Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
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:a little late to the party (Score 1) 92

You're making it pretty clear by the fact you can't even answer these questions for yourself that you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about.

Even if I do do your research for you wants the point where you're clearly a zealot? The fundamental fact you're making assertions about a peace of software you're demonstrably highlighting you have no idea alone means that any discussion with you is a losing proposition.

If you genuinely had an open mind you wouldn't be calling something you have never used, and have no knowledge of a pointless proposition. The fact you are means any suggestion you're capable of holding an open mind on the topic is already well and truly null and void - an open mind requires you to not jump to conclusions, yet that's the entire premise of your thread here - your conclusions based on zero actual experience of the subject at hand.

If I've learnt anything about Slashdot it's that I have way better ways to spend my time than trying to convince a zealot of the facts, so here's a better idea - fire up Google and go and find the answers to your own question if you care. If you're not going to bother to do that then you merely prove my point - you're not here with an open mind, you're here to spread your zealotry.

Comment Re:FSF = not practical (Score 1) 144

When he started there was no such thing as an entire operating system of free software and no hardware you could run it on. This exists today - it didn't then. It's not as readily and easily available as it should be - but it exists. And, as he rightfully pointed out, if he had compromised the ideal of that existing - it would still not exist at all. It only exists because he never settled for less than that.

Well evil tounges would suggest that without Linus we'd still be waiting on GNU/Hurd. GCC forked off and became ECGS. "Linux libc" forked away from glibc and was only later "gnu-ified" again like ECGS. The rest the FSF made seems mostly to be small utilities, for sure having a GNU/free ls, awk, sed, grep etc. is important but hardly the showstopper. His one (admittedly huge) crowning achievement was writing the GPL, but most the projects seemed to refuse his leadership.

And even then the adoption by some of the core players seemed to be more by chance than ideological success, like Linus primarily wanted to see what other developers were doing to learn so he could run it on his box. User freedom was never a big deal for him nor most other Linux kernel core developers, which is why the GPLv3 was met with a "meh". X11 and Wayland doesn't use the GPL. Apache isn't using the GPL. Android isn't using the GPL except the kernel. It is popular? Yes. Is it the only commonly used open source license? Very far from it.

According to Black Duck GPLv3 + LGPLv3 + Affero GPL = ~10% of all projects and GPLv2 + LGPLv2 ~20% so most projects haven't really been following Stallman since 2007. And that's not counting the non-GPL licenses, my impression is that the Apache license has gained a lot of popularity particularly with corporations like Google (Android), Apple (Swift) and Microsoft (ASP.Net). The kernel is the one project that seems to get away with copyleft because you can run any userspace on top. And because it doesn't really crack down on shims and driver blobs.

Comment Re:CEO's fear (Score 1) 172

I seem to recall a study a few years back that showed that most highly paid CEOs' decisions were not better than random and, in a number of cases, were significantly worse. They shouldn't be worried that they can be replaced by AI, they should be worried that