Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom - A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at 88% off. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:bitwise math (Score 1) 605

Compilers aren't AI, they can do any 'trick' the compiler writer knows

There is an entire class of optimizations that the programmer can make but the compiler can't because the programmer understands things about the program that aren't expressed in the source code. For example, maybe the programmer knows that in his case the shift really is equivalent to the divide because he knows the range of the possible inputs, but he can't tell the compiler that unless he's programming in Ada.

Comment Re:Isn't this illegal? (Score 1) 325

ordinary Democrats generally preferred her. If you can't get the left of American center voters to support a so-called socialist

That is an idiotic argument, and here's why: there is almost certainly not a single, solitary "ordinary Democrat" who would have voted for Trump over Sanders. On the other hand, there were many people for whom Clinton's out-of-touch elitist platform (e.g. support for the TPP) made her unacceptable. This includes, crucially, historically-Democratic union workers in exactly the few Midwestern states that handed Trump the victory. Sanders would have swung those people easily.

Comment Re:Isn't this illegal? (Score 1) 325

Bernie was an outsider not a lifelong member of the party.

Who gives a shit?

The Democrats (the party not the people who vote democrat - annoying how I have to spell everything out) would see any win by him as a loss.

More of a loss than electing FUCKING TRUMP?

Let me spell this out very clearly, since Democratic partisans are apparently utter morons: even though Sanders wasn't a loyal apparatchik of the DNC political machine, they would have still been a fuck-ton better off having Sanders sit there vetoing all the alt-right bullshit the Republican-supermajority Congress will be shoving through for the next four years, instead of having Trump sit there signing it into goddamn motherfucking LAW!

Comment Re:Isn't this illegal? (Score 3, Informative) 325

On a related note, the White House FOIA page is currently unavailable. So much for requesting transcripts of all Trump Administration business done over Confide (just for shits and giggles since there's no chance they'd, you know, comply with the law or anything).

Comment Re:He didn't steal the data, they still have it (Score 1) 156

Well, they are secrets, which are only valuable if not shared.

One can make a similar argument about the commercial value of copyrighted material.

On the contrary, one can make the opposite argument about copyrighted material: I say it becomes more valuable to society as a whole (as opposed to any particular entity in it) the more it gets shared.

Comment Re: Well, damn (Score 1, Interesting) 333

I mean, what exactly is wrong with our elected American leaders saying they are going to put forth and defend American interests first and foremost when dealing with the rest of the world?

If that's all it meant, it wouldn't be a problem. But it's actually a dog-whistle for fascism, and you fucking know it.

Was it about the same time it seems it became just plain wrong to be born a white male?

From one white male to another: fuck off with your bullshit feigned victimhood. It's not helping anything, least of all other white males!

Comment Re:Pro Shareholder Agenda (Score 1) 182

Corporations should focus on their employees and their customers, not shareholders.

Corporations should act in the public interest. Otherwise there is literally no reason for them to exist.

Remember, the Constitution affirms the right to assemble, but it does not affirm some imaginary right to do so and then demand special legal treatment to limit liability!

Comment The Commons (Score 3, Insightful) 120

Let's say that I do get tortured and abused, and someone gets pictures of it and puts them online, say in liveleak, or even in some "well respected" news site. Who is responsible for torturing me? The one who did it? Or the jerks who hosted the pics?

They are both responsible, provided no party is a common carrier.

I read a very interesting article recently on the law of the commons. It essentially said that knowing someones real identity in a public commons, makes for polite (read socially acceptable) behaviour. This is why facebook is generally very polite; but anonymous blog comments can be abusive.

The issue is, we have a great tussle between our valid fear of governments, and even private businesses, abusing their knowledge of you; and our need as a society to protect those that cannot protect themselves by revealing the identity of those that abuse. This is not only children, but the elderly, and those with physical and mental impairments.

There is currently no answer to this problem as the two requirements will always oppose each other.

Slashdot Top Deals

This is a good time to punt work.