Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

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

by mlwmohawk (#49230991) Attached to: Was Linus Torvalds Right About C++ Being So Wrong?

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

by mlwmohawk (#49037045) Attached to: Firefox To Mandate Extension Signing

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.

Comment: Its all about privacy protection and nothing else (Score 3, Interesting) 275

by mlwmohawk (#47745539) Attached to: Dropbox Caught Between Warring Giants Amazon and Google

Dropbox had a great claim, originally, that your data was secure not even "dropbox" could see it. Well, it turned out that was a lie.

The bigger issue is privacy protection. If I upload non-public information to one of these services, which one can I trust to keep that private? If there is no clear answer, then price is the only differentiator. Who's going to protect your privacy when presented with an NSL? Answer: no one. After that, who cares?

I believe that if a storage company wants to stand out and charge a premium, it needs to hire lawyers, a lot of them, to defend the rights of its customers. When you store your data on your property, you are protected by the 4th amendment, the warrant requirement, and the legal right to a defense, when you store your data in the cloud, you have little, if any, protection, and the service provider has no duty to protect your data from government requests.

Criminals, lawyers, and the general public have the same needs. If you can't protect criminals, you can't protect the general public. Data storage has never been about the bits. It has always been about the meta requirements: security, longevity, recoverability, and yes, cost. The google/amazon threat is about cost, what about the other requirements?

Comment: Cynical attempt to lower tech wages (Score 2) 253

by mlwmohawk (#47413829) Attached to: US Tech Firms Recruiting High Schoolers (And Younger)

Tech companies want to make sure the Zuckerbergs make a gazillion dollars, but tech wages get driven down. 501(C) organization like FWD.us are all about getting "immigration reform" which includes a lot more H1B, which means you distort the intellectual capital market by bringing in more workers and thus driving down pay. Why pay money to an american with school loans when you can lobby government to get someone who can work for less as an H1B serf.

Paying kids is a new twist on this game. So, why even pay people who have careers, lets pay our employees even less by hiring children?

It is a race to the bottom, and make no mistake, it is so the rich can get richer. I don't want to sound like an "occupy wall street" loony, but don't workers deserve reward for their work just as much as industrialists. 40 years ago, CEOs only made a few hundred times more than their average employee, and that was scandalous.

These guys complain about the "economy," but that facts are clear, the U.S. economy was better when we had more wealth distribution, stronger unions, and a growing middle class. They want us to be China, and unless we figure out how to stop it, we will be.

Comment: Re:Who are you? (Score 1) 646

by mlwmohawk (#47309277) Attached to: Washington Redskins Stripped of Trademarks

So you're a Mohawk and you think it would be a good gesture for the European aggressors to make up for the centuries of genocide by... not calling a football team the Redskins?

It would be a fantastic start for the "European aggressors" to stop thinking of the indigenous peoples as something other than mascots, yes. Once they realize the blood they spilled taking this continent from its rightful owners was, in fact, human blood, the blood of people, they may be more humane.

Comment: Re:Who are you? (Score 1) 646

by mlwmohawk (#47294079) Attached to: Washington Redskins Stripped of Trademarks

Yea, Mohawk. LOL. Seriously, the French call themselves French, being "European" is fairly a new thing.

The Mohawk are part of the Iroquois which is huge number for tribes from Canada down to Florida on the east coast who share a basic language. The Lakota are in the midwestern USA in the dakotas and Sioux is probably the tribe you know best. There were over 500 different nations with a population more than twice Europe before Columbus came here. It wasn't until the white's diseases came here that decimated the indigenous populations.

Remember what the "black death" did to europe in the 1350s, the diseases the white man brought to this continent did about the same to its population. In europe every one got it at roughly the same time, so no invaders could capitalize on it. The indigenous people of this continent were not so lucky.

