of what you need. Any non-trivial C application will end up re-implementing basic features in C++. The problem comes when C++ becomes, in the eyes of its developers, its own language. If used as "C with classes," many of the problematic issues are gone.

All that being said, bad developers will find a way to write bad code.

Comment sigh, boring (Score 1) 88

They have been doing this with sound for some time. Radio is just faster. (Yes, I know that is WAY oversimplified). At radio frequencies, any electrical engineer will tell you there is no such thing as digital. The edge of a square wave is not perfectly straight. It is a noisy curve based on the impedance of the circuit and the current used to drive the transition. There is inductance and capacitance in every conveyance of electricity. In a "clean" circuit, the effect of this parasitic L/C is either negligible or compensated for.

A radio antenna is, by definition, an analog part which electrically resembles a coil with some capacitance . So even the title misleading. The fact that they can us algorithms to control the digital signal in such a way that the antenna will smooth it out into a radio wave is kind of cool, but it isn't a crazy breakthrough. You can see almost every computer on a spectrum analyzer as radio wave source. This is just a neat trick, like getting the line printer to sound like music by sending the right stuff to print.

Comment When you have control, you have liability (Score 3, Interesting) 196

Just saying, "anyone can write code, be careful" gets you out of a lot of trouble. Saying "We've checked these and they are good" buys you a lot of headaches. That's the first problem. Who's going to test the extensions? Who's going to be liable when a "tested" extension is malware? It WILL happen, you know it. Who is going to maintain the cert?

No user work-around? That's pure insanity. What happens when a vendor says "This is too much trouble, we can afford to support firefox anymore," their customers will have to switch browsers.

Lastly, having any group of people dictating what others can do is against the whole notion of free and open source software. I have absolutely no problem popping up a dialog that says, "This extension has not been tested by the Mozilla Organization, Proceed at your own risk," but not even having that option is totally and completely bogus.

Time to fork.

Slashdot Top Deals

Money cannot buy love, nor even friendship.