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


Forgot your password?

Submission + - Luxembourg Prime Minister Resigns over Spying Scandal (

ArsenneLupin writes: Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker, Europe's longest-serving leader, Wednesday said he would step down over a scandal involving the small country's small secret services, who were alleged to have created a "big mess" by indulging in a spate of misconduct on his (or rather: Mister Mille's...) watch.

When will president Obama follow suite?

Comment Errmmmh ... what was your question? (Score 5, Interesting) 304

Sorry, your rambling - that is supposed to be a question I presume - is a tad incoherrent. But I do think I catch your overall drift, so I'll chime in:

I think the overall issue is basically about programming languages. Wether it's some software runtime enironment or the other - in the case of JS Node.js just happens to be the first to revive JS on the serverside.

To the case:
Wether or not a PL takes over is dependant on things that usually have nothing to do with the PL itself. Once a PL is sufficient enough .... ok, scratch that. Take for instance PHP. PHP was a joke when it becam popular. 2 guys had a thing called Zend engine and they decided to craft it around a Perl based templating "language" that was becoming popular - mostly because Perl is quite bizar to handle and it was the most popular web scripting language back then. They built PHP 3 based on the zend engine, then a mod-php was added for the popular webserver Apache and the rest is history. All things went web, as a result we have PHP pissing into serious Java territory today. I remember when PHP was a joke and JSP seemed to be posed to rule the webworld for decades to come. That didn't happen, mostly due to political reasons. ...
Had Netscape released their webserver as FOSS back in the mid-90ies, we'd all be using JS as serverside language ever since, since JS was the serverside language on the Netscape Enterprise Server.

I think compiled languages are impractical for web environments, for reasons everyone can come up with, so that rules out C and C++. For every environment that is set up from scratch I can't think of a single expert that would recommend .Net. .Net exists because it banked on the existing Windows/MS legacy. The MS CLR may be a neat feat, but it is a MS lockin trap, and today it's mostly pointless, since abundant server power, virtualisation and simular things have made optimisation concerning multiple runtimes on one setup a non-issue.

This leaves us with JIT/bytecode compiled or interpreted languages. Here I see Java vs. all the rest (Python, PHP, JS, Ruby, etc.). It's basically Java vs. FOSS languages. Java *is* a FOSS language by now, but the problem is that Oracle is a very bad herald for FOSS Java, and the FOSS alternative, OpenJDK/SDK is bad/slow.

For the future of web I do see Node.js gaining lead position. Google put serious cash into aquiring V8 technology, improving it and putting it into Chrome. Flash was killed by Steve Jobs/iOS, pushing brilliant no-Flash-allowed devices (iPhones and iPads) into millions of end-user hands, so Google had to come up with a serious alternative. Hence JS/V8.

Not being stupid - selling software is *not* Googles business - they released the impressive V8 engine as FOSS, and some smart people put in the effort to port that engine to the serverside, where it is about to kick PHPs and Rubys ass, simply because it's at least as good as either of those *and* it is the same primary non-lockin language on the serverside as is on the clientside. Mind you, clientside JS only became popular once a guy wrote a famous blog article in which he renamed "doing important smart things with JavaScript" into "Ajax", which is a cool name and thus made JS on the clientside popular with a lot of people who formerly had no interest in looking into JS seriously. We have the same effect when some smart guy decided that plain Java objects weren't used and other things like EJBs were more popular simply because regular Java objects didn't have a cool name. So he named them Pojos (Plain Old Java Objects) and solved the problem. Any serious respectable Java toolkit today uses Pojos at its heart.

Bottom line: Wether a tech or PL catches on, gains traction and becomes the next big thing is usually rooted in issues one would not think as relevant right away - things like 'Does the tech have a cool name?', among others. That said, for the reasons stated above, I do think JS on the serverside (and thus Node.js in particular) does have a good chance of ruling the serverside future of the web. Add in nginx overtaking the conceptially dated Apache Webserver setups, and you have a safe bet.

My 2 cents.

Comment Re:Expect more of this. (Score 1) 608

That person who tries to get their friends to adopt Linux and sees their hopes and dreams dashed when they go buy a cheap Windows PC.

Interesting. Perhaps they aren't quite using their position right. It is very simple: you want my help? You'd better be very close family, for whom I'd run Windows on a dead badger... If you're not, you have three choices:

  • You buy a Mac, and I'll help you. Of course only after you have tried yourself, after all the first thing you'll hear for me is: "Mac is for people who don't want to learn about computers. Try it yourself, it will most likely do exactly as you think."
  • The second option is that you get Linux (Hey, you even may choose the distro if you're inclined to do so, but why are you asking me then?) and you get support. No questions asked. Printer doesn't work because you didn't insert the paper deep enough. (This actualy happened) Fine, no problem.
  • Finally, you get Windows. Pre-installed OEM or if I feel magnanimous, I'll even build you a machine and install it. However, from that point on: you are on your own. I will not help, I will not reinstall, I will not clean viruses. You find another idiot for that. I do not have time for that crap.

Some do see value in my help, and chose option one or two. That's how you convert people. In that sense Richard Stallman was right: "You sell on support". My support is free, but at least I don't have to deal with our friends from Richmond.

Comment Perfect natural, healthy reaction to circumstances (Score 2) 770

Seriously, I don't get the fuss. The industrial world has been overdue for a change in tactics for at least 3 decades, and the problems in society around the globe reflect humanity pursuit of things that can't work the way they used to anymore.

