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


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

Comment Re:Is it really a war? (Score 1) 135

"The Internet" hasn't meant the physical network for at least 2 decades. Since at least the early '90s and the "internet superhighway", average people have used "The Internet" to refer to the collective set of interactive services and activities made possible by the network, rather than the underlying network hardware itself.

What good is the physical link if nothing intended to run on it is actually functioning?

Comment After over 15 years ads force me to leave slashdot (Score -1, Offtopic) 149

As a max karma poster who's been here since 1999 or so, I give up.

The last couple weeks, every time I open an article I get a hijacked redirect to the App Store.

Since you can't be bothered to police your ad network, I'm leaving for someone less intrusive (ArsTechnica)

I suffered through John Katz, pink ponies, multiple acquisitions with cross promotion, the infamous Beta and 2.0 redesigns, multiple attempts to modernize. I was here when this was almost the only site still responding and active during 9/11. I was here for the marriage proposal. I was here when making a /. story meant your little site had "made it" and the first you found out was that your server was hosed by the /. effect. I was here for the community and insightful (and inciteful) discussing.

I'm leaving because of the ad abuse.

Comment Re:Sales Tax, Use Tax, and the Internet (Score 1) 347

You don't calculate your income tax 5-10 times a day. And income tax involves a crap ton of work to do every year and even two different programs can spit out wildly different results using the same data based on different interpretations and order-of-operations.

Your analogy is flawed.

Comment Re:Enormous tax and administrative burdens (Score 1) 347

And now your "simple" solution is complicated because the carriers don't know what's inside the box they are shipping (unless it falls into a prohibited or dangerous class of goods that require special handling).

And you still haven't solved the classification problems. Biologists debate the taxonomy of known species all the time (see bison bison bison vs. bison bison athabascae) and you think there's some simple way to classify manufactured products? Even Amazon hasn't solved that problem.

Even if you could come up with some magic taxonomy for manufactured products it still wouldn't work for taxation because the tax laws in even a single jurisdiction are riddled with exceptions for certain buyers, or for different types of use. For example, buying a sandwich at Subway "to go" is not taxed in CA because it's considered groceries and not a served meal. But if it's a hot sandwich, you eat-in, or you opt to have the sandwich toasted, and it's taxable as a meal. Buy the same sandwich at the grocery store deli, and it's not taxed because it's groceries. Unless they package it as ready-to-eat and have picnic tables and suddenly it might be taxable and depends on how they wrap/package it. In some jurisdictions the soda that came with your meal has a tax, but not if you got ice tea or lemonade out of the exact same fountain.

That's just one state, with just a simple fast-food meal. And isn't even including the counties, cities, special taxation districts, etc that all complicate it further.

The only way to make this work is to rip it all out and replace sales tax with a Federal standard (see Europe and VAT), and that's not gonna happen.

Comment Re:Encrypting the Link is only part of the story (Score 4, Insightful) 57

I think it's exactly the opposite. For so long PGP and other security features were email were ignored because you can't communicate with users on email providers that don't enable it. Same thing with various spam controls - we've always bitched that we can't turn them on because the big vendors ignore it.

This is a GOOD thing by Google. By turning it on, and making it blatantly obvious to their users, they force the industry as a whole into better practices. They've done the same thing with HTTPS (now mixed-mode errors invalidate your "lock" status) and also spam control (reverse DNS lookups, etc). They are using their position of influence to encourage improvements across the industry and should be applauded.

It's going to take multiple steps to get to the final goal of end-to-end encryption. You can't jump to the end overnight. Give credit where credit is due.

Comment Re:The trouble is the Video Chip (Score 1) 542

And unlike Dell or HP who updates their lineup of hardware configurations by the minute leaving you completely lost as to which options are beneficial or detrimental (or even purchasable again 2 weeks later), Apple refreshes only once or twice a year. Everyone who purchases Apple equipment for professional use knows this and already factors it into their purchasing cycles.

Comment Re:So what type of Windows PC do you need. (Score 1) 542

There are quite a few CAD packages for OSX (ArchiCAD and even AutoCAD come to mind), several 3D applications (like Maya) and also quite a few compositing applications (Combustion) that run wonderfully on a Mac.

And that's before opening the door to video editing.

Ironically, there was a point where I had a Mac Pro (aluminum, not trashcan) running Windows XP x64 because that was the absolute fastest hardware available under $10K for the particular software package and work that I was doing at the time.

Comment Re:It has been awhile (Score 1) 542


It's called separation of concern. If I want to upgrade my workstation to the latest greatest shiny super-fast processing work horse, I don't need to update my data storage. Likewise if I need to grow my available storage space, swap out the performance of my data storage, or introduce hardware redundancy, I don't need to update my workstation to do so.

Yeah, let's make MORE RISK by having A SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE.

Comment Re:So what type of Windows PC do you need. (Score 1) 542

The amount of quickly addressable space you have usable depends on the bus and the number of GPU cores. There are scenarios where having more memory addressable per-instruction is more important than the total number of parallel GPU instructions, and the opposite is also true. It all depends on what your shaders need to do. Shaders for gaming are designed to maximize the number of simultaneous shaders, and assume the game developer is trying to minimize the number of polygons, and minimize the memory footprint of their texture maps. People doing 3D modeling find it more important to have as many polygons as possible, and their real-time shaders usually aren't as complex since so much will happen when they "bake" their renderings. People doing video editing have a completely different set of needs that require raw bandwidth for getting as many pixels from source video footage decoded and onto screen in a single frame as possible. And people doing compositing need very very few polygons, but benefit greatly from transformation layers and particle systems. Each of these different use cases puts different optimization requirements on what is the most value in a graphics card. When you're spending $4K, $10K, or even $100K on a single software license, you make damn sure that the hardware to run it is optimized for your particular use case.

In my grandparent post I meant GPU in the sense of the graphics card, not GPU as in the discreet processing core. I should have been more precise in my language choice since the terms are used interchangeably.

Slashdot Top Deals

Algol-60 surely must be regarded as the most important programming language yet developed. -- T. Cheatham