Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Chrome - the web browser that's added as bloatw (Score 1) 223

by swillden (#49612363) Attached to: Chrome Passes 25% Market Share, IE and Firefox Slip

The claim is that it's added to a "lot" of products, and that that explains its growth and its presence on millions of machines

That is not the claim at all. The words that OP used were "hardly surprising" and "gains an advantage". Do you deny that paying people to use Chrome (which is what this is in essence) doesn't give Google an advantage? Perhaps they just like to pay companies to bundle products for no return.

Capcha: sincere .. lol

Nice selective quoting. The original claim was that it "gains an advantage in market share" due to being added "as bloatware to a lot of products". The claim was specifically that growth in market share was due to being bundled.

And what evidence do you have that Google is paying anyone to include Chrome?

Comment: Re:Looks like the prophet's gunmen (Score 1) 746

by swillden (#49612267) Attached to: Two Gunman Killed Outside "Draw the Prophet" Event In Texas

Given the uses for a gun exactly what use would you have for one that would merit bringing it to work with you?

Same as why you'd want one anywhere else that you're not hunting, target shooting, etc. -- defense of yourself or others in the unlikely but possible case that it's necessary. People are occasionally murdered at work, same as anywhere else.

If you are so afraid that you need to carry a gun to work with you, then you may want to consider moving to a safer area.

What does fear have to do with it? I'm not particularly afraid of fire, but I have a fire extinguisher and smoke alarms. I'm not afraid of driving my car, but I have insurance. I'm not afraid of minor injuries, but I keep a first aid kit in the car. I don't expect to lose my job, but I have savings. I don't expect to be sued, but I have legal insurance. Like a hundred and one other ways in which the prudent person is prepared, having the means of self-defense is a good idea.

In my 30 years of owning guns, I've drawn a weapon on a human being precisely zero times. I've used a gun to shoot at or injure a human exactly zero times.

Same here, if you ignore some experiences in the military (where I also never shot at or injured a human, but I did have to draw).

Given my lifestyle, I fully expect that I'll carry my gun for 50 years and never once need it. I certainly haven't in the nearly 10 years since I started carrying it daily. Further, I sincerely hope that I'll never need it, just as I hope not to need my life insurance for a very long time. But in the event something really bad happens, I've done what I can to prepare.

Comment: Re:Oh come on. (Score 1) 236

by shutdown -p now (#49607745) Attached to: Long Uptime Makes Boeing 787 Lose Electrical Power

The main reason why people recommend it is because of what happens if you mix signed and unsigned. If they are of the same size (e.g. signed int and unsigned int), then according to the spec, the result will be unsigned. So you divide, say, -2 by 1u, and get something very unexpected. If you always use the same signedness, then you can dodge this problem, and in general you do want to represent negative numbers every now and then, hence the default is signed.

In practice it doesn't work so well simply because so much of the language and the standard library uses unsigned anyway. For example, sizeof is unsigned, and so is strlen(), and in C++, size() on all the standard container types, including string. So if you want to write C or C++, you have to deal with signed/unsigned mismatch anyway.

Comment: Re:Sanders amazes me (Score 1) 376

by shutdown -p now (#49607521) Attached to: Bernie Sanders, Presidential Candidate and H-1B Skeptic

You want to play this game? Fine. I'm well within the 1% of US by income, and while the majority of my income isn't from capital gains, they are a sizable contribution due to stock bonuses and such. I'm quite okay with making personal income tax more progressive, and raising capital gains tax to match personal income, even though that would mean more money taken out of my pocket every year. Why? Well, perhaps because I don't want another Baltimore in my neighborhood?

Comment: Re:Bernie Sanders (any real shot at winning?) (Score 1) 376

by shutdown -p now (#49607405) Attached to: Bernie Sanders, Presidential Candidate and H-1B Skeptic

This implies that communists would be against worker cooperatives, which isn't true in general. Marxist-Leninists are, but there are other kinds of communists, including anarcho-communists and Luxembourgists who like cooperatives just fine.

The real difference is in the ultimate goal. Communists are a subset of socialists who believe that it is possible to create a classless society, thereby resolving the class conflict once and for all, and removing the need for any form of state and societal oppression (and hence the state itself - communism is supposedly a classless and stateless socioeconomic system). They typically believe that this is only possible by undergoing through a transitional socialist period, but how that period looks varies depending on the brand of communist, and pretty much any socialist form of organization is claimed as the best by some group somewhere.

Socialists who aren't communists don't generally believe in that future perfect society, and for them socialism is a way to achieve socioeconomic justice and fairness (as they see it) here and now more so than just a means to advance to the point where said justice and fairness is inherent and self-sustaining.

