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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Immigration policy is not hate speech (Score 2) 1048

I wanted to point out that there is a diverse set of opinions. "Democrats" say X and "Republicans" say Y is a gross generalization. Also, you have to put everything in context. The GOP doesn't simply say illegal immigrants are bad so lets have a scholarly debate. They make vile disgusting political ads specifically designed to rile up people with their propaganda.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballo...

So, if you could spare us your sanctimonious bullshit about having a proper discourse it would be nice.

Comment Re:Slashdot double standard (Score 1) 177

No, it's valuable experience

Actually, it isn't. Software developers are not interchangeable cogs in a machine. Each project has unique considerations, unique requirements, unique properties all of which makes it pretty much impossible to apply broad generalizations. What stage is the project in? How tightly defined are the requirements? How experienced are the people managing it? Have they ever managed a remote team before? How flexible is the design? Does it even make sense to use this technology? etc etc etc. Its typically "MBA style thinking" to lump us engineers into one giant bucket of nerds - which ironically leads to _more_ outsourcing because all they see is a cost center.

The CTO eventually told them to fuck off, we hired 4 more developers inhouse, and got the entire project completed in 6 months alongside our other duties.

Then it sounds like you guys are incompetent at evaluating whether a company is capable of servicing your needs.

Comment Re:Slashdot double standard (Score 0) 177

This is backed up by evidence of companies that started on the outsourcing fad and had to pull things back to America to get the quality back up to what they wanted. Again it is not bashing the Indians, but the skill level of the specific subset of people getting into that line of work.

The plural of anecdote is not data.

Comment Re:Why they said "maintaining maximum compatibilit (Score 1) 585

Wow, That is complete marketing bullshit. The only way it makes sense is if those were two separate sentences.

"This enables us to focus on deep integration between Windows and the silicon, while maintaining maximum reliability" -- No Win10, no shiny CPU for you.
+
"compatibility with previous generations of platform and silicon" -- non-shiny CPUs continue to work with Win10.

Comment Re:Just wanted to say "thank you" (Score 1) 110

I don't have an ISO because this is an upgraded system from Win8. I don't know what your point is, or if you even have one. But it doesn't take a genius to disprove the GP's absurd claims. If you understand basic OS architecture, you'd know that the hard limit on the number of threads is the size of the stack (approximately, because you have other associated bookkeeping data structuresm but they are usually very tiny) , which ultimately means you're limited by the physical memory, paged pool and virtual memory. So creating 100,000 or even 200,000 threads is not a big deal. Threads are the "basic unit" of work in the NT design. Now as far as the scheduler goes, threads have discrete priority levels, thread quantums, as well as numerous strategies like temporary bumps and downgrades in priority/quantum lengths (esp on desktop workloads) so that for e.g. the UI threads dont get starved. (The balance set manager prevents priority inversion) So not only can you schedule a large number of threads, you can do so without locking up the system. Obviously this is a simplistic explanation but it was part of the NT kernel's original design 20 years ago. The idea that NT can't schedule a measly 2000 threads is not really tenable (with the caveat that you have enough memory for the stacks). Since then there have obviously been lots of additions like NUMA support to schedule threads optimally per-processor, etc, etc, etc

Comment Re: Why can't we leave it alone (Score 1) 151

There isn't one. For any small entity, funding the production of a generic item that works in every case is not possible in most situations. And that's not a bad thing, necessarily. It fosters alternatives. Why is software development special than say.. a small tire manufacturer unable to make a snow tire for every SUV or a small smartphone case manufacturer unable to make cases for every kind of phone, etc etc. Monoculture often produces strong network effects that aren't always pleasant. But like anything else, you could find certain exceptions. Certainly, having agreed-upon ways to store data or other inter-op protocols/services can be beneficial, etc. But I don't agree that we need a single development platform. This forces the feature-set to be this abstract commonality between wildly different OSs. Historically this has always produces platforms that totally suck, are inefficient (simply owning to the fact that abstraction always has a cost) and are resistant to innovation because of the forced requirement of compatibility.

Comment Re:MS Spyware (Score 1) 421

Do you think that "debug performance telemetry" should be in a mission critical embedded application build in release mode? Do you?

Did you also throw a hissy fit when they added dtrace to the kernel? Did you?

I await your answer.

You people are really dumb. I mean, I get it, you're clearly an anti-ms troll and a Linux cheerleader, but you should know when you're getting fucked and when you're just masturbating.

Slashdot Top Deals

Entropy requires no maintenance. -- Markoff Chaney

Working...