These are the facts (and we all know them, either intuitively or by plain analysis):

1.) We are reaching peak capitalism.

2.) Our jobs are going away, either to robots or the poorest of the poor on the planet ... and *then* to robots.

3.) We are about to reach a worldwide abundance of material goods. The last pieces of production society are on the way out.

4.) Most of our societies follow rules which, under the circumstances described above, seem bizare, arcane and silly. Each society and country has it's on set of soon to be totally pointless behaviours, but they all have them. The US has their evangelical cristian stuff, Germany spends 4.7 billion man-hours per year in traffic jams (seriously) and I don't even know where to begin in describing the bizar notions and pressures the Japanese society puts on people.

Let's face it: Most of us here on slashdot (I consider the average IQ here on /. measurably higher than average) would do the same if they hadn't developed some sort of psychological survical skill or found a nice warm place in the 9-5 jobworld where they can play with computers all day.

Bottom line: This is a totally normal reaction to environment, especially if you haven't had the luck to be introduced to stoic or zen philosophy or something simular in your teenages which might help you cope with the bizar theater going on around us in everyday life, including people presuring others to 'get a real job' and 'do something usefull'.

My 2 cents.

Comment I wouldn't over-estimate todays knowledge. (Score 1) 277

... Ok, ok, hear me out: Yes, it is true, our knowledge is quite impressive to a degree, in some fields, the technological high-culture we've built these days has a significant positive impact on overall global wealth and power over the forces of nature in general, etc. jadajada ...

How many things are there that really can count as a significant cornerstone of out civilisation?
- Electricity
- Internal Compustion Engine
- smithery/metal works
- arabian math & british navigation, astrology
- the wheel
- knowledge of basic hygene, virii, bacteria and genetics aka medicine
- chemistry
- experience with various modes of agriculture (4-field agriculture and nitro-ferilizer), carring crops and fruits from one continent to the next (the south-american potato definitely brought europe and the western civilisation forward) ... and a usefull overview of the laws of physics and some neat applications of those (flying, solid-state transistors, etc.)
- nuclear power

So what gives?

ICE - I'd say the internal combustion engine we could to without. Overall it has done more or at least as much damage than good, imho.
Electricity - that one definitely rocks. No other tech has brought us as far ahead as electricity.
Chemistry - not quite sure what to make of this. I'm leaning toward 'not-so-good'. Petrochem definitely has done more harm than good, I'd say. Don't like the polution. Basic knowledge of chemistry, especially in the field of medicine is neat, no doubt.
The Wheel - neat. Very usefull.
Modern Agriculture - modern agriculture sucks, however, if the insights would be applied correctly, we'd live in paradies in this area
Metal - tools: nice. means of transport: nice. Jewlery: ok. Weapons, large machinery, modern production, etc.: bad to not-so-good, imho.
Arabian math - very nice. A strike of genius, if you ask me.
Astrology - Usefull, but only to a certain extent. The past 150 years were more of pasttime in that field. Don't need to know about radiation to admire the stars.
Medicine - Very neat. Allthough I'd argue chemical medication hasn't improved that much since the 1960 - some diseases have been tackled since, but they were specifically targeted by an army of well/globally organised scientists - nothing regular humans with common sence couldn't to again. And diseases change all the time, this is an ongoing battle.
Physics, basic laws of nature - neat, very usefull.
Nuclear power - not needed, does more damage than good, especially in the hands of 99,9% of humans who are to dumb to handle it. This is one of the things I'd want *removed* from our knowledge.

All in all I'd say that in a well ordered society this knowledge could be rebuilt in 6-8 generations, roughly 200 years. Not that difficult. ... Once we have moved away from playing angry birds on smartphones to building AI to solve Big Problems (TM) that may be a totally different picture though. Then again, those big problems wouldn't be there if humanity had shown a little more brainpower while advancing in tech so fast.

Our knowledge has done far more damage than it should have, and to me it is apparent that overall inteligence isn't sufficient enough to handle todays technology correctly. A little more moral and mind training and another century or two of entlightenment before moving into hightech would've been better for humanity.

My 2 cents.

Comment Re:Manufacturers seriously missing the point (Score 1) 217

Hmmm, while not 800x600 (which is the standard resolution I think he was hinting at), there have been graphic cards in that timeframe that were high resolution. Well high resolution for those days. You're probably just too young to remember. That's fine. Let me show you: Hercules Graphics Card.

Comment Re:Sad (Score 1) 217

CRT's were... Older LCD's could also. I just recently had to throw away my 15" 1024x768 LCD screen I bought in... 2000 (!). That's 13 years and the image quality was as good as on day #1. One day, last month, it simply didn't turn on again. Sure, the last 5 years, it was the console of a server, but it worked.

So, the conversion from CRT to LCD also cost us longevity.

Comment I can't believe they actually tested this. (Score 2) 522

I can't believe that some scientists actually had the bizar idea to test this on animals. What sick brain actually thinks "Gee, I wonder if I could transplant the head of this goat to the body of that other goat ..."
Creeeepy. ... Perhaps scientists doing stuff like that should be locked away or at least have their permissions revoked or something.

My 2 cents.

Slashdot Top Deals

I cannot believe that God plays dice with the cosmos. -- Albert Einstein, on the randomness of quantum mechanics