Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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 Re:God Dammit (Score 1) 450

Sorry, I forgot a part of my reply: I think you hit the nail on the head with the voting of their conscience thing. Related to that is the problem that somehow we've reached the point where 'compromise' is a dirty word, and yet compromise and cooperation are the only ways to get things done when there are diverse interests, but candidates often get shamed if they are on record as having worked with "the other side", like that's somehow bad.

Voters and candidates both share some of the blame because it seems common for in primaries/elections the candidates to try to out do each other in their extremity. To me the classic example of this is the "pledge" that some candidates sign and then bully other candidates to sign, e.g. a pledge to never raise taxes. Candidates take all sorts of extreme positions to ensure they get elected, and then they show up at Congress with their hands tied by dumb, extreme promises they made to get elected.

If I can generalize, it seems like the voters in the country have adopted a "winner takes all" mentality, and so they demand candidates that promise not to yield an inch, and are furious with any elected representative who "caves" on anything the voter deems important. This mentality is fatally flawed and we have to get back to the idea that negotiation, give-and-take, and even compromise are the norm, are good, and are productive.

Comment Re:God Dammit (Score 1) 450

I agree with the broader sense of your post but disagree with the initial premise. Garland would have been confirmed easily.

Maybe so, I dunno - I think Democrats had 44 seats in the Senate (+2 independents) at the time. They would have needed 14-15 Republicans to vote for Garland. IIRC only 9 Reps voted in favor of Sotomayor in 2009 and only 5 voted in favor of Kagan in 2010, and in each vote there was also a Dem who either voted no or who abstained (meaning Dems would have needed to come up with one additional Rep 'yea' vote). Would nearly *one third* of Reps broken rank in 2016? Seems iffy.

You could argue that Garland was perceived as moderate enough that he would have gotten significantly more Rep votes than other recent nominees had, but you could also argue that by 2016 (when Garland was nominated) the Reps were already so fully entrenched in "no" mode that even less of them would have voted in favor of a Dem-nominated candidate, no matter how moderate or qualified. Garland getting enough Rep votes was possible, but by that time him getting zero (or very few) Rep votes was also pretty plausible because by that point in time the vote wouldn't really have been about the nominee - just like how the Gorsuch vote arguably wasn't really about him.

I can see how it could have gone either way, although I still lean towards believing Garland would not have been confirmed. If he had been confirmed, I bet it would have been reallllly close.

Comment Re:God Dammit (Score 5, Insightful) 450

I'm not a Republican, but the whole "stolen seat" thing is kind of overstating it because it implies that Garland would have become a justice for the SCOTUS, which is unlikely. It was stupid for the GOP to refuse a vote for Garland (stupid on multiple levels but even just strategically - they could have blocked Garland just via voting, there was no need to take it a step further and refuse a vote altogether and cause so much rancor), but regardless Garland was most likely not going to be on the SC, so the seat was not stolen. Legally it doesn't appear that they did anything technically wrong, but I think it's fair to say that having a vote would have been the right thing to do (notwithstanding some cases in the past where people such as Biden suggested a different course of action).

But let's be clear: both sides have, are, and continue to behave like children. Is what the GOP did stupid? You bet! Is the Dem handling of Gorsuch stupid? Most definitely. It's worth noting that the GOP senators in the past voted to seat justices that were quite liberal, but in the end relented because the candidate was qualified and there was not a good reason not to. With Gorsuch there's no real debate that he is very qualified, and yet few Dems voted for him - they voted against purely as retaliation.

And so the Dems did something stupid in retaliation for something stupid the Reps did. And the Reps did that stupid thing because of what Dems did to them before that. And the Dems did that thing because of what the Reps did even earlier. It's been going on for so long that we're at the point where neither side can claim any sort of moral high ground - it's pure, deep-rooted, partisan politics, and anyone who tries to argue that one of those two sides is better-behaving than the other is turning a blind eye to past events.

To everyone who is frustrated by this, you have to realize that Dem and Rep are two sides of the same coin. Both are almost comically hypocritical and neither consistently acts in the best interest of the USA. They have reached the point where so much of their identity is defined by not being the other side that I don't think there is any way for either party to fix themselves.

I watched a lot of the Gorsuch hearings and I came away with two main conclusions: (1) Gorsuch would make a great justice - I don't agree with him on various points, but he's sane and sincere and intelligent and it's not hard to imagine him being a fair judge. (2) The senators from both major parties are complete morons. So much pettiness and shallow posturing. So much snide smirking and pretentiousness. It was embarrassing for both parties.

