Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



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

Comment Re:Surprised I'm still alive! (Score 1) 527

It's not just meat that is best eaten cooked. I believe a potato is much more edible once baked, boiled, or fried. E. coli is bad for people but cooking your fruits and vegetables will make it safe from them.

Potatoes came from Peru. Unless you have Incan blood in you, your ancestors have only been eating potatoes for 500 years when it was brought to Europe. And if you do have Incan blood, then your ancestors have been eating it for 5000-8000 years only, which is too small a time frame for any meaningful evolutionary change.

Thus potatoes are certainly not part of our natural diet cooked or raw.

Comment Re:little to do with pokeman go (Score 1, Offtopic) 153

BAN POKEMANS

You joke but this is government logic. 2 people got killed by drivers playing pokemon. Very visible, perfect "think of the children" motivator to rally up support for your campaign. I can see politicians trying to ban pokemon in certain areas or while driving which is just impossible to enforce.

But how many people have actually prolonged their life by playing pokemon? Seriously, this game did something amazing: it got people off the couch and walking around in the park. I have never seen a video game do that before. I have friends that lost weight by doing nothing different except playing pokemon.

It's just like a politician mandating people wear helmets on a bicycle. Sure all else being equal it is safer, and I am sure wearing a helmet has saved some lives, but they don't look at unintended consequences: people dislike going on the bicycle with a helmet and it makes biking more expensive, so less people do it which ends up costing more lives than it saves by virtue of encouraging couch potatoes.

Comment Re: Does not replace mount (Score 1) 541

I get that the Unix way is to have lots of little utilities and services doing specific things

But this is exactly what Systemd is. Systemd is a collection of several dozens of binaries each one doing specific things. People say systemd is monolithic and bloated because it packages all these binaries together. But that is exactly how other popular packages like util-linux and binutils are packaged, and nobody bats an eye about them.

Heck by any definition of monolithic, the linux kernel is a lot more monolithic than systemd. Where is the outrage?. There is an occasional microkernel vs monolithic kernel discussion, but its nothing compared to the Systemd flamewars.

I know this is slashdot and it is customary to hate SystemD, but does anyone actually have a technical argument against it? All the systemd tools I have tried seems to work well. Even if they didn't, they are all separate binaries and it is trivial to replace each individual component. It seems to be adopted by a lot of distributions by the developers choice. Has anyone here had an actual problem with systemd? if so, were you unable to replace the specific tool from systemd that did not work for you?

Comment Re: What does Netcraft say? (Score 1) 515

Gnome cut useful features in the same way that Apple does. And both desktop is therefore a bad choice if you like to customise you desktop to suite you. Now MS are follow suit with Windows 10 so we will soon all be forced others opinions on how a GUI should look down our throats.
Personally I think that stinks and that Gnome took a good start and buried in "we know what's best" attitude that I will do better without.

And those 2 (apple and gnome) happen to be my favorite desktops :)

Comment Re:What does Netcraft say? (Score 2) 515

I used to be a big fan of KDE, It was my first desktop environment back in the 90's and I used to follow their blogs, and even made a few contributions. I marveled at their frameworks and clean code. As the years went by, KDE developers improved the code more and more. Every iteration of the desktop had better and better frameworks, and that is all it had. Usability seemed to be an after thought for most KDE developers. They added features that while impressive, were ultimately not particularly useful such as activities and rotating plasmoids.

In contrast, the gnome project had some frameworks that seemed rather poor in comparison, but the devs were laser focused on usability. They mercilessly cut out features if they were not useful. At the end of the day if I am using a tool every day, usability is king.

Comment Re:Why should it have a remote? (Score 1) 234

Why should each TV come with its own remote these days? The default should be that people use an app on their phone...

It sounds so logical and wonderful in theory. But as someone who tried it a while ago I can assure you phones are absolutely horrible remotes.

Suppose you just saw Janet Jackson flash a boob during the Superbowl. A reasonable person would want to watch it over and over to make sure they catch every detail of what just happened. What do you do?

1) reach for your phone in your pocket.
2) slide to unlock it
3) enter your password or fingerprint
4) browse to where the remote control app is
5) click on it, wait 3-5 seconds for it to open.
6) select the device you want to control (the tv, or dvr or whatever)
7) and finally you are ready to hit the rewind button.

