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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: And how many were terrorists? Oh, right, zero. (Score 5, Insightful) 276

by sideslash (#48653039) Attached to: TSA Has Record-Breaking Haul In 2014: Guns, Cannons, and Swords
These were items confiscated, i.e. stolen from citizens. Heaven forbid that American citizens think they have a right to keep and bear arms. Bearing arms is the mark of a terrorist. Not the kind of terrorist who actually blows up buildings or shoots people, mind you, rather just one who plays the part of "Terrorist" in the Security Theater.

Comment: Re:Watson is a scientist (Score 1) 235

by sideslash (#48567181) Attached to: James Watson's Nobel Prize Medal Will Be Returned To Him

Probably has something to do with the fact that "measurable intelligence" doesn't have any scientific basis.

That's politically correct baloney. Tests can be devised to gauge many types or aspects of intelligence. You can measure an individuals aptitude and/or ability, and then use it to predict in a very general way how that individual will perform on various tasks that benefit from such intelligence.

Comment: Re:Watson is a scientist (Score 2) 235

by sideslash (#48567141) Attached to: James Watson's Nobel Prize Medal Will Be Returned To Him
I characterized it as his expressions of honest (at least I take him at his word) opinion.

You appear to be part of that species of fence sitters who are unwilling to commit to anything even when your position gets ridiculous. Of course some intelligence tests have some part that is biased toward cultures. They are still of some use at estimating the parts of intelligence we most care about for practical purposes. And more particularly, IQ tests are useful at predicting aptitude to excel at Western intellectual pursuits including academics in general. Do you disagree with that?

Comment: Watson is a scientist (Score 5, Insightful) 235

by sideslash (#48566675) Attached to: James Watson's Nobel Prize Medal Will Be Returned To Him
Watson is a scientist. He's very intelligent. He's also a fallible human being. And he's old. Put all those together and you have a recipe for some unfiltered opinions. As long as he's honestly speaking his opinions, I personally disagree with blacklisting such people from society.

When you think about it, our culture's political correctness has some weird quirks. Religious views, put forward as religious views, are summarily shot down, because ours is supposed to be a secular society informed by science. But there is a strong dogma that genetics is not a factor in the observed disparity in measurable intelligence between sub-Saharan Black Africans and Ashkenazi Jews. This dogma doesn't have any scientific basis that I'm aware of; the best that can be said is that we don't (yet?) understand all the many factors that affect intelligence. Therefore (correct me if I'm wrong), honesty should compel us to admit that genetics, including genetics exemplified in racial groups, may constitute major factors in intelligence. And therefore, Watson's fundamental heretical belief may be... true? Is it OK to talk about this?

Comment: Re:Good reasons for Swift and Go (Score 1) 161

by sideslash (#48538607) Attached to: Why Apple, Google, and FB Have Their Own Programming Languages

The only substantial way of improving on string concatenation in Objective-C would be to introduce custom operators, and that brings its own set of issues. The other alternatives sacrifice consistency.

I think it's telling that the ultimate way Apple found to improve on Objective-C is to put it on a retirement path by introducing a replacement language. That's mostly all I'm saying here.

Comment: Re:Good reasons for Swift and Go (Score 1) 161

by sideslash (#48535205) Attached to: Why Apple, Google, and FB Have Their Own Programming Languages
The problem isn't clear naming of variables. It's boilerplate in the library that you can't get away from. Talk about making your skin crawl, try doing very much with NSString's. Anyone who has worked in a high level language with a concatenation operator (typically "+" or "&" or ".") will feel bewildered at the ridiculous hoops Objective C makes you jump through.

Check out: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/510269/shortcuts-in-objective-c-to-concatenate-nsstrings

Every action that should be common, quick and simple requires forming a committee.

Comment: Re:Good reasons for Swift and Go (Score 1) 161

by sideslash (#48534787) Attached to: Why Apple, Google, and FB Have Their Own Programming Languages

And personally I have no objection to methods with long names - it helps me understand what has been written when I return to a program after months (or a year) away. The long names actually make the code more readable and maintainable.

No, in many cases the extra length is just ridiculous boilerplate. And even in cases where the extra length clarifies what's going on, you can do the same thing in other languages, i.e. every language supports use of meaningful names.

Can you seriously argue that concatenating a string in Objective C is elegant?

Be careful! You're repeating yesterday's Dogma of the Faithful. Apple fanboys now have corporate blessing to move to Swift, and you may find yourself left behind. /joke, joke

Comment: Good reasons for Swift and Go (Score 3, Interesting) 161

by sideslash (#48533181) Attached to: Why Apple, Google, and FB Have Their Own Programming Languages
Swift needed to be created because Objective C stinks, and no other modern language would have fit smoothly into the Smalltalkish legacy of the Cocoa framework. I'm just glad that the Apple fanboys who constitute most of my fellow iOS developers are finally allowed to believe bad things about Objective C, at least now that there's a nice alternative. Made me a little sick before to hear people praising Obj-C while writing reams of ridiculously verbose code that nobody will want to maintain 5 years from now.

Go is a fantastic language for server side development with concurrency that's not painful to wrap your head around, and is perfect for cloud development in Google's world.

Won't comment on Facebook Hack, since it's not clear to me why Facebook itself needs to exist. But to each their own...

Whenever a system becomes completely defined, some damn fool discovers something which either abolishes the system or expands it beyond recognition.

Working...