Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: Well, sure, but... (Score 1) 292 292

Anyone who (apparently) gets this upset over a simple discussion on the Internet is either a troll, or someone who feels so powerless in their real life that stirring up shit on the Internet is the only way they can feel relevant.

Yet you got modded down, and I got modded up. Sadly, it wasn't because you dared to speak the truth, though I'm sure in your persecuted world view that's what you think went down. But no, you got modded down because you're just another internet dimwit.

Comment Re: Well, sure, but... (Score 1) 292 292

Hoo-kay.. you're just yet another pedantic, argument-loving internet person, and as such I'm not taking you seriously.

Anyone who says shit like "daring to state the truth" is pretty much automatically not to be taken seriously. The fact that I called you on such a pathetic attempt at melodrama doesn't make me argument-loving, it just means that you're full of shit.

Comment Re: Well, sure, but... (Score 1) 292 292

Listen, guy: of course it's all speculation right now.

You would do well to pay attention to the portion of your comment that I quoted. I'll quote it again for your convenience:

and, naturally, I will now get modded down to (-1, Troll/Flamebait/whatever) for daring to state the truth

That bit where you anticipate being modded down for "daring to state the truth" is utter bullshit if what you're doing is speculating.

Comment Re:Swift (Score 1) 352 352

Sure, it has come to pass. Everybody has a web presence without the need to personally hire a programmer. Everyone can compile graphs and charts of their data and advanced analytics
reporting without the need of a programmer. No, programmers haven't gone away and someone
still needs to write the programs but many of the tasks that once required a programmer now can
be done via a service without a programmer.

None of those things are actually examples of programming, nor are (or were) any of those activities the domain of programmers. Word processing, graphic art, illustration, sure. But there's no logic or flow control in any of those examples.

Comment Re:Swift (Score 1) 352 352

The general population does seem to have problems with complex logic problems. There are some intermediate programs like ifttt.com that seem to work ok for the general population but I consider ifttt still for power users and basic useful stuff will continue to be simplified until many of the things done by programmers today can be done by someone who doesn't understand complex logic.

The pundits have been predicting such a scenario since sometime in the early 1980s. To date, it hasn't come to pass, and I'm pretty confident in saying that your vision is right up there with flying cars.

Comment Re: Well, sure, but... (Score 2) 292 292

and, naturally, I will now get modded down to (-1, Troll/Flamebait/whatever) for daring to state the truth

But here's the thing, and this is a really important thing: while some things you say are true, most of what you're saying is at this point speculation. And honestly, you sound more than a bit unhinged to me.

Comment Re:Swift (Score 1) 352 352

BZZZT! No.

Web pages (the kind you're talking about, anyway) do not employ logic. They do not employ any kind of procedural operations. They do not employ the concept of several / many / hundreds of moving parts. Web pages of the kind you are referring to are little more than RTF documents. There is plenty of convincing evidence that the general population can use word processors. There is no such evidence that the general population can deal with even the most basic coding constructs.

Comment Re: Swift (Score 1) 352 352

Or programmers who use a bunch of bested if statements because they don't understand XOR, or freak out when they see a ?: statement.

To be fair, I've seen some genuine coding atrocities committed with ternary operations. The programmer thought he was being clever. He was so clever, in fact, that a year later he couldn't quite tease apart all the edge cases in his very compact (and largely impenetrable) code.

I'd call that bad code.

Comment Re:11 rear enders (Score 2) 549 549

Obeying every traffic law guarantees getting in accidents. It might not legally be the robot's fault but they did cause it because they aren't following the rules of the road. Because of that, they flow against the normal progression of traffic and cause disruptions which lead to accidents.

This is complete and utter bullshit. Far be it for me to defend Google (*spit*) but to even suggest that the Google car had any culpability here is incredibly stupid.

Comment Re:Tidal? (Score 2, Insightful) 574 574

What his excuse for not putting his music on there?

Because it's not really about the sound quality, as he asserts.

As it happens, I've listened to Neil Young on and off over the years. Excellent sound fidelity is definitely NOT especially noticeable on his records, nor is excellent sound fidelity something that his music particularly benefits from. His strengths lie elsewhere, which is why this whole PONO thing and now his fake streaming protestations ring especially hollow.

Comment Re:For an alternative (Score 1) 581 581

I would argue that if the places that exist to be heard are so small that they are barely noticed, that is an effective stifling of free speech.

Would you in the same breath argue that you have the same right to be heard as everyone else on the planet (or the country of your choice)? If my posts aren't elevated to the front page of reddit, does that mean that censorship is occurring because my voice isn't being heard as widely?

Comment Re:For an alternative (Score 1) 581 581

No, censorship is when something is censored. Government censorship is when the government censors something. Someone might even self-censor to avoid offending others, even out of pure politeness.

I think most of the semantic confusion here boils down to the fact that censorship isn't precisely the opposite of free speech.

Even when a corporation engages in censorship, that does not in fact strip an individual of their right to free speech. It just means that the corporation isn't willing to help the individual exercise their right to free speech. There may be other corporations that are, and there may be other avenues (i.e. the public square) where the individual is still free to engage in free speech.

In order for censorship to be the precise opposite of free speech, it would have to take place in all contexts, not just the context that a given corporation happens to control. Hence, the reason why the First Amendment is focused on prohibiting government censorship, and why censorship in other contexts is so much less important.

Comment Re:For an alternative (Score 1) 581 581

Private censorship is still censorship, and it can potentially become as big of a threat to social progress as speech repressed by the government. For example. lots of social issues have been avoided in mainstream media because of corporate/political incentives to stay quiet about the subject.

Not exactly. Sure, corporations could collude and tend to reduce the audience that one has access to. But those corporations, in all likelihood, would be unable to stop that individual from standing in a public square (on a proverbial soap box) and delivering their message directly to the unwitting public. So the individual still has an audience, but the audience may not be as big as the individual would like. Is that still censorship? No, I don't believe that it is. The person still has all the elements of free speech. The fact that the individual doesn't have as large an audience as they would like is really very much secondary.

On the flip side, if the corporations were obligated to help every individual reach as large of an audience as they would like, what do you think the practical consequences would be? To start with, we as fellow individuals would be drowning in a sea of literally billions of unwanted messages.

I know which side you are arguing for. But I am fairly confident that if you thought about it for more than 10 nanoseconds, you wouldn't actually want what you're arguing for.

% APL is a natural extension of assembler language programming; ...and is best for educational purposes. -- A. Perlis

Working...