Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



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

Comment Snowden's info reported in 2006 (Score 0) 260

First, context of what Snowden actually did....

We knew about what Snowden released since 2006, read it and weep: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...

From that article:

NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls
Updated 5/11/2006 10:38 AM ET
The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.
The NSA program reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans — most of whom aren't suspected of any crime. This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations. But the spy agency is using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity, sources said in separate interviews.

Now that we got that out of the way, let's see Snowden for what he is, an obtuse narcissist who was either blackmailed or duped into stealing a powerpoint presentation that gave names of programs we knew existed.

Today, Snowden is basically in prison in Russia.

I think he should come clean on what actually happened, admit the info was already available, and get pardoned. Same with Chelsea Manning and others who haven't gotten as much press coverage.

We need whistleblowers. Our government needs a safety valve for situations when the people who watch the watchers are not doing their job.

Comment "quantum" computing (Score 2) 38

D-wave is not quantum computing. It's regular, non-quantum computing that uses software to simulate what we think using non-locality in computing would be.

Humans actually controlling quantum non-locality would be arguably the biggest feat since harnessing the atom...it amazes me how this blatant bs continues to be called "quantum"...

Comment Re:Not quite. (Score 1) 227

I just don't have the time or the inclination to fuck around with the current MBP products. I see a million roadblocks and stumbling points that I just don't want to deal with. I have other things to do.

imho you aren't an edge case...you should be the target user...sort of like how a pole vaulter aims *over* the bar...grandmas and sorority chicks who use their mac for email and facebook will be happy if you're happy, in that sense

but...switching to windoze?

Comment design hubris vs total garbage (Score 1) 227

Apple under Tim Cook seems to believe iOS devices are the "future" as the traditional computer dies out

Partially true.

Apple is the victim of their own design hubris...the port removals are the perfect example.

They think paper thin phones are "a few years away" and are pushing wireless everything, and it's horseshit.

Apple just needs to come back to reality and put usable ports on their devices...that's all...

Windows is still spyware/adware garbage, and even with Apple's port nonsense, Apple products are still miles better than Windows.

Mac's are Unix-like systems...basically they are Linux with a candy-coated shell. People do the most technical software development on Macs all the time and it works flawlessly.

Windows is...it's just garbage...Apple just needs to put the fucking ports back and all will be well.

Comment Government Contracts (Score 2) 227

Windows has always...*always* benefitted from these kinds of stats due to the fact that most desktops in the US government run Windows.

It's our taxpayer dollars at work!

Apple's products are better than ever...*except* for the ridiculous port nonsense.

Windows is still garbage spy/ad-ware...it's worse than ever.

Neither are right, but Apple's products are still way better for the end user of any level.

Comment Re:simple concept can be as complex anything (Score 1) 381

There are more than two cases. The volume of detail has an affect on the difficulty of a programming problem, but it is not the same affect as when there are difficult details.

I have seen other responses below that say the books are good for reference for what algorithm to use in specific and complex use cases.

I have only needed to "look up" an algorithm once (simple random sort in python to generate random work groups from all students present that day in a class I taught) but if you need to do that semi-regularly I can see the books being very useful.

As far as OP is concerned I still think it's just a matter of perception on the reader whether OP 'gets it' or not b/c their responses are so short on detail.

Comment Re:It's highly overrated (Score 1) 381

Arduino libraries themselves are rife with examples of such 'bad' programming, some operations unnecessarily take many more cycles than necessary while using a simple example in Knuth's books shows how to do it in one (such as bit shifts).

OP said other books have covered these needs better, in OP's opinion.

You do make a good point however, there will always be people cramming circuits into smaller and smaller things and some code has to run them.

Comment simple concept can be as complex anything (Score 3, Insightful) 381

They're completely correct.

OP is being a bit flippant.

Conceptually, the idea of using alphanumberic characters to give computers instructions is "simple" and getting a computer to do basic operations is fairly simple with a good tutorial or guide.

The idea that the codebase for a web app like Yelp's website or a phone app like Snapchat is "simple" or "easy to learn" is of course patently ridiculous...I think it boils down to whether or not you give OP the benefit of the assumption.

Seriously OP really didn't say much other than, "No it is easy"

Comment "engagement" (Score 2) 220

oh ffs...everyone with the "social media" hot takes...

first, *idiots* are killing discourse...not any kind of communications technology. Idiots. I blame the decades-long Republican project of defunding public schools to enable privatization.

2nd, idiots will use *all communication channels available* to communicate their idiot ideas

3rd, 'social media' is text and pictures...stored and communicated between users on a computer system. That's all it fucking is.

facebook isn't innocent by any means. They use an obtuse term "engagement" to measure usage of their system, and it is sentiment agnostic...meaning if the system shows you a dumb post about Trump for your weird uncle and you comment on it 3x, that gets meansured as "engagement"...even though you absolutely hate the article posted and were only commenting to tell others that it was from a fake news site. Repeat that over and over and it's easy to see how bullshit articles would rate high in facebook's system.

They do many shady things (remember the 2012 election and the phantom Mitt Romney likes on facebook???)

but blaming "social media" is steering this whole conversation wrong...it's not "social media" it's specific to a system and there are humans who choose how that system works

Slashdot Top Deals

The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is the most likely to be correct. -- William of Occam

Working...