Comment: Re:Let's see, stranger things have happened (Score 1) 376

by shutdown -p now (#49607369) Attached to: Bernie Sanders, Presidential Candidate and H-1B Skeptic

I'm a liberal here in US on an H1B visa, and I'd support Sanders if I could (obviously I cannot vote, and I cannot legally contribute to his campaign). I disagree with his position on the visas, but it's one thing out of many, and there is way more important fish to fry short term.

Comment: Re:He's also an interesting candidate for this (Score 1) 376

by shutdown -p now (#49607353) Attached to: Bernie Sanders, Presidential Candidate and H-1B Skeptic

A big part of it is support for electoral reform. I may disagree with a candidate on 99% of his platform, but if his 1% includes making it easier for me to get the candidate that I actually like into office in the future, that's the 1% I'll care about most. And this usually comes from the fringes of both left and right, from people like Pauls or Sanders.

Comment: Re:More like to his own parents (Score 1) 161

Heh. That shows what I get for relying on my memory rather than looking it up again.

I'm particularly embarrassed that I followed a previous poster's lead in mispelling Gary Kildall's name.

Though, as the article you linked explains, Kildall did have a chance to make this deal and blew it, leaving it to Gates to pick up. Had Kildall been a better businessman Microsoft would never have become what it did, regardless of Gates' mom's connections.

Comment: Re:Vacuum robots (Score 1) 45

On the topic of vacuum robots...

Has anyone seen any vacuum robot that integrates with central vacuum? I'd love to have the robot's base station connected with my central vac so when the robot returns to charge the central vac empties the robot and maybe even cleans its filters a little. The combination would be true launch-and-forget ongoing carpet cleaning.

Comment: Re:Chrome - the web browser that's added as bloatw (Score 1, Insightful) 223

by swillden (#49606081) Attached to: Chrome Passes 25% Market Share, IE and Firefox Slip

I've seen it included with CCleaner and Avast. It's a plague.

You're referring to CCleaner and Avast, I assume? The AV industry is certainly a plague on the world.

Anyway, thanks for the specifics. I found some information that says CCleaner's installer asks if you'd also like to install Chrome -- it isn't bundled; it prompts for an additional download, AFAICT. I don't see anything about Chrome related to Avast other than that Avast has a Chrome extension.

Even assuming those are true, are the any other packages bundling Chrome? Is it just AV vendors? The claim is that it's added to a "lot" of products, and that that explains its growth and its presence on millions of machines. I don't think CCleaner and Avast are enough to move the needle significantly, even if they both always installed Chrome.

Comment: Re:More like to his own parents (Score 1) 161

Maybe. But IBM approached Kindall first. I strongly suspect that if he'd said "Sure! I'll license it to you for $5 per machine", IBM would have done the deal with him. There really weren't any "back room" negotiations required; it was a pretty straightforward deal.

It is perhaps possible that Mary Gates learned that IBM would be interested in a licensing deal, but I'm skeptical that John Opel would even have known that much about the project. IBM was an enormous company and the PC project was a small effort that nearly all of the company thought was irrelevant. It occurs to me that perhaps Mary Gates talked to Opel and found out that he didn't know much about it, and realized that the project didn't have much internal support, and from that deduced that the execs in charge were fighting internal opposition and might see a licensing deal as a way to get to market faster and cheaper before they could get shut down.

But all of that is purely speculation. What is clear is that (a) IBM did approach Kindall first and he ignored them, and (b) an OS licensing deal was good for the PC project. I see nothing to indicate that IBM wouldn't have accepted such an offer from Kindall.

Comment: Re:More like to his own parents (Score 2) 161

You were obviously not there at the time. Bill Gates got rich because IBM signed the daftest contract in computer history from their point of view. Yes: IBM - the company known for hiring the very best in legal expertise signed away their arms and legs

Why? - I would like to know that!

I don't think it's so strange. IBM didn't expect the PC to be a success. It was a niche project pushed by a few execs over the objections of more -- who saw it as undercutting IBM's real business, to whatever degree it was successful -- and ignored by most of the company as irrelevant. Other parts of the company were actively trying to kill the project. The group developing the PC needed an operating system and needed it quickly. They couldn't take the time to build one, assuming they could find the budget, and likewise couldn't pay a lot of cash up front. Licensing an existing OS for a low per-unit cost was an obvious win.

And, of course, by the time it became clear that the PC was a success, it was too late to change OSes, and by then Gates would've been a fool to sell. Besides, the cost to IBM was low and the machines were selling well. As long as IBM was the only company selling PCs, there really was no significant downside to IBM, and IBM was confident in its legal teams' ability to shut down clones... until Compaq performed a successful clean-room reverse engineering of the PC BIOS.

It ultimately boils down to lack of foresight, that the PC would be so important, and that IBM couldn't prevent clones. Without understanding those, IBM had no reason to insist on ownership of the OS.

"In the face of entropy and nothingness, you kind of have to pretend it's not there if you want to keep writing good code." -- Karl Lehenbauer