Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Subtraction... (Score 0) 64

Significant digits (figures)? Fuck that shit - everyone does it incorrectly, and it's fucking retarded when done "correctly". Seriously, why the FUCK would you consider a reading of "20" to be less valid than a reading of "21" when all else (measurement device, environment, methodology, etc.) is the same? Yet "2.0x10^1" is more significant than 20? It's absurd.

Further, 26.3 / 25.6 is a calculation, not a measurement, and you can't apply significant figures to raw calculations like that without fucking everything up. Significant figures are meant to handle the inaccuracy/imprecision of measurements. Only a few classes of calculations are imprecise (essentially because they are based on measurements or approximations, like trig functions on shitty, not cool angles).

What if I asked you to convert 1 meter to inches? 1 meter is exactly 5000/127 inches. Using 1 significant figure, to match 1 meter, we need to do 5000/100! 1 meter is not 50 fucking inches.

For 26.3/25.6 You get exactly 1.02734375.

Now, IF you know the significant figures of the measurements (and you don't necessarily just by seeing the number there), then you can do the following:

Assume 26.3 means a value in the range of [26.25, 26.35) and 25.6 means a value in the range of [25.55, 25.65).
We can take the extremes, 26.25/25.65 and 26.35/25.55 and get 1.0233918128654970760233918128655 to 1.0313111545988258317025440313112. The mean of which is 1.0273514837321614538629679220883, if you want to take a statistical stab at it. Remember our calculated value of 1.02734375? How does that compare?

If we used "significant figures" we'd get 1.03 for a 3% increase. But wait, it gets more retarded. Because if we calculate the percentage increase instead of the ratio, we get a different result even though they're giving us the same fucking information!
(26.3-25.6)/25.6 = 0.02734375, rounded to 3 significant figures gets us 2.73x10^-2, or 2.73% (as leading zeroes are never significant).


Comment Re:Nintendo is done (Score 0) 68

I knew you would come back with this shit. The window includes not just reading the post but the you landing on the story after it was posted, browsing at 0 or -1 to even see it, reading other posts attached to the story before getting to it, finally getting to it, reading it, deciding to reply, and ultimately typing out a response and hitting submit.

I simply don't believe that's gonna happen in less than 5 minutes or before 31 other Slashdot posts are created, especially since you're replying to a bad troll with a pointless post about how it's a good troll. No one takes the effort to praise shitty trolls unless they're the same shitty troll who loves the smell of their own shit.

I caught you, fucking deal with it.

Comment Re:Nintendo is done (Score 0) 68

It's considered poor form to reply to your own post just to agree with it or praise it.

Or are you going to claim that that AC posted, you loaded the page after that, read it all, reflected on it, had a chuckle, and decided to post about how you enjoyed that chuckle, all within a 30 post (sitewide) / 5 minute window? HIGHLY UNLIKELY!

Comment Baby Goes Whaaaaaaaa! (Score 4, Insightful) 111

A walkout is not in anybody's best interest and it's unfortunate that the union chose to do that

I'm generally anti-union because they almost always devolve into pieces of shit, but fuck AT&T and fuck the obvious bullshit line about a strike not being in anyone's best interest. It's in the best interest of the union (and hopefully of the employees).

Comment Re:All these bans are useless security theatre (Score 1) 244

If the point is to spread terror, the destroying an aircraft seems to be more effective than blowing up a queue. Not only is the visual of an aircraft crashing to the earth more vivid, but it demonstrates that security itself is ineffective.

People tend to forget that the last time that happened, the terrorists didn't have any bombs whatsoever. They just bluffed. 9/11 worked because everyone assumed hijackers would try to live and everyone was safer going along with it because that's what had happened before. Security was ineffective because it's basic assumptions were turned upside down.

That would be exactly true of the gate lines today: we assume terrorists would only care about the plane because last time they only cared about the plane, so we completely ignore another gaping security flaw. The number of terrorists it would take to bring down a plane could probably be more "effectively" used at separate airports in the pre-security line.

Hope I'm not giving Trump ideas here for how to unite the country behind him...

Comment Re:What's the plan, Stan? (Score 1) 197

I don't give a goddamn fuck about changing people's hearts and minds. The MRA sexists, the alt-right nazi fucks, the 4-chan high school trolls, the genuinely unhinged infowars people, and the thousands of people who simply want to threaten people online can continue with their shit forever. Great, more power to them. I think they should bring back 4-chan, and make a bunch of other #-chans for them. Infowars should make it's own twitter. Those idiots weren't realizing they would be doing everyone a service by shooting themselves in the head while they were on twitter.

