Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Does not computer (Score 4, Interesting) 258

Even more damning was that the Note 3 was still faster than the G2 when run using 'stealth' (basically renamed) versions of the benchmarking apps which did not get the boost."

Not sure how this is "damning". I'd have thought it would prove the principle that the optimizations aren't app specific.

What am I missing?

Comment Re:Figured it out yet? (Score 4, Informative) 203

Correct (other than the inflation thing, where you meant deflation). Essentially Bitcoin's "Growth" is (a) engineered to slow down to a standstill in a few years and (b) cannot in any way be related to the growth of the underlying economy. If the economy tries to grow 10% in a year, and would under normal circumstances, assuming there's not already slack in the monetary base, there will not be enough Bitcoins to cover the increased commerce.

About the best you can say about it is that if we had a problem where people are doing too much work, Bitcoins would fix that...

Now, in fairness, I should point out that Bitcoin's defenders here normally argue that it's all OK because what can happen is banks can issue tokens equal in value to a single Bitcoin, backed by a smaller number they'd have in reserve combined with themselves (because they're effectively loans of one bitcoin to the person who takes one.) This is called Fractional Reserve Banking, is used in the real world, works well, and has the itty-bitty problem that virtually all the people who seem to be obsessed with Bitcoins really, really, really, don't like FSB, considering it a form of fraud. It isn't, it's a quirk of accounting, but it's hard for many people to get their heads around as is the fiat money system, so they get upset and start saying "What we need is something backed by something real", "Oh, I know, what about a whole load of computational power that's lost when making the coins", "Yes, great idea, even though it doesn't make sense because you can't turn the coin back into that computational power so it isn't, actually, backed by anything after all", and then this happens.

Comment Re:It is true (Score 3, Informative) 408

Uh, whut?

Akin didn't say that getting pregnances due to rape were uncommon. He said that rapes rarely result in pregnancy, because the female body has a way to "shut down" pregnancies in such circumstances.

So no, there was never a germ of truth in what he said, especially as, for reasons yet to be explained, there is actually statistically a higher chance of getting pregnant if you've been raped than if you've had normal sex.

Comment Re:Not a big deal (Score 1) 415

Funny thing is that most USB, microUSB, etc, cables I've used have lasted considerably longer (that is, I think I've had one break - and that was due to abuse - in my entire lifetime of using them) than any of the 3.5mm jack cables I've used in the last few years.

It'd be nice if MHD took off to a degree that people started selling MHD headphones and put MHD sockets on car stereos for you to plug your phone into.

Comment Re:Sure, it's good today (Score 1) 415

They're not mandating a standard, they're mandating use of a standard. It's up to the industry to pick one.

FWIW, while I think MicroUSB sucks (as do all USB connectors), this isn't because their connectors break easily - they don't. I'm not entirely sure why you've had such bad luck, but it's pretty uncommon.

MicroUSB sucks because, as with the full size USB connectors, they're four dimensional objects, which is why you generally have to turn them around at least twice before they'll slide into the socket. It remains a mystery why the use of four dimensional physics, which is a groundbreaking advance in technology, was used for USB connectors in a way that'd make them harder to use, and not for anything useful like teleportation or making washing machines that don't lose socks.

User Journal

Journal Journal: DeviantArt thinks this is spam 2

[Just saving this here in case I need to point to it. Long story short - never try. Someone posted a question. I wrote an answer. Then wasted five minutes signing up because DA pretends you can comment when you don't have an account then hits you with the sign in barrier. So you sign up, enter lots of crap, open Yahoo mail to retreive the confirmation email, confirm, then you're landed me on an unrelated page. So I had to back out until I found the comment form in my history. Fortunately t

Comment Re:MATE RULES! (Score 1) 218

Well, a number of reasons spring to mind. The most obvious is that GNOME felt it necessary to create GNOME Classic in the first place, which was introduced as soon as it became clear that the end of GNOME Fallback was a major problem that was forcing people to leave GNOME.

There is a reason GNOME Classic exists. It wasn't created in isolation, it wasn't created as a third party project by some developer with an itch, it addresses a very real problem that the direction GNOME was heading in is simply unsustainable and virtually nobody likes it.

What good does it do to the GNOME project to spend time developing GNOME Classic and then throw it away afterwards?

Right now it's clear that no post-desktop UI is viable for PCs running GNU/Linux. Virtually nobody is using GNOME Shell. Ubuntu is actually losing users because Unity just doesn't cut it. Other DEs such as KDE have, after flirting with the concept of post-desktopism, though not actually making major steps to implement it, have steered clear.

