Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Follow a dream in a circuitous path (Score 1) 481

I burned out in my 50s and followed an old dream to become a math teacher, which was the hardest thing I've ever done professionally (much harder than software) and didn't go so well because I was only good at the teaching part of teaching. So I became a math and computer science tutor. I don't earn what I used to but I'm doing pretty well and I've never had so much fun earning a living. It helps that I also have a math degree; I get very little demand for computer science tutoring. And since I do miss writing software and wanted to learn Ruby, I rolled my own accounting system, about 5% of which is in Google Script (to export my tutoring calendar to a spreadsheet) and the rest in Ruby. That was fun!

Comment Re:Not trig as we understand it today. (Score 1) 83

I still don't see how this is trigonometry. When solving a right triangle and you have two of the sides, you can find the third side using the Pythagorean Theorem, without trigonometry. That's pretty much what this system does, normalized so the long leg is 1. The way they did it, taking advantage of terminating sexagesimal fractions coupled with an impressive collection of Pythagorean triples, is certainly amazing, given how long ago this was done, and it might have been extremely useful, but I wouldn't call it trigonometry since it's silent about the angles.

Comment Re:Not trig as we understand it today. (Score 1) 83

Agreed. In the video, they keep saying that this trigonometry is "different" from modern trigonometry because it's based on ratios, not angles. Hogwash! Modern trigonometry is all about ratios, but in relation to angles. It might be interesting to study triangle ratios without reference to angles, but it's the relationships between the angles and the ratios that makes it trigonometry. If you can't figure out how high up a wall a 10' ladder goes at a 70 angle, it's not trigonometry!
Image

Open Sarcasm Fighting Copyrighted Punctuation 155

pinkushun writes "SarcMark is a copyrighted punctuation mark, that claims 'It's time that sarcasm is treated equally!' Pretty damn cheeky while they're charging for their software, which only inserts their punctuation through a hotkey. Open Sarcasm is destroying SarcMark by advocating a new punctuation mark (not displaying here properly — alt+U0161) as the new open and free sarcasm symbol. Either way, this will be one interesting turnout. With bad unicode support across the web, displaying the characters properly might be an issue. PS Left out sarcastic end sentence as Slashdot doesn't display the U0161 character."

Comment Why is there only AC everywhere? (Score 1) 323

In this age, when most electronic devices live on low voltage DC, why do we keep building them to plug into AC power, with all that lost energy and lost space taken up by bricks and other power supplies?

Instead, why haven't we standardized on some standard DC power plug, maybe with +5V and +12V, with some minimum power cleanliness? Houses and office buildings could be wired with that alongside AC, and people could buy power strips that plug into AC and provide many standard DC outlets (old houses would not have to be rewired). Then many devices wouldn't need power supplies at all, and others would need much more minimal power supplies that would just clean it up and maybe alter the voltage level to its own purposes. I know that DC doesn't travel well for long distances, so still only AC would come to the house/building, but I'd rather have one big, efficient brick in the basement, or one medium-sized, efficient brick in my office, than zillions of little inefficient bricks all over the place.

I guess we kind of have some standards like this, because you can buy 12V stuff for off-grid homes and there's the "cigarette lighter" adapter for cars, and another one for airplanes. But still most stuff we buy plugs into AC.

Imagine a world with no power bricks, and smaller, quieter PCs, tiny phone/camera chargers, etc.

Presumably because of economies of scale, the AC/standard DC adapters could be built to be smart enough to consume not much more power than they emit.

Why haven't we done this? Couldn't a relatively small coalition of big manufacturers do something like this to add value to their products and reduce their costs at the same time?

I admit to being an analog electronics moron so there must be something I'm missing.

Comment Self-selecting data? (Score 1) 104

Er, if a gazillion youtube users were to film molecules exhibiting brownian motion, and if those users were to post the tiny fraction of that video that is amusing, I'll bet those molecules could be "scientifically proven" to dance too.

Linux

2009, Year of the Linux Delusion 696

gadgetopia writes "An article has come out claiming (yet again) that 2009 will be the year of Linux, and bases this prediction on the fact that low-power ARM processors will be in netbooks which won't have enough power to run Windows, but then says these new netbooks will be geared to 'web only' applications which suits Linux perfectly. And, oh yeah, Palm might save Linux, too." The article goes on to skewer the year of Linux thing that seems to show up on pretty much every tech news site throughout December and January as lazy editors round out their year with softball trolling stories and "Year End Lists." We should compile a year-end list about this :)

Slashdot Top Deals

One possible reason that things aren't going according to plan is that there never was a plan in the first place.

Working...