Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



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

Comment Re:Obama should do a fact check... (Score 4, Insightful) 413

You mean, like the people in Bangkok who are feeling the problem of sea level rise every day (of course, they're also doing it to themselves due to over pumping of ground water)? Even if they stopped pumping water, that 2.5mm/year is still going to drown them very soon. Then again, I'm guessing they're all just "selfish self-centered coastal living fucks that have no sense of scale", and are all above the poverty line...oh wait....

Comment Re:Oh boy, here we go... (Score 1) 413

Given healthcare costs going up due in part from pollution, we just need to slap these costs onto radiation/toxic gas/sludge/CO2 producing coal fire plants and you'll see those figures fly right up. I don't think we even need to get to carbon taxes before these coal plant operators go belly up.

Comment Re:Could not agree more (Score 1) 413

I don't know, but I thought most left-leaning people in the US aren't against gen4 or above anymore? Furthermore, I think the argument against nukes are more nuanced -- most people aren't against nukes...they're against crappy nuke constructions, like Fukushima. But because they don't have any way of controlling the construction process, they go for the outright banning action.

Comment Re:Could not agree more (Score 1) 413

I also do find it interesting that the Tea Party has slightly better scientific understanding than the average non-Tea Party-er. But given more data from this link, it seems to me that non-Tea Party Republicans are the true scientific illiterate population (not only do they have to lower their own average, they have to also be low enough to drag down the positive contribution of the Tea Party members).

Comment Re:Google doesn't target ads (Score 1) 233

You should really reread the post of the person you're responding to. Let me put it in a simple way: the coaching schools explicitly paid more to show their ads when is a male on the other end. That or others (non-coaching service) paid more to show their advertisements when it's a female on the other end.

Comment Re:Back to the future .. (Score 1) 126

No thanks. I don't want a VM that has mandatory built-in GC and a bunch of other nonsensical limitations. Provide me one which I can allocate and commit virtualized memory and a safe method for system access with all the facilities/opcodes of an ideal modern multi-core processor.

Comment Re:Not relevant? (Score 1) 89

Do people not also see the connection between increases in privacy breeches and global warming? Exactly. Correlation != causation, otherwise we better stop going to see the doctors.

I think it's the other way around -- people are moving to the cloud because they see themselves as bigger targets and can't adequately protect their own systems compared to another company who spends billions hardening theirs. If the hackers can spend 2 seconds breaking into your system vs taking 2 years to penetrate Google's, I'm pretty sure they're going to infiltrate 500k servers like yours instead of bothering with Google's. This is probably also why CaaS is the big new thing now.

Comment Re:Power savings (Score 1) 98

I don't know why you're attributing this. One of the leading firms for 3D stacking is Tezzaron, and they've been around for more than a decade. You can give credit to AMD for taking on the risk of 3D memory, but not for innovating it -- other companies did most of that work.

Comment Re:Not much of a debate... (Score 1) 161

Yes yes, I know your type. The ones that say "don't use anything the system was designed to be used, and only do things as if you're working in C". I.e. don't allocate all the time, don't modify the structure of the object after construction, make types easier to infer for JIT, etc.... That, or maybe you have 0 clue about what performance really means.

Comment Re:Yes, Please!!! (Score 1) 161

Except:
1) Mobile CPU/GPU is still 50X slower than desktop (i.e. your CSS transitions are 50X slower...hardware acceleration included).
2) Mobile RAM allowance is still 10X lower than desktop (i.e. less resources loaded, prefetching, more thrashing, less JITed code, less unboxing, etc...).
3) No native look and feel, so everything seems out of place.
4) Still takes 3 years to get anything through the JS committee, and god knows how long before browser adoption.
5) Users still can feel latency even if backend is optimized (queue post about X% drop in latency equates to Y% increase in app usage/engagement).
6) Did you know that FB was originally all HTML5 on mobile? Did you know solely because of that decision, they were at most two quarters away from going belly up -- until they shipped their mobile app which turned everything around?

The fact that you brought up desktop being your primary client goes to show how little regard you have for the problems on the mobile platform.

The goal of science is to build better mousetraps. The goal of nature is to build better mice.

Working...