Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment Re: Does anyone speak technical here anymore? (Score 1) 337

He wrote a proxy, so probably something like:

The proxy fetches the content from the remote server to a local directory /speedtest and then serves the content to the phone from there (rewriting URLs in the process to be relative to /speedtest).

Comment Re:Not possible with Free software (Score 2) 60

If a free program wanted to do this, it would be readily visible and available for inspection to determine what exactly it's doing.

That's the fantasy world that free software proponents* like to trot out. While it's technically correct, in the real world, however, very few people have the ability, motivation, or time to code-review every application they use.

* Not that it should change my point one whit, but I also am a free software proponent, but not for that dubious reason.

Comment Just eliminate messaging and mentions (Score 2) 204

One way to fix Twitter would simply be to eliminate mentions and messaging. IMHO, the use-case for Twitter is to allow people to receive broadcast (one-way) messages from others.

For example, if I follow Bob, then I (and everyone else who follows Bob) would receive Bob's tweets. If EvilJerk also follows Bob, he can be as outraged and tweet about it as much as he wants -- nobody except those who opted-in to follow EvilJerk would get his tweets.

Problem solved.

Comment Re:And yet HTML is still shit (Score 1) 136

Browsers now have to accept twice as many tags.

To make your attempted point accurate, you'd actually have to say that they accepted an exponential number of tags 2^N where N is the length of the tag, e.g., "a" could be either "a" or "A", but "body" could be "bodY", "boDy", ..., "BODy", or "BODY".

Nobody does that in a real HTML parser: they simply translate the tag name either to all-lower or all-upper case and then do the comparison.

We dumb [sic] grave accent tags, like À for à and à for à which prevents browsers from converting all tags to either uppercase (or lowercase)...

No it doesn't. The lexical analyzer handles all of this. If it sees an '&' character, it does the case-sensitive lookup for what follows and then returns the actual character that it represents back to the parser. If it's not an '&', then it does the case-insensitive lookup. Really, this isn't that hard.

At least it isn't a badly designed and bloated as XML.

HTML derives from SGML. If you think HTML is bad, SGML is much, much worse. XML is much easier to parse than HTML which is why XHTML exists.

The worst think about parsing HTML (that you didn't even mention) was the fact that some elements (as they're correctly called, not "tags") have open tags, but no (or optional) close tags, e.g., <p>.

Comment Re:You missed a couple of sections (Score 1) 309

The court says that when you download child porn from foreign countries, you should expect that you might get malware and your information might be exposed.

Why should the content of what you download matter? What if I downloaded legitimate software? Also, why should the country of origin matter?

Slashdot Top Deals

An authority is a person who can tell you more about something than you really care to know.