Even if you cut half these steps, you are talking about at least 10-20 seconds to get to that damn rewind button. You will need to keep your eyes on the phone screen the whole time. That boob is ancient history by now, people have already discussed it on twitter, made thousands of memes, laws have already been enacted to prevent the unholiness of a nipple from destroying more childhoods. Now, your friend who has a real remote wants to talk about wardrobe malfunctions. He could be calling you right as you are in the middle of working towards getting to the rewind button.

Compare that to the remote that comes with your dvr

1) Pick it up
2) click rewind.

You don't even have to look at the damn thing, you can keep your eyes on the nipple the entire time. It takes 1-2 second.

Now imagine this every time you want to fast forward a commercial or pause it to get a beer. You have just invented a new very effective technique for interrogating prisoners in Guantanamo.

I got fed up with the phone as a remote very quickly and bought myself a real remote with damn physical buttons.

Comment Re:Nest temperature display is backwards (Score 2) 193

are you serious - they only show the SET value and not the ACTUAL current value? no option to set the default large text for the one you want? not a split display, even?

They show both, the current and the set temperature, but the set temperature is in large in the center of the screen, and the current temperature is tiny. You have to actually get close to the thermostat to read it as opposed to glance at it from the other side of the room. Its an epic fail.

Here is a pic. In that picture, the current room temperature is 78, and it is set to cool down to 75.

There is no way to change this.

Comment Nest temperature display is backwards (Score 5, Interesting) 193

I have a Nest thermostat. It displays in large the temperature you set it to instead of the current room temperature. What the actual fuck? A mercury thermometer is smarter than this.

There was a feature request for this opened in 2013, it has 1683 votes and its the third most popular feature request. You would think that even an entry level programmer would be able to fix that or add an option, but no, the feature has been completely ignored for years and contacting support about it only gives the reply "keep voting for it", even though that is clearly going to /dev/null. The other popular features request are equally ignored.

I am very frustrated by the complete lack of support these devices have. The entire community web site is nothing more than a pacifier for nest owners.

Comment Re:Loss of jobs... (Score 1) 260

Jobs is not a scarce resource, labor is.

We don't have to work to produce air, that does not mean unemployment. If we had to work to produce air, then some of the jobs in other sectors would not exist, and the labor dedicated to that would simply be allocated to the more important job of producing enough air.

Consider that in 1800, 76% of the labor force was dedicated to food production. That is how much labor it took to feed the population. Naturally, there was not that man people left to work on leisure activities, and the typical work day was 12 hours/day 7 days a week.
We dramatically improved the efficiency in agriculture, and now only 2.3% of the labor is dedicated to it. You would scream "we have killed so many jobs", but in reality, people are now free to do jobs like arts, services, technology improvements, etc... and now we typically work 8 hours/day 5 days a week. If we keep innovating, and producing more with less labor, then we will simply shift jobs to things that we want but are now preempted by our needs, and our work schedule would continue to be reduced as we are able to produce more in less time. Imagine working 4 hours / day 2 days per week, the only way to achieve that is by increasing our productivity.

Another example, refrigerators killed the ice making companies. So what? all those people simply started working on other stuff that is less critical.

This is how we improve our quality of life, by producing more with less resources (including labor), so we can as a society enjoy life instead of work for it.

Comment Re:The real reason? (Score 1) 381

As a 40 year Type 1 diabetic, I am sick to *death* of fat people making excuses about how "I ate the wrong type of food, so I gained weight". instead of admitting "I ate too much". And I'm sick to death of the endless rationalizations and excuses.

You know why these surveys conclude rationalized absurdities? Because humans making poor choices *lie* on surveys, even if they don't admit it to themselves.

I agree that people rationalize absurdities. Some people blame genetics even though the gene pool in America today is the same gene pool of the 60's when obesity was not an epidemic. Some people blame "slow metabolism", neuropath, Obama, aliens, or whatever other bullshit people tell themselves to cop out of exercising.

That said, what you eat does make a huge difference. The body has a natural way of regulating how much food you eat: if you are hungry, you should eat, and if you are not, you should not eat. However, this mechanism completely fails when we eat foods that we just didn't evolve to eat such as refined sugar, white flour, french fries, etc. It is very easy to over eat 5000 calories per day if your diet has a lot of sodas, cakes, french fries, rice, bread rolls, etc. Your body just does not register quick enough that you are full when you eat these, and as the GP explained, these carb rich foods will cause your body to store the extra energy as fat.

In contrast, you simply cannot overeat broccoli, your body will tell you you are full before you eat too much.

I am not excusing overeating. It is your own damn fault if you overeat, I am simply saying that one of the best ways to stop overeating is eating quality food.

