Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



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

Comment about time (Score 1) 85

The architecture of software is something almost (if not totally) always neglected in all forms of docs I find on open source project.

One problem I perceive in the open-source community, which I love, is that sharing of knowledge and the education of peers is something that is often considered a mercenary's game - each is left to his own devices. The mentality seems to be: if you can't read the code and figure it out, then stfu noob. This mentality completely forgets that noobs need to learn and not everything should take interminable code reading to figure out.

I've long wished I could contribute to open source projects, but always dreaded the prospect of having to pore through reams and reams of code just to understand basic connectivity and causality in a piece of software. These are things which a few words, a few diagrams can handily take care of, which would be much more efficient than telling everybody the barrier to entry is the ability to devote weeks of code reading just to understand basics. The basics.

I've found new/fledgling projects I can contribute to because as long as a codebase is young I have a chance of catching up, but when something is a world-class projects several years old at least, it would be nice to be able to understand what is going on without having to wait until I am at the 10th level of extraplanarity in terms of coding wisdom.

I hope this example of documentary exposition on open-source software isn't the last I see.

Comment best reason this is interesting: collaboration (Score 1) 219

Ever since I first saw Borg depicted in star trek, I've dreamed of some kind of mind-to-mind interaction being possible. Contrary to what many people fear, there is no need to be permanently jacked into such a system, although, like facebook, you might find yourself compelled to use it ceaselesly regardless of actual benefits - because we are social creatures of habit. Still, the ABILITY to commune mind-to-mind in no way prescribes the NECESSITY to be plugged in and enslaved. Advantages are countless - although I personally feel like communication with any degree of fidelity would have to be restricted to symbols - language, math, diagrams, what have you. More subjective things like complex combinations of feelings or stream of mental impressions are likely to have a unique code to represent them in every brain. For codes that we share, like math, natural language, etc., it would be great to be able to communicate these faster and more conveniently than we do today. For verbal communication, people being in different locations can't be on the phone all the time. Instant messaging is great but not for people who don't like typing or with imperfect vision. I can't wait to welcome our new robot overlords who are me!

Comment AR can be useful... (Score 1) 101

I easily say what I look forward to, and it will come from a combination of machine learning, human input, structured and unstructured information: the ability to look at something and know how it works, what it's made of, where it came from, who's involved with it. I mean, not having to google/wikipedia every interesting aspect, but having it show up translucently in front of what you're looking at.

This would be especially interesting for complex things like computers, electrical devices, organisms.

I'm looking forward to sub-$300 quality tablet devices to start working on my own version.

Comment usage based billing not the issue (Score 1) 364

But how it's being or was going to be done. In theory, charging the amount that a service is worth (plus small markup for profit) is great business. However, BELL and ROGERS have complete ownership of all telecom infrastructure in this country. Given this situation, does anybody familiar with capitalism and human nature expect prices to be fair and proportional to usage? Technology has improved in the last ten years - fact. Whether it's routing or transmission, all relevant equipment is cheaper and better. Prices have remained static or in many cases kept up with inflation - fact. Service has remained static. Hardly any improvements in the last decade. Some better plans are available for much more money. Does all this add up to fair service? I wouldn't mind usage-based fees if: - the infrastructure PAID FOR AND DEVELOPED BY THE GOVERNMENT (and hence the people) didn't belong to just one company - I could use the internet to replace tv (you can't due to collusion and racketeering by cable providers) Compare all this to cable tv. What is the typical cable subscriber's costs? 40$ per month? 50$? This will not change if the tv is on 24/7. How much bandwidth is that? Clearly the infrastructure can deliver massive amounts of data at little cost to the provider.

Slashdot Top Deals

Save yourself! Reboot in 5 seconds!

Working...