Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Anonymous shills and astroturfers (Score 1) 215

Science doesn't work that way.

Didn't. Or isn't supposed to But scientists are human. They do have to eat. Which means they have to work for profit or for hand outs. And then it's just the matter of who's motivated to give the hand outs (grants).

bad news for the deniers

I don't know too many deniers. Plenty of skeptics though. And the more ad hominems are used to defend "science" (for example, by calling skeptics "deniers"), the less scientific credibility these positions have.

you'd have a million guys

Who'd pay for it? If you can't establish credibility, you can't get paid. If you question paid-for consensus, you get shut down as not credible. It's catch 22. Unless you show that a lot of grant money goes to credible efforts to actively disprove the hypothesis, you can't claim that it's been tested and vetted. You need to show me where you have grants which actually motivate contrarian evidence. An no, oil company payments don't count. Because receiving those immediately discredits the researchers. So can you show me government sponsored research aimed at disproving AGW and done by researchers who are paid more only if they can successfully challenge some of the standing hypothesis? No? Only grant money if they provide further evidence supporting government control and intervention? Nough said.

Comment another dumb headline by soulskill (Score 1) 453

Why is it a "problem" with the market? People getting what they want instead of what sociologists' (sorry, psychopaths') believes of what they need? That's how "satisfaction" is defined -- getting what you want. The fact that strangers, who would rather be entertained by troubles in your relationship than see you be genuinely content, don't get to enjoy the show of your relationship fiascos is not a "problem."

Comment Re:Dying gasps (Score 1) 535

Yeah, I'm of the opinion that a person who cannot properly use C (and understand how memory management works) has no business writing mission-critical software in any language. JVM's garbage collector is for sissies. =P

You are an armature. Making mark-and-sweep mission critical actually requires a trick which DOES include keeping track of all memory you grab from the heap. Relying on gc is only something you can afford to do with low-frequency-creation-destruction objects. Just so you understand, I have written systems which relied on GC-based languages and which had to create and destroy objects faster than GC could handle them. And the way I did it did not make the system grow to the worst-case-scenario use pooling. Tell me I am a sissy to my face... cause my code will run circles around your code :P

Comment Re:Dying gasps (Score 1) 535

Object-oriented is good for projects that need to be maintained

Only if you think that a program "does" stuff. If you think of the actions in the program as secondary to what is being accomplished, OO reduces the attention span foot print.

less duplication means less typing

You are a bad person. I mean it. From the bottom of my heart. You think that 20 seconds of your typing is worth 20 minutes of my reading.

Comment Re:Dying gasps (Score 1) 535

Exception Handling

entirely optional. and can be turned off at compile time.


only part of runtime if you want it to be.

dynamic memory allocation and the crappy way new/delete handle out of memory

utter unadulterated nonsense. you have multiple ways of handling memory allocation. you can have custom memory management schemes. C standard library pretty much is guaranteed to cause memory fragmentation.

no _standard_ way to specify order of global constructors/destructors

if it's an issue, than don't make them global. there are standard (ie, language guaranteed) ways to control their run order... they come directly from C, btw, so not sure if you know both languages as well as you think

Comment Re:come on! (Score 1) 535

Nope, the atheist Mao still holds the record (with 100 million). The 2nd highest goes to atheist Stalin with 60 million. If you claim that Hitler was Catholic acting on behalf of the church (something that he himself never claimed), then you might have a claim for the 3rd place for the church.

Slashdot Top Deals

To be is to program.