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 This,kids, is what it was like back in the day. (Score 1) 65

The developer of this thing has thoughtfully provided a "hello.c" file and cc. Oh, yes, and emacs. So go ahead and type:

cc -o hello hello.c

and marvel at the speed.

This environment is just like my first full-time, non-student programming job. There was no IDE, so we pretty much lived in emacs. I haven't used emacs in decades, but my fingers still remember the key bindings for the commands -- as long as I'm not trying to consciously remember them.

It was on a 68020 running at 16 MHz which delivered a grand total of 2 MIPS at 16 MHz. We shared all that computing power among four programmers, which was luxury because the system was supposed to support 16 users (32 max).

It seems almost inconceivable, but the funny thing is it was really just as fun programming back then as it is now with a supercomputer all to myself. Our office was next to a reservoir, and used to start a compile, wait five minutes for the parsing to catch any syntax error (about 75% of the time), then go for a walk on the 1.5 mile trail around the pond. Then I'd stop in at the convenience store to buy a cup of coffee, and head back to the office, and make would just be finishing up the linking. God forbid you got a link error though. That's why we had time to read the entire Unix manual (all eight sections) cover to cover. Many times.

This has fed my conviction that user perceptions of system speed are as strongly affected by consistency as it is by absolute speed. If you're used to a build taking fifteen seconds,a sudden change to 30 seconds seems unbearable.

Comment Re:I'm just guessing they won't study the fraud (Score 1) 472

Look, this is a prime example of what I'm talking about. It all seems plausible to the poster because he doesn't personally know any scientists. Trying to organize scientist into a vast, disciplined conspiracy is laughable, if you've ever worked with them. They're waaay more likely to be obstreperous free thinkers than they are to be timid conformists.

Comment Re:I knew some scientists are shameless (Score 1) 472

you'll realize that there was a decades-long, vigorous debate that has gone on that was largely decisively finished by the late 90s.

I remember that. It concluded with the prediction that by 2010, the sea level will rise by three to six feet.

I think that has been thoroughly refuted by now.

And that is why climate scientists don't make predictions about the temperature in their own lifetime anymore.

Obviously your memory is defective. The debate did not "end" with a six foot rise by 2010. Early on when the "horn of possibilities" was wider, sure that was in it. That's why scientists continue to examine evidence.

This is the difference between science and whatever it is denialists use to make their beliefs: science goes out and checks results.

Comment Re:Am A Noob Too (Score 1) 183

"Dude, I'm not a network technician but I've been putting computers together since the late 80s and have been running Linux OSs as my desktop OS for over a decade now...

And I couldn't set up the network you described without some serious googling."

If you don't know what pfsense is (and you claim to run Linux as your desktop OS for over a decade) and if you don't realize that almost everything described is actually a cable job (outside of making VLANs and configuring pfsense) then I suggest you get out of the IT field entirely.

Comment Re:A simple reality check (Score 1) 472

The global warming "scientists" are the same "scientists" who were running around in the 70s saying that the next ice age was upon us

A single idiot journalist in TIME magazine who wanted to stir things up and boost circulation?

You've been conned by someone and are letting the side down. As engineers we are supposed to apply science and not bullshit.

Comment Re:I'm just guessing they won't study the fraud (Score 1) 472

Why would they deny FOIA requests and conspire to find a way around them?

Look up "distributed denial of service attack" for why.
A bunch of unscrupulous pricks set up a letter campaign to make requests to keep those "evil" scientists too busy to actually work. It was pretty obvious since it was coming in alphabetical order.

Why hasn't Al Gore

People in politics LIE. Ignore the showman on stage and talk to the real people behind the curtain.

Comment The two have been conflated at the start (Score 1) 472

They are connected very tightly by politics - well, money paying for that politics really. One of the arguments pushed strongly by the deniers is that climate change is just a trick to force companies to cut emissions, impose water discharge standards, etc. That was really the start of the PR campaign against scientists some years ago. Since some of the companies involved were donors to Republicans it all got very political.

Before the "debate" was kicked off with millions in PR money conservatives such as Thatcher were on the side of reality instead of PR. The only reason many conservatives are opposing reality King Canute style today is because of donor money from those who think climate change will be used as a reason to cut emissions, impose water discharge standards, etc and that new regulations will cut into profits.

Who knows - if it happened today instead of back then the Koch brothers and others may have donated to Hillary instead and the political situation would be the other way around, but historically it's the Republicans that decided to deny reality despite earlier conservatives listening very closely to scientists. Eisenhower would probably tell all the deniers to fuck off and let him run the country as well as he could with expert advice instead of playing stupid PR games of make believe.

Comment Re:So many people who think they are experts... (Score 1) 218

The problem is that the building did not collapse as intuition

That's only because movies used to show stuff as if cardboard boxes were falling over so the "intuition" of a lot of people was set by cheap special effects.

and plenty of demolition experts testified

No they did not. Various nuts lied about demolition experts that do not exist while the ones that do exist sided with reality instead of Hollywood.

As long as that is not explained

Impact. Dynamic loading not static. When a single floor collapses it hits the floor below pretty damned hard and buildings are not designed to withstand that sort of thing happening. If they were New York would look like the Valley of the Kings in Egypt.

Which would lead to a tilting of the building to the side

Hollywood and cardboard box effects in the 1970s has a lot to answer for. Stuff falls down not sideways. Even when earthquakes provide a bit of lateral movement large buildings collapse into themselves without much tilting - they do not fall sideways intact like a cardboard box as "a layman" has been encouraged to think over the last few decades.

Slashdot Top Deals

He keeps differentiating, flying off on a tangent.