But on the actual twitter, hateful and bigoted people can turn people worth following away. I dunno, it's just a hypothesis I haven't investigated. But I'm more than willing to risk it. If getting rid of a million Milo and Spencer type alt accounts causes even one educated, rational person to say "Hey, maybe Twitter ISN'T a complete cesspit and I should try it," THEN WELL FUCKING WORTH IT.

Comment "innovation" (Score 1) 62

When did silicon valley define "innovative" to mean "Almost as boring as the same old shit"?

This for example appears to be amazon as it has existed since 1998, except prices are going to be even harder to figure out. Oops, I'm sorry, I mean "ALGORITHMS! MAGIC! "LOWER" PRICES!"

When you say "innovative" I think new like the first iphone after I had a fliphone, or like CRISPR DNA editing. Tech bros say innovation though and mean "This iphone doesn't have headphone plugs!"

Walmart pretending to be "innovating" means we should probably just give up the word entirely, it's fucking dead.

Comment Re:"We" are forcing quality down ... (Score 1) 62

Technically that is we the consumers that are doing that. Offshoring, low quality, etc ... those are not CEO choices, those are consumer choices.

Call me cynical, but I keep going back to the MIB quote: "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." Consumers as a mass of people don't make "choices." In big groups, we behave more like a herd. A stampeding herd of cows doesn't "choose" to run off a cliff, the collective is dumber than any individual. It's up to the ranchers to make decisions for the good of the cows.

... not that I expect CEOs to actually make decisions for the good of society unless they're forced to. Just that I really really really don't think consumers are capable of it.

Comment Re:But which kind of stroke? Too thin or too thick (Score 2) 41

I found this link. Ischemic is blocked and Hemorrhagic is bleeding. It sounds like there are signs of either and a CT or MRI can discriminate between the two. I assume there are borderline cases where they can't make a call, maybe like in minor stroke cases? Which I'm assuming yours was?

In any event, I'd be surprised if stroke was the only application for this. I'd assume this would be useful for other parts of the body deprived of blood flow. From my limited understanding, blood block and tissue death can happen in hernias in the guts, fingers and toes with certain blood pressure medications, and probably a bunch of other places.

I'm not a real doctor, so no idea if this is something that would only be useful in brains in a stroke, just seems like the potential uses for it are more than just one big thing like strokes, even if it's unlikely to ever be used to treat anything. (Most drug candidates turn out to not be good for anything really.)

Comment Re:SSD as cache (Score 1) 61

Are you kidding me? 2 GB of "slow" DDR3 blows away whatever SSD you're imagining in terms of both speed and latency. And the ASICs in RAID controllers can keep up just fine. They're typically designed to saturate all their internal links, with headroom.

When the battery backup fails, nothing happens unless the server also loses power.

Where are you getting servers with "100's of GB in DDR4 RAM" as a dedicated cache? Why would such amounts of cache matter when just a few GBs can provide a very low cache miss rate? How do you ultimately account for the lack of speed from running a single device compared to, for example, 4, devices in RAID 10? If you're advocating software RAID or various fake RAIDs, who is supporting it and what are you running on it? Can you boot from it?

Yes, I suppose the RAID controller itself could fail. I've seen it once in my life in a server that was already decommissioned and resurrected to give it away to someone else.

A modern file system with SSD write caches? WTF? I'm talking about the most popular "solution" in the server space - VMware ESXi. How do you set up software RAID in ESXi and use your "modern file system" as such? RAM-based SSD? You mean a fucking RAM drive? Those haven't been relevant for ages due to practical limitations on capacity and power, and of course the fucking cost. Maybe if someone goes back to them using HBM2 they'll be an option, but so far all I can conclude is that you're insane.

Comment Re:SSD as cache (Score 1) 61

RAID provides redundancy and speed. ESXi for example doesn't let you do RAID across multiple storage devices at a software level. My hardware RAID controller has 8 PCIe 3.0 lanes, cache, and battery backup. Yes, battery backup is still important. Yes, a RAM cache is faster than SSDs (though you'll wants to toggle the write cache policy). I don't live in pretend fairy land where SSDs never fail, and I don't shuffle shit off to a SAN/etc. device over network, fiberchannel, etc. because I want the performance.

Slashdot Top Deals

Work smarter, not harder, and be careful of your speling.