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


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 Carrier comparison (Score 2) 205

Many who comment here will have a reason that they chose one carrier over one other carrier. They may have switched carriers. I always found that the latest carrier plan was better than the competition, and that it would go back and forth or be too confusing to come up with one clear answer. I actually have iPhones and aPhones on 5 carriers. I also travel the world quite a bit. Domestically, all the carriers are good for most unless you live in an area not covered by some. I remember times when Verizon was faster but now it seems that AT&T is faster for me, most of the time. I remember when you could buy international data from Verizon that covered 200 countries, while the AT&T list was only about 50 countries. That affected me in places like Russia and South Africa, back then. T-Mobile has incredible data plans for here and away but they don't seem as fast as claimed unless I'm in the store. Sprint has gone far out of their way to help me with issues, including a stolen phone number. Right now I believe that the best carrier I have, for my own needs, is Google Project Fi because the plan works in over 100 countries. You can even order a free data-only SIM for free, without even a shipping charge, to use it on iPads and the like. I would never say that anyone's choice of plan is bad in any way though.

Comment Re:No. (Score 5, Informative) 198

A whole interview rarely carries over. I was asked if I thought Apple would be around in 100 years. My reply even referred to IBM, along the lines of what you can do and how many restarts you can get when you are that big. I facetiously jabbed at the idea of Trump seeking advice from today's huge internet companies by telling the reporter that they would all ask for lower taxes and become larger yet.

Comment Re:"visible in small optical telescopes" (Score 4, Insightful) 44

Are you just trolling? Meteors, as in "shooting stars", are obviously perfectly visible with the naked eye. It's actually much easier without a telescope because they're bright enough, happen kinda randomly and sweep a large part of the sky.

If you're talking about asteroids, then you're right that you'd need a telescope to see them. You also can see the bright ones with a wide-angle camera and a long time exposure.

Comment Re:Because they weren't written in just ten days (Score 3, Informative) 125

To be fair, in most other languages, 99999999999999999999 == 7766279631452241919

Which other language, exactly?

Let's see :
Not in Ruby.
Not in Python.
Not in Java (compiler would complain, needs to be BigInteger).
Not in C# (same) ...

Sorry, JS is all alone on the shittyness podium.

Comment Re:Javascript really sucks (Score 2) 300

I can learn a new language relatively fast. Any language, except for JS.
This clusterfuck of a language would rather return something than throw an error. Bugs appear apparently out of nowhere, because some data has been passed in the wrong format for the last 10 functions.

As an example :
    '1' + 0.1 is '10.1'
    '1' - 0.1 is 0.9

Then comes a JS 'expert' telling you "It's perfectly normal! It's been described in ECMAScript clusterfuck Specification"

Just for fun :

    Array(16).join("lol" - 2) + " Batman!";

Slashdot Top Deals

"If the code and the comments disagree, then both are probably wrong." -- Norm Schryer