It's time we moved the conversation away from "Reps are bad" vs "Dems are bad" because that will get us nowhere. Both are terrible and possibly beyond repair. But as long as we allow ourselves to believe that one side is acting in good faith while the other side is not, we will make zero progress. Both are incredibly corrupt. Both major parties have a list of "sins" so long that neither should be allowed in power.

Comment If those are the best arguments... (Score 1) 370

... then they are screwed.

We still go to the theater occasionally - it's kinda fun if done once in awhile and the theaters near me don't tend to have the "problem people", and I like movie theater popcorn - but watching from the convenience and comfort of my home is just really, really tough to beat.

The weakness of this list is itself a testament to why people like to watch stuff at home.

Comment Re:The best one... (Score 1) 141

Pro-tip: to be a really effective troll, and to gain the most enjoyment from trolling, you need to draw out the conversation a bit more, and to do that you can't just completely ignore all the points in a person's reply, otherwise the other person will interpret that as you having no reading comprehension ability (and so they'll walk away because any attempt at conversation is pointless) or they'll know right away that you're a troll (same outcome).

You gotta lead them along, feigning that you're considering their viewpoints, and that you're always right there, just on the cusp of agreeing to - or at least appreciating - the alternate point of view... but needing just a little more convincing. Repeat for a few rounds of back-and-forth (or until a more interesting victim comes along), all the while leading the conversation further and further away from the point or from rational thinking. The longer you have them engaged, the zanier you can get without them walking away (because the more they invest in you, the harder it is for them to realize it's been a complete waste of time), but even then to keep it going you need to still maintain the pretense of actual debate.

It's not just a skill, it's also an art. Focus on your subtlety and patience, and with practice you'll master it - I believe in you, you can do it! Have a great day!

Comment Re:The best one... (Score 1) 141

Just curious, have you tried the latest gen of VR? Because I've tried the Rift and the Vive on tons of people (basically large swaths of my neighborhood), almost none of which are tech geeks, and not a single person has had any bit of motion sickness. From young kids to people in their 70s, all of them were blown away by the experience, and nobody got sick.

The main reason IMHO, besides the much improved tech, is that very few VR experiences are creating the situation you describe, where there is a disconnect between physical and virtual motion. A lot of work has been done to develop techniques for moving the user in ways that don't violate what the user's body thinks is happening. It's an area of ongoing research, but already some pretty effective techniques have been discovered. So while it's true that a lot of people can't stomach a roller coaster VR experience, there are also tons and tons of VR experiences that work just fine without inducing nausea.

I don't think VR or AR is going to have the exclusive hold on the future because they both have their usefulness. Further, there is so much overlap in the technical needs that ultimately both will probably be delivered to consumes in the same device anyway (e.g. an AR headset with a removable opaque covering over the eyes that you can put on for a VR experience).

(P.S. As to the OP's question: Vive wins this round, but only slightly now that the Rift has finally released hand controllers - the room setup is less convoluted and it deals with user orientation better and allows for other devices to be given tracking sensors - but round 2 could easily go to Rift, we'll see)

Comment Re: Curly braces = good. Indents = bad. (Score 1) 173

Actually, lots of people would miss it - just go ask on on comp.lang.python for example - it's one of the features that many people really prefer about the language. I for one do. I totally get that you might not like it, but to a /lot/ of people not only is it not a negative, it's a big positive.

Comment Re:Curly braces = good. Indents = bad. (Score 1) 173

C'mon, go re-read what I said - not once did I suggest that "everyone" (or anything close to that) was having problems with those things, only pointing out that that is a class of problems that can arise due to having both braces and indentation (which is significant on some level to the human but not the language). Unlike many of the anti-Python posts, I didn't make any claim that this was a major source of bugs, a huge issue, etc.

Anyway, looks like my posting limit is just about up with this story, not sure if /. will let me continue feeding ACs, so thanks for the discussion and have a great day!

Comment Re:Curly braces = good. Indents = bad. (Score 1) 173

*sigh*, no, it's not that at all. I'll assume you're trolling, but for the sake of the discussion: yes, obviously the compiler requires them, but that's purely because that's the way the language was designed. My point - which I'm pretty sure you got - was that if you're coming from a language like Python, you tend to wonder why a language like C++ requires them. As in, you don't see the point of them, that's all.

Comment Re:Curly braces = good. Indents = bad. (Score 1) 173

I guess so? I dunno - somewhat ironically, I do *all* of my Python development in vim and I have no special plugins or anything that assist with it other than the native indent stuff, and it's only with other languages (Java/.Net/ObjC/C++) that I feel the need for a full IDE.

