Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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

Comment I don't think you can compare the two. (Score 2) 216

Apple of 2001 made computers.
Apple of 2016 makes phones. The fact that they're now making fewer phones just means the phone market is maturing as the computer market matured. The real question can the revolutionize yet another industry? Steve Jobs? Perhaps. He was smarter than me so maybe he could've come up with something.

Not an Apple fan in general but now I feel a bit sad.

Comment Re:Garbage collection - less than 1% female (Score 1) 570

Misogyny. What an interesting concept. If men need to avoid swearing because women are around, is that misogyny because it implies women can't handle the rough and tumble of foul language? Either you believe women are equal and capable, and you treat them the same as you would anyone else, or you believe that women are fragile and must be protected, and you censor yourself to avoid offending their delicate ears.

As for suicides, you've got to be careful there - it could be that the suicide has nothing to do with anyone's pressure, but their own personal mental illness (T in particular is a mental illness, not a sexual orientation). And it's also demeaning to assert that people cannot be full and conscious participants in society without your encouragement.

But let's do a counter-factual - what if every man in STEM started identifying as a woman today? Would that be the effective end of misogyny? Would we need to encourage women anymore, since 100% of all IT jobs in the world were women?

Comment Re:Garbage collection - less than 1% female (Score 1) 570

Well, obviously there are also average differences between men and women besides upper-body strength - including factors that lead to success in computer science.

Men aren't just women with more muscles, and women aren't just men with less muscles.

As for attracting "as many good people as possible", I'll assert the proper way of doing that is to be gender-blind, so that you don't waste resources trying to drive people away from their own free choices, and making them "good people" for a job when their inclination is not in that direction.

If anything, we should be targeting socially inept and awkward folks (aspergers, autism), who might not make it through typical education paths because of their lack of social skills, but whose natural proclivities are highly productive when dealing with computing.

Comment Re:Garbage collection - less than 1% female (Score 2) 570

I guess the question is, do you believe that women are being unfairly kept from garbage collection, or do you think the lack of representation is a matter of their individual choices. If it's an individual choice, then we shouldn't be trying to social engineer someone away from free choices (say, encouraging people to become Mormons instead of evangelicals in order to balance the religions against each other).

So before we put effort into socially engineering people into roles we believe they should be in, maybe we should figure out if they're making free choices or not.

Heck, even if you don't care about people's free choices, your method of social engineering is going to differ if the current behavior is due to free choices - knowing where to apply your pressure requires understanding the situation in depth.

That all being said, I definitely think free choices are a good thing, and we shouldn't interfere. I don't think it's right to try and make gay people have sex with people they don't prefer (conversion therapy), or to make women work jobs they don't prefer.

Comment Re:Hopefully this doesn't result in (Score 1) 72

There are a number of alternatives -- flushing the BTB on ring switch seems a reasonable starting point. It should eliminate most privilege escalations.
Making the address randomization affect bits outside the range seen by the BTB indexing scheme would also make the attack much more difficult. This would require some non-trivial OS kernel changes

The BTBs themselves can be multi-level and pretty large -- they could form part of a process context, but they'd add several kbytes to it. There is no hardware support to save/restore this resource, and it'd have to be *fast* to be of any use. For paranoid people, flushing the BTB on every process (not thread) switch would pretty much stop this attack in its tracks, with a small performance penalty.

It's not clear that making the BTB part of the process context would make things faster overall -- you'd get better prediction, and worse ctx switch overhead. It's not clear to me which would win.

Comment Re:Feel The Bern (Score 1) 475

Olympic teams are like private clubs, and they can do whatever they want to run their clubs.

But when people get caught doping, or using steroids, they get disqualified. Even if they would have won the medal without the juicing. It's about integrity.

The DNC had rules, and they broke them to keep Bernie from winning. The colluded against his campaign, engaged in voter suppression and voter fraud, and even got debate questions in advance.

Regardless of the "fix", the fact is that the DNC has lost all credibility. The insurgent who fought the Republicans won because the Rs played by the rules they set out. The insurgent who fought the Democrats lost because the Ds didn't play by the rules they set out.

Comment Re:Feel The Bern (Score 1) 475

When the DNC is actively selling your campaign out (, or stealing debate questions (, can we really say that the democrat primary was a fair process?


Now sure, you can go counterfactual, and imagine a world, where the DNC didn't cheat, and didn't rig the system, where Clinton won on the merits. I'll admit, that's *possible*. But once you find out that a team juiced with steroids in the olympics, you disqualify them - even if they would have won without the drugs.

Comment Re:Feel The Bern (Score 1) 475

The combination of superdelegate corruption, voter suppression (, and outright voter fraud, really is undeniable for the democrat primary. The party elites want you to believe that the voters picked Clinton, and that a socialist is unelectable (despite 8 years of Obama), but the truth is that the revolution was killed by hook and crook in the democrat primary.

Comment Re:Feel The Bern (Score 3, Interesting) 475

Let's be crystal clear - the Republican Party fell to an outsider this year. One could make the argument that they tried to cheat the outsider, and failed, but it's more likely that they literally ran a fair and balanced primary election.

The Democrat Party, on the other hand, excluded outsiders by cheating this year. One could make the argument that they would've won even without cheating, but that's highly unlikely.

Comment Re:Feel The Bern (Score 1) 475

So, say you don't want Trump, and Clinton is a criminal - why isn't the MSM and the democrat party not lining up behind Jill Stein, who would wipe Trump in a landslide if she got the same support from the media as Clinton does?

Electing Clinton is a boneheaded move, but worse, it's a move that you don't get a choice on - they cheat.

At least if the country makes the boneheaded move of electing Trump, it was *their* boneheaded move, not just a thumb on the scale by the political elites.

Comment Feel The Bern (Score 2, Insightful) 475

It's amazing, that throughout all of this, we keep forgetting that the democrat primary was stolen from Bernie Sanders. Literal rigging of the election by the DNC. Literal vote fraud (

Forget the hypothetical stealing of the general election, this just happened with the democrat primary. The lack of outrage is palpable.

Slashdot Top Deals

They are called computers simply because computation is the only significant job that has so far been given to them.