Comment Re:What is webassembly? Never heard of it before.. (Score 1) 118

>> 1) Javascript has awful performance ... perform many times faster than javascript.

Not true at all. SIMD does a provides performance advantage, but that is hardware optimzation.

It is more than that. Consider the following code fragment in javascript:

function sum(values) {
        var result = 0;
        for (let i=0; i < values.length; i++) {
                  result = result+values[i];
        }
        return result;
}

should be a straight forward function right? should perform the same in c++ right?, well, not so fast. I could pass an array of integers, an array of floats, an array of strings, or an array of any combination of them and the function would still be valid. So at runtime, the code would have to check the type of each individual entry in the array to figure out what the + operator really means, and in each pass, the + operator might be a completely different function. In other words, the best compiler ever would have to come up with assembly that follows this pattern:


function sum(values) {
        let result = 0;
        for (let i = 0; i < values.length; i++) {
                  tmp = values[i];
                  if (tmp instanceof int) {
                            result = addint(result, tmp);
                  } else if (tmp instanceof float) {
                            result = addfloat(result, tmp);
                  } else if (tmp instanceof string) {
                            result = concat(result, tmp);
                  } ...
                  else {
                            throw exception;
                  }
        }
        return result;
}

Actually that is an oversimplification, since the variable "result" would also be have to checked for type. It might have been turned into a string in the previous pass for example. You can see that is a lot of code that is generated to check the types if all I want is to sum up some numbers.

Now consider a similar code in C or java or any other statically typed language:


function sum(int values[], int length) {
        int result = 0;
        for (int i=0; i < length; i++) {
                  result = result+values[i];
        }
        return result;
}

The compiler knows that every single entry in values is an int, and no matter what "result" will remain an int. Therefore there is no need to check what type it is. The + operator can be simply replaced by an integer add instruction in assembly. And yes, a smart compiler could even use SIMD to optimize this code, but even without SIMD, any half brain compiler will do better than the best javascript compiler.

Now you can actually see some numbers. V8 is an amazing javascript engine, and all cases except one its an order of magnitude slower than equivalent code in C++.

Comment Re:What is webassembly? Never heard of it before.. (Score 5, Interesting) 118

Aren't the vast majority of web APIs text based anyway? Why would webassembly change anything about that?

I am a game developer and I am really excited about webassembly.
There are many challenges a game developer faces today:

1) Javascript has awful performance. Some game related code such as procedural content generation is very cpu intensive, and it would just take too long in javascript. Webassembly is meant to _always_ be compiled to native code and it is statically typed which allows the compiler to optimize the code much better. It will perform many times faster than javascript.

2) Javascript does not support threads. This is one stated future goal for webassembly. This is useful when you want some work to happen in the background (again, procedural content generation).

3) Plugins suck. If I deploy my game, say with the unity plugin, I am asking my customers to download a huge ass plugin in order to run my game. Some won't because they don't trust the plugin, some wont because the download takes to long, some wont because they don't have the required permissions, some won't because it does not work in their platform. Whatever the reason, I am losing a lot of potential users by using a plugin even if I get better performance. Webassembly will not require plugins.

4) Download time. If I compile a game to asm.js, just the game engine runtime require several megabytes downloads. Webassembly does reduce the size of the download significantly. This is one of the stated goals. This is one of the reasons webassembly is binary instead of text based. The smaller the download, the faster the player can start playing and the less users I lose.

5) Startup time. If it takes 30 seconds to parse all the asm.js or javascript before the game actually starts, that is an eternity, and many people will actually close their browser before the game starts. Webassembly is binary because parsing it will take orders of magnitude less time than parsing the equivalent asm.js.

6) Browser compatibility. Today, only 2 browsers are serious about asm.js: Edge and Firefox. webassembly is being developed by all major browsers. It is also quite likely it will be implemented in mobile or even outside browsers altogether.

So yes. I am excited about it. It will make may games more accessible to my users.

Comment Re:Exams should be open-book anyway (Score 4, Insightful) 394

Exams which test memorization are pointless. Better to make them problem-solving based, challenging and open-book. That way cheaters will still do poorly. It's more a problem of lazy exam creators than anything.

I would agree 100% with you if we are talking about math, programming, physics, etc... On these subjects I am all for open book tests.

But if you are talking about history or anatomy, well, the entire subject is about memorization.

Slashdot Top Deals

"All we are given is possibilities -- to make ourselves one thing or another." -- Ortega y Gasset

Working...