Maybe that's for other reasons though (like other languages being more verbose or something). I just find it interesting that in the scenario in which you feel I should really need the aid of a good tool is where I use the most rudimentary development environment. :) Again, I move chunks of code around all the time, so it seems like I should be running into this issue constantly and yet... it doesn't happen. I don't consider myself some superstar dev, I don't consider myself lucky, so I'm at a loss to explain it, especially when the same is true of all of the other people I've worked with that use Python as well. Life's mysteries I guess!

Comment Re:Curly braces = good. Indents = bad. (Score 1) 173

People that think braces and statement terminators are problematic have never used a good auto-formatter.

Hmm, that seems like a pretty sweeping generalization, no? I've used every major IDE out there too, and I don't dev in just Python. As noted earlier, my dislike of braces is that they are noise, and more subtly, they introduce this problem where the block structure indicator that actually matters to the tool (the braces) is a weaker indicator than the one people naturally see more strongly (the indentation - the "shape" of the code is a stronger indicator of structure than some relatively small symbols).

I'm genuinely confused by people who think that cutting and pasting a few lines in problematic in Python. That sort of thing is what people do all day, every day... and somehow it's not causing widespread problems or anything close to it. Even copying and pasting from websites works well (although I find there aren't many real world cases where anyone copies and pastes code verbatim off the web, especially anything more than a few lines).

Anyway, all I can do is reiterate that I've used Python for decades, and watched others - of all skill levels - use Python for decades, and this simply isn't a problem that occurs with any sort of regularity (like I mentioned elsewhere, I can't actually remember the last time I /ever/ saw this happen in practice). Because of this, I really struggle to reconcile lots of first hand experience to the contrary with people who assert it's a major problem (or even a minor problem that occurs with any sort of regularity). Any suggestions?

Comment Re:Curly braces = good. Indents = bad. (Score 1) 173

Hmm, no, that's not what I said (or meant). Rather, when I go to a language like C++, the braces feel entirely superfluous, which begs the question: why are they here? Even with the IDE doing a lot of the work to keep them in sync with the indentation (which in itself is pretty telling), they still feel like completely unnecessary noise.

All languages have things you do that aren't really for your benefit as the developer and are there because the language or other tools need them, and that's a source of friction and too much of that makes it tedious to use that language. Remember in the old days when in C you had to put all your variables at the start of a function? Despite a few who would claim that it aided in "organization" or something, the fact of the matter is that it was because the tool chain just wasn't smart enough yet. Not a big deal, but a case where you're doing stuff not because it helps you, but because the language requires it. For me, curly braces are another example of that, that's all. If you like 'em, great, more power to you. But Python is by no means broken or bad or poorly designed for not having them.

I don't miss them in Python, and in languages that use them I really wish they weren't there.

Comment Re:Curly braces = good. Indents = bad. (Score 3) 173

Well, I too have anecdotes in the opposite direction, so not sure what to say. I've used Python on very, very large projects that have undergone multiple, massive refactorings and I'm not aware of a single time in a refactor that this was an issue. Honestly, as I've read your message and others' and genuinely tried to imagine the circumstances under which it would happen, I'm really struggling. Like, do you have these 10 page functions or something and large swaths of code are being cut and paste willy nilly?

The "major source of bugs" comment - is that "major source of bugs [in programs I've worked on]" or "major source of bugs [for Python programs generally]"? If it's the latter, I'd love to hear more because, again, my experience and the experience of everyone I've ever worked with who uses Python is the exact opposite.

Comment Re: Curly braces = good. Indents = bad. (Score 2) 173

"nearly impossible to find bugs in" ?? Sorry, but that's at best a wild exaggeration. I have no way of knowing if you've really seen "teams" of programmers spend "weeks" looking for one line being wrong with tabs or spaces, but it strains credulity - if it's true, then that may say more about those developers. Sorry, I'm sure that comes across rude, and that's not my intention, but ... wow. So this code passed your unit tests and there was some corner case w/o coverage in which it resulted only in something like a logic error and not something more obvious like throwing an exception? Not saying it can't happen, but the whole scenario sounds a bit fishy, especially if it took multiple teams multiple weeks to find it. Anyway...

On the whole, I haven't found Python any harder to find bugs in, and there are a good chunk of bugs that simply don't occur in it, so that it has been a net gain for me. I guess YMMV, but again, I've used Python along with other languages for literally decades and what you're describing just doesn't occur. Maybe I should go buy a lottery ticket or something because I'm wildly lucky... or maybe this just doesn't happen very often in practice.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you think the system is working, ask someone who's waiting for a prompt.