And now, to the extent to which GNOME 3 is used, it's by the remaining Ubuntu users who use it with Unity instead of GNOME Shell, or who use it in fallback mode.

GNOME's developers have shown that they understand this by developing GNOME Classic. They'd have to suddenly forget they know this to then throw it out.

So no, to you, and to the AC who keeps insisting that RedHat demanded it for RHEL 7 but will suddenly switch to GNOME Shell for RHEL 8 because look over there pretty colors, I just don't buy the "It's a trap" argument. At this stage, it seems infinitely more likely that GNOME Shell will slowly (not immediately, it'd be too humiliating to suddenly drop years of work that so much has ridden on) lose GNOME's focus. If it survives as GNOME's primary focus, it'll be purely because the tablet-PC convergance that Microsoft is currently pushing becomes a thing. And maybe that'll happen, but even Microsoft wasn't stupid enough to ditch the desktop entirely.

Comment Re:MATE RULES! (Score 0) 218

If GNOME is a slave to Red Hat, and Red Hat doesn't believe GNOME Shell is viable, why, exactly, would GNOME Classic go away after RHEL 7? Wouldn't it be more likely that GNOME Shell would go away after RHEL 7?

Comment Re:Canonical's Hubris (Score 1) 631

Of all the things you can accuse Canonical of, Hubris is the least of their issues, if not the exact opposite.

Canonical believes, with some justification, that the GNU/Linux desktop cannot stand still, that what they've done so far is not good enough. Their problem is that they've taken this principle too far. In what feels like a blind panic they've taken the Mac UI and dumbed it down considerably.

Why the blind panic? Well, two reasons: first, tablets. That's something on the mind of every desktop OS developer at the moment.

The other: GNOME. Canonical wasn't going to be able to just merge in upstream updates from GNOME any more, with GNOME 3 everything was changing, from revamped APIs, to the GNOME 3 UI itself. The available options to Canonical were simply this: maintain, alone, an obsolete branch of GNOME, use GNOME 3 with the deeply unpopular UI updates, or attempt a hybrid approach and merge in the core of GNOME 3 but with a UI that Canonical would be able to maintain and that would suit the rest of Canonical's agenda.

In a sense, they've done the same thing as Microsoft. They've ignored the fact they had an excellent UI that nobody was complaining about seriously, believing what they have to be not good enough for the future. Microsoft didn't develop Metro because they thought they were awesome, they developed it because they thought they weren't. And Canonical's done the same thing.

And unlike Microsoft, third parties - the GNOME developers - were pushing Canonical into a corner and had the power to do so.

And, you know, I'm not going to be like every Slashdot whiner and condemn Canonical for this. They're far sighted. They're trying to push things forward. It's just, ultimately, Unity (and, in all seriousness, there are no other serious problems with current versions of Ubuntu, all of the complaints are about Unity) is just not quite what's needed.

The hope, I guess, is that GNOME Classic will finally give Canonical an out, something they can use to bring back the friendly, familiar, and powerful UI of Ubuntu past.

Comment Re:Some people... (Score 2) 621

Completely agree.

FWIW, when I was in my very early twenties, I played a game on my Amiga called "Hired Guns". It was awesome. Recommended to anyone with UAE and access to an abandonware copy.

It also, literally, gave me nightmares. Over several nights. I'd stop playing it, pick it up a few weeks later, and the nightmares would start again. And yeah, they were images related directly to what was in the game, it wasn't some weird coincidence where I'd have a dream about scary ponies or something.

That was in my early twenties. And Slashdot's legion of child rearing experts are now telling you that you're a terrible censor for being careful about what games your kid plays because it might have effects they're too young to handle.

(FWIW, one of the issues that lead our dear friend and Slashdotter role model Hans Reiser to kill his wife was that she wasn't entirely happy about his insistance that his kids play violent computer games with him. Even though said kids were effected enough that Nina was able to argue, successfully to a court deciding custody issues, that they had PTSD.)

My wife and I have different views about what's harmful for our child, with strong differences of opinion on when to have the birds and the bees talk, for example: but I'm pretty confident we see eye to eye on video games. Any zombies more realistic than "Plants vs Zombies" are going to have to wait until my daughter's old enough to seek out that content. The only pill popping she'll see will be in PacMan. GTA V? Or VI, X, or M? That'll have to wait.

Slashdot Top Deals

A fail-safe circuit will destroy others. -- Klipstein

Working...