Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:A language that compiles to JS (Score 3, Informative) 575

Unfortunately this is a great way to have to learn two languages (HaXe and Javascript) instead of one. I believe browser support for "source-level" operations (debugging, profiling, etc) for compile-to-JS languages will come some day, but that day is not today.

Comment: Safety dependent on altruism is doomed to fail (Score 1) 436

by tomk (#36107150) Attached to: Alabama Nuclear Reactor Gets 'F' Grade

I think most people agree that a nuclear plant can be operated safely, with a much lower environmental impact over its lifetime than a similar output "traditional" (coal/gas) power plant.

Where I think some are naive is in estimating the potential for human nature to do the things necessary to operate a nuclear plant safely for its lifetime. The problem is that most of the things required for safety (regular maintenance, proper decommissioning, technology upgrades) are high costs whose benefits do not show up immediately (or perhaps, ever) on the balance sheet. This means that no matter how well-intentioned a nuclear plant owner is at the outset, there is a chance that they will not do these things. Once an upgrade is skipped and there is no consequence, the next upgrade is even more costly, and even more likely to be skipped.

One solution to this might be more regulation, to try to force the companies to work toward goals other than the bottom line. Unfortunately, government changes over time and sometimes is clearly in the pocket of corporations rather than the public good. Assuming that you could prevent this from happening for a century or more is not realistic.

I could fault the owners of these plants for not having a perfectly spotless record of safety improvements and maintenance, or the government for failing to hold the companies to a high enough standard. But honestly, we should know better than to put our faith in any system that is inherently unstable, requires continuous inflows of money and manpower to remain safe, has an operational lifetime that spans generations, and has a large decommissioning cost.

Comment: Why the TV? (Score 1) 535

by tomk (#33894056) Attached to: Huge Shocker — 3D TVs Not Selling

Reposting from a previous 3D TV story...

If I have to wear glasses anyway, why not put LCDs in the glasses themselves? You'd get a full edge-to-edge experience, avoiding some of the weird off-screen 3D effects. You'd always be in the "sweet spot", avoiding the off-center weird geometry effects. You could go 120Hz on both eyes and make the correct matching frames appear at exactly the same time, avoiding the headache-inducing strobe effect. You would not have ghosting or other distortion caused by trying to use the same display surface for two independent images.

I am cautiously optimistic about 3D as a whole, but I don't understand why I need to buy into the 3D TV paradigm in order to get a 3D experience. I would prefer to simply use active-screen glasses.

Comment: Why the TV? (Score 1) 594

by tomk (#33479376) Attached to: The Joke Known As 3D TV

If I have to wear glasses anyway, why not put LCDs in the glasses themselves? You'd get a full edge-to-edge experience, avoiding some of the weird off-screen 3D effects. You'd always be in the "sweet spot", avoiding the off-center weird geometry effects. You could go 120Hz on both eyes and make the correct matching frames appear at exactly the same time, avoiding the headache-inducing strobe effect. You would not have ghosting or other distortion caused by trying to use the same display surface for two independent images.

I am cautiously optimistic about 3D as a whole, but I don't understand why I need to buy into the 3D TV paradigm in order to get a 3D experience. I would prefer to simply use active-screen glasses.

Comment: Firefox is now blocking the extension (Score 1) 333

by tomk (#29775521) Attached to: Sneaky Microsoft Add-On Put Firefox Users At Risk

Does anyone know how to re-enable it?

Unlike some here, I actually find the extension valuable and wish to have it active. I am quite annoyed that Firefox decided to block it without giving me any choice in the matter.

BTW I understand that my own frustration at having this blocked without consent is similar to the frustration of those who wish not to have the extension but had it given to them without consent. That does not excuse either party. As a user I am now bearing the brunt of this petty squabble between MS and FF.

Comment: Nice, yes, but perf issues... (Score 1) 236

by tomk (#28228069) Attached to: First Look At Visual Studio 2010 Beta 1

I tried out VS2010 and found it to have some nice improvements; though nothing earth-shattering for me personally, it has some little things that are nice-to-have, and I can see how those things would improve productivity. But I had such severe performance problems I had to give up using it.

In a solution with 12 C# projects and 3 C++ projects, compiling takes around 5 minutes (took under a minute with VS2008) and hangs the UI completely for nearly the entire time. It also seems to not honor dependencies quite right, because compiling a second time with changes in only one project without downstream dependencies still takes nearly as long.

I sincerely hope Microsoft invests some more effort in the performance side of things prior to RTM, if they do, I'll be happy to upgrade.

Just go with the flow control, roll with the crunches, and, when you get a prompt, type like hell.

Working...