Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
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:Fortran (Score 1) 534

I'm not quite old enough to have used FORTRAN.

What does age have to do with anything? I took a computational linear algebra course in the late '90s that used FORTRAN nearly exclusively.

That said, I started out, like most kids in the '80s, with BASIC and assembly language (6809 and 6502, in my case). I started college early enough that the introductory computer-science courses were still in Pascal, but pretty much every course that needed to do real work used anything but Pascal...lots of C, with a systems-programming course splitting time between 8086 assembly and VAX assembly and a database course that introduced us to SQL (of course).

The computational linear algebra course mentioned above was a math course specifically for computer-science majors; other engineering students took a different linear-algebra course.

Comment Protect you against SQL injection? Really? (Score 2) 74

I would love to hear the explanation of how a general purpose language would protect you against attacks like that, clearly called out in the article.

You're doing the snowflake thing, blaming everyone else for the coders' incompetence and unsuitability for the job. Some dweeb wrote a tutorial and because it's not ready to be cut and pasted into production code, that's the tutorial writer's fault.

NB: Not everyone can code.

Comment Academic: FORTRAN Work: Assembly (Score 1) 534

I learned programming at university using the FORTRAN language, picked up Basic on my own later when one of the engineering profs bought a Data General Nova on his own dime so we'd get some "minicomputer" experience. But my first job required assembly programming on a military Univac 1218. I loved that thing (then), because it was so computery: every register was displayed on the front panel and you could set/clear the bits by pushing the light button, and when it ran, they all flashed. Very very cool. Programmed the thing with punched cards. The assembler was multipass, dumping the cards off to 9-inch reels of mag tape (also very computery) and making the passes through that. So the whole experience was this blinking, tape spinning, card reading, huge printer printing experience and DEAR GOD IT WAS BEAUTIFUL. It was like I had stepped into a '50s era scifi movie and it was all in my control, mwaaaaahahahaha. So, you know, just your average day in paradise for an engineering newbie.

Comment Re:Bullshit, Todd. (Score 4, Insightful) 239

The problem is they are not suing over the mistake made by the clinic, but that the child has the wrong genes.

The kid having the wrong genes is the direct fruit of the clinic's malpractice. It's no different than a baby being dropped on its head by the doctor. You don't sue ONLY for the mistake, you sue for the consequences of the mistake. Two parents decide to merge their DNA and make a baby. They do so knowing their, and their families' histories. The clinic chooses to negligently upend that planning with an unknown set of consequences - and robbing the parents of having allowed the father to contribute his traits to the child they've chosen to make. The ramifications are numerous, both emotionally and quite possibly medically, intellectually, etc., for the child. You can't separate the negligence from the life-long consequences.

Comment Scott Adams disagrees (Score 2) 123

Scott Adams would like a word with you:

Kahan found that increased scientific literacy actually had a small negative effect: The conservative-leaning respondents who knew the most about science thought climate change posed the least risk. Scientific literacy, it seemed, increased polarization. In a later study, Kahan added a twist: He asked respondents what climate scientists believed. Respondents who knew more about science generally, regardless of political leaning, were better able to identify the scientific consensus—in other words, the polarization disappeared. Yet, when the same people were asked for their own opinions about climate change, the polarization returned. It showed that even when people understand the scientific consensus, they may not accept it.”

Notice how the author slips in his unsupported interpretation of the data: Greater knowledge about science causes more polarization.

Well, maybe. That’s a reasonable hypothesis, but it seems incomplete. Here’s another hypothesis that fits the same observed data: The people who know the most about science don’t think complex climate prediction models are credible science, and they are right.

In fact, there's more incentive to lie about climate science than cancer research: More immediate funding is at stake, more groupthink applies, it will be decades before others can prove you wrong, and unlike falsified cancer research, people won't die because you misdirected searcher.

And as for saying "the fraud was in the review process, not the work itself," that's like saying "Well, Anthony Weiner was only caught sexting. He never actually cheated." The odds that the fraud we've caught is the only fraud committed by those willing to commit fraud would seem pretty low...

Comment Re:Non-starter 'flying car' (Score 2) 162

Yeah. Clients are always kind of shocked at the downdraft created when I use mid-sized hex to lift a camera while we're shooting some video. And that's something that weighs, oh, 15 pounds. It takes a LOT of moving air to keep a suitcase or a watermelon hovering in the air. To say nothing of my over-two-hundred-pounds and my passenger and the thing we're sitting in. NOT back yard material, here, never mind the enormous racket it's going to make.

Comment Re:Back in the 1990's, you only needed 4GB... (Score 1) 89

My phone as 6GB Ram. It rarely uses more than 4, occasionally 5. But phones are funny, they prelaunch apps you use, until most of the RAM is used. Because it is less battery bringing app to the foreground, than launching it from storage. I suspect that if you had more RAM, your RAM usage would go up.

Comment Re:Oops (Score 2) 215

it's drunk by fat people.

You're going to need some real data to back that up. All the 'normal' sized people I know who drink soda drink diet soda.

My anecdotal response to your anecdote is that I mainly see obese people drinking diet soda... along with entire pizzas, supersized fries, etc.

Comment Re:BETRAYAL (Score 1, Troll) 356

US secret services know more about this than has been revealed

You trust the same secret services that lied to us about spying on Americans ... repeatedly? If you believe anything they say, you're the idiot. Until someone OTHER than Secret Services (and gets their info from them) says so, I won't believe anything they say. Because they have already lied, under oath, about spying on Americans. And this appears to be another case of that, except that nobody really cares about our Government spying on us, Soviet KGB style ... on steroids.

The political statists (both D and R) are flat out ignoring the repeated claims that our government is who hacked the election, literally, and figuratively, and everything in between.

And as for the Russians, their "hacking" of the DNC, Hillary Campaign and various other people related to HRC, if anything, is proof that the Email server scandal is probably worse than what we believe. You think that Hillary could secure her top level secrets, when she couldn't secure her own campaign? AND people wanted her in office in spite of being completely idiotic with security? Not to mention Uranium One Deal, quid pro quo Bill Speaking fees to Russia, and deposits into the Clinton Foundation?

Politics makes people stupid. The truth is, it is more likely it was Seth Rich that leaked most of what WikiLeaks release. But he is dead, from mugging where nothing was taken. Yeah, that's the ticket!

Comment Re:BETRAYAL (Score 2) 356

TBH, I didn't vote for Trump either, but I would like to point out that a large part of the people who did vote for him, were sick and tired of being called "troglodyte haters". Hillary's "Basket of Deplorables" comment was just another symptom of the stupid elitism of the useful idiots of the left. And they are idiots, because they continue the same tired name calling, and repeating debunked claims. It is as if they are completely devoid of any other means of communication.

"Racist"
"Nazi"
"Russians"
"Misogyny"
"Cheeto"

Luckily for them, most of the Republicans are inept stooges who are more concerned with "tightening their grip, while systems slip through their fingers"

Many Americans are tired of the two existing parties and have completely given up politics as a solution to any real problem.

Slashdot Top Deals

FORTUNE'S FUN FACTS TO KNOW AND TELL: A giant panda bear is really a member of the racoon family.

Working...