Comment: Who are you? (Score 3, Insightful) 646

by mlwmohawk (#47267617) Attached to: Washington Redskins Stripped of Trademarks

My great grandfather was Mohawk. I typically say I'm part Mohawk, not indian or native American.

What is going on is the idea that a race of people were/are in the process of genocide against the native population of a continent for over 500 years. The whites have dehumanized the various peoples to the point where individual customs and ways are nothing more than trendy new-age fads. Rather than a proud people, the whites depict them as mascots and comic book characters. When they take offense to being dehumanized, they are told to get over it.

The whites did not win the Americas (stupid name), it was the european diseases that did. If the natives were not in decline because of new diseases, the europeans would never have token hold. The whites merely capitalized on continent wide pandemic that they brought here.

So, if the people who had democratic representation and centralized trade routes BEFORE the magna carta, whos only offense is being in the way of white european aggression, say stop dehumanizing them, maybe it would be a good gesture.

Comment: Re:So sick of Google This Google That (Score 2) 358

by mlwmohawk (#46806433) Attached to: Google: Better To Be a 'B' CS Grad Than an 'A+' English Grad

From the fate of other 'search' companies (some of which were very good), I'd say the board at FAST were correct - and that you're the idiot.

So, you are saying, two competing companies doing about the same thing. One quits the business, the other goes on to be HUGELY successful, and I'm the idiot for calling the quitting company's manegement idiots? Sorry Bjorn and Larvik screwed the pooch and killed a potentially golden goose.

Google isn't a multi-billion dollar company because they're exceedingly good at search - they're a multi-billion dollar company that's exceedingly good at delivering advertisements (only a fraction of which are on their search pages).

You may have missed what I wrote: "Google sells ads, nothing else even comes close on their books."

Comment: So sick of Google This Google That (Score 5, Insightful) 358

by mlwmohawk (#46804815) Attached to: Google: Better To Be a 'B' CS Grad Than an 'A+' English Grad

In 1999 Fast Search and Transfer was neck and neck with google for speed, volume, and accuracy. The board at FAST were idiots and said there was no money in search and basically stopped trying and let google win.

What I learned in this time is that Google was no better than FAST, and is no better than any other company. They won because viable competition walked away. Google's only real innovation was thier revenue model. Right now, Google has BILLIONS to toss at projects. We hear about a LOT of successful or nearly successful projects, but how many failures are there that we never hear about? Its easy to be innovative when you are grossly profitable.

For any "hiring practice" to be better than any other, you need to *prove* that the cost of labor compared to productivity (innovation, etc.) that is directly related to revenue has a better ratio than that in other companies. Frankly, I don't see it. Google sells ads, nothing else even comes close on their books.

Google is just the Microsoft of the late '80 and early '90s. A pundit's darling, a fictional yardstick by which the ignorant measure what they don't understand.

Comment: Elephant in the room (Score 1) 233

by mlwmohawk (#46667233) Attached to: Most Expensive Aviation Search: $53 Million To Find Flight MH370

OK, lets say it. Bullshit. We all know it didn't crash.

It takes a series of catastrophic failures for a 777 to crash. Sure, it happens, but it is very rare. It is an extremely unlikely event.
Now, we also know that the various telemetry devices on the plane were manually disabled by the flight crew.
We also know from the telemetry they didn't know about (or could shut of, the engine pings) that the engines ran for about 5 hours after other telemetry was turned off.
We know the plane turned "off course" after the last radio contact.

Given all these facts, do you really think it crashed? Of course not. It landed somewhere.

The cruising speed of the plane is about 560 miles/hour. It was in the air for 5 hours after it's last known location, that's a 2800 mile radius. This gives us a 24 million square mile area to search. If we have 1000 crews searching the area, 80 hours a week. If it takes 1 hour to search a square mile, it will take almost 6 years to find it.

Someone or something was on that plane that someone wanted. The plane was stolen, BY THE PILOTS, and landed somewhere. We will not find the black box, well, maybe on ebay.

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Working...