Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Diagnoses (Score 1) 48

Having some experience in this... I think it has more to do with how terrible our actual knowledge is about a lot of bad problems (or more fairly, how ridiculously wide the spectrum of their symptoms are)

The guidelines for differential diagnosis are... sometimes embarrassing to look at. But I'm not sure they could be better.
What do you do when lupus erythematosus can present with identical symptoms to an autoeczematous id reaction to a fungal tinea incognito infection on your damn shin? The doctor throws you on steroids... Why? Because if you really do have lupus, at least this stands a good chance of prolonging your life. Unfortunately, if you don't, it can shorten it. But you may never find that goddamn asymptomatic fungal infection.

It also doesn't help that doctors aren't biochemists. Not by a long shot. They're car mechanics, but they don't really understand VE curves or stoichiometric ratios. On average, they're shit without a Chilton manual.

Comment Re:Kill X already (Score 1) 374

I do not agree to your second point

And I agree with what he said, at least as literally written.
The Windows GUI is by far the most productive GUI layout for me. I don't use Windows... I can't use Windows. I need a GNU or BSD userland... I can't live without it anymore. But the GUI layout- Fuck Unity. Fuck Gnome3. Fuck KDE in spite of its astounding beauty and brilliant customization... it's just too fucking cluttered.
I administrate nearly 200 machines, and design networks and write software on a daily basis. There's one thing I care about for my DE- my productivity. My ability to keep my wasted overhead to a minimum.
The fact that you're using a 30 year old FVWM means you largely agree with that precept, albeit with a different preference in layout. And no matter how you swing it, RDP is simply better in almost every use case unless you're attached to a very low latency network, even in spite of the fact that it's not even a replacement for X network transparency. It's just.... better. In practice.

Comment Re:Kill X already (Score 1) 374

(albeit differently than X)

And much to my consternation as both a Linux desktop (laptop) user, and a sysadmin for a large amount of servers, Windows and Linux-


Don't get me wrong- I love the concept of network transparency in X. I think it's beautiful. The way I can run an X app remotely on my machine almost as if it were native... It's awesome. In practice? Give me an RDP connection to a Windows server any fucking day of the week.

Comment Re:People don't hate on the mainstream (Score 1) 374

Normal people? They are happy that they can use the tech.

Ridiculously unintelligent comment.
Normal people almost always generally hate a reduction in functionality of which they are accustomed to, regardless of what that level was before hand.
My decidedly unarrogant and unnerdy mother is ready to throw away her new TV because it doesn't do a single thing she wants, no matter how many times I tell her she can do it another way.
People become accustomed to a way things are done. Quit thinking your minimalist future is The One True Path, and that everyone who disagrees with you must be somehow less enlightened, you arrogant fuck.

Comment Re:O RLY? (Score 1) 374

Pulse really did have a legitimate need, even though the implementation for a long time was a pile of shit.
ALSA is not a great sound system as far as routing and mixing goes. Pulse makes it very seemless to have multiple sources and sinks, and prevent apps from taking over the sound device (something desired on a desktop platform that may have multiple things playing sounds at the same time)
And no- routing to bluetooth isn't done in hardware on phones.

Comment Re: Never understood the Ubuntu hate... (Score 1) 374

That's so insanely reductionist.
I administrate 187 machines along with one other person at a large regional ISP/Business internet services/colocation provider.
I understand it very, very well (all of our centos7 deployments use it, after all)
I have very legitimate beefs with it (and some things that I think are positively fantastic about it)
I will say, that like pulse audio, systemd has evolved from a massive pile of shit, to something pretty decent, but it's still done a fairly terrible thing to the ecosystem, which is make way too many parts of the system as a whole dependent on the functioning socket communications of the systemd organism.
Go ahead and try to log into a systemd system with a daemon that has gone insane and is flooding the journal. Don't worry, I'll wait.
Honestly, I love the init replacement. I just wish the interdependencies in certain arenas weren't... well, interdependent.

Anyway, your claim that "systemd sucks" is a euphemism for "I have no understand of, or experience with systemd, but I like to pretend I do on Slashdot" just shows that you're a tool who has no fucking idea what he's talking about. You're literally the same person, on the other side of the fence, as the people who blindly hate it.

Comment Re:Test for Quacks (Score 1) 374

Erm... How else does one verify type at function/method invocation in a ducktyped language?
Duck typing basically enforces that rote programming for checking type in the way that languages with less advanced error handling paradigms enforce (or don't if you're insane) enclosing every single function call in an if statement...

Comment Re:Where's the news? (Score 1) 266

Are you an aerodynamicist?

Nope, I sure am not. But I'm a software engineer, and I bet what I consider "non-obvious" in terms of software design differs very drastically from that of an aerodynamicists opinion on the subject. Fortunately, the patent requires non-obviousness within the field covered by the invention.
Also, as it turns out, there are quite a lot of people who are highly qualified in this field.

I'm not either, but I know how to use Google, and I know that the characteristics of the dimples can have a large impact on a ball's flight.

Just as use of a user-space shared-memory IPC mechanism vs. a kernel-mediated one can have a large impact on multi-threaded application performance.
Any software engineer knows this. Why don't all people do it that way? A million factors including ease of implementation, economic factors (time to develop vs. performance needed)

So, developing a new pattern which makes a ball fly straighter, or flatter, or with any other desired characteristic is a useful invention.

If indeed it is a non-obvious improvement upon the established knowledge, sure.

If you don't think a new arrangement can provide an improvement so it can be patented, then you'll agree that other manufacturers can stick to the old patterns and not be at any competitive disadvantage, so there would be no reason for them to even try to copy the patented pattern.

This argument is crap- no offense intended.
Capitalism doesn't work like that, just like evolution doesn't.
Manufacturers expend resources to out-compete, not to progress simply for the sake of progress. The progress of the system as a whole, let's call it the group-velocity of progress, is in no way predicated upon waiting for these inventions to happen.
Why didn't the other manufacturers change the design to be better before now? Because they didn't need to.

I am again, not weighing in on whether or not this *is* valid as a patentable invention. I am simply saying that I suspect most people in the field of aerodynamics who understand dimple dynamics probably have a very different opinion as to whether the patent is obvious or not, and a company should not be rewarded simply for being the ones to bring it to market. That's just regular competition.
If they have truly done something spectacular, then they should be provided a patent to reward them for it. State-granted monopolies are to reward for making improvements in sciences and processes public domain. They're not to reward the first guy who bothered to slap an electric motor on a scooter.

Comment Re:Where's the news? (Score 1) 266

In any case, here are the patents, go look them up instead of asking what they're about: 6994638, 8123632, 8444507, 9320944, 8025593, 8257201, 7331878, 6358161, 7887439, 7641572, 7163472.

I don't give a shit what they're about, personally. I didn't look them out because I don't care. I responded to:

I take it you wouldn't deny the actual inventor legal recourse.


That really depends on what they "invented"

I had absolutely no opinion on this actual litigation. Hopefully your jackass comment is moderated positively for the informative quality, at the least.

Comment Re:Where's the news? (Score 1) 266

Why so? There may be significant R&D which goes into the aerodynamics.

Because rearranging the dimples is hardly a new invention or a new technical solution to a problem. It isn't anything that anyone couldn't figure out. Patents aren't a reward for you having done work, they're a reward for you having done innovative work. An invention.
You should get a patent for a cotton gin. You shouldn't get a patent for slapping an electric motor on one.

Comment Re:Where's the news? (Score 2, Insightful) 266

I take it you wouldn't deny the actual inventor legal recourse.

That really depends on what they "invented"
Knowing the way the patent system is abused, knowing the simplicity of a golf ball, and how old the concepts are that govern their design, I believe any patent claims against a golf ball in *20-fucking-17* should be viewed with a massive fucking grain of salt.

For example, dimples being understood to provide highly improved aerodynamics was pantented back in 1905.
Are that patents here number, shape, and size of the dimples? If so- bullshit patent. But perfectly valid in today's patent system- until it goes to court (and even then, depends how far away you are from East Texas)

Comment Re:Plutocracy (Score 1) 404

(a) In General: The Commission and each State commission with regulatory jurisdiction over telecommunications services shall encourage the deployment on a reasonable and timely basis of advanced telecommunications capability to all Americans (including, in particular, elementary and secondary schools and classrooms) by utilizing, in a manner consistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity, price cap regulation, regulatory forbearance, measures that promote competition in the local telecommunications market, or other regulating methods that remove barriers to infrastructure investment.

(b) Inquiry: The Commission shall, within 30 months after the date of enactment of this Act, and regularly thereafter, initiate a notice of inquiry concerning the availability of advanced telecommunications capability to all Americans (including, in particular, elementary and secondary schools and classrooms) and shall complete the inquiry within 180 days after its initiation. In the inquiry, the Commission shall determine whether advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion. If the Commission's determination is negative, it shall take immediate action to accelerate deployment of such capability by removing barriers to infrastructure investment and by promoting competition in the telecommunications market.

That is Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which is far less contentious than the status-based regulatory jurisdiction granted by the FTC act, limited to a poorly defined "common carrier".

That's just a flat out lie. You're lying.

No, you're just an ignorant ass.

Comment Re:Plutocracy (Score 4, Interesting) 404

No, the Republicans know the FTC doesn't have the legal jurisdiction to rule on this, and are thus claiming that it is the realm of the FTC to rule on. The FCCs jurisdiction by passed law was less contentious, so Obama sent it that way to get the job done, since he knew damn well the Republicans weren't going to clearly empower the FTC to do it, since they are idiologically against the idea of limiting the size of dildo you're allowed to penetrate American consumers with.

But your story sure sounds so much easier to defend.

Slashdot Top Deals

Remember: Silly is a state of Mind, Stupid is a way of Life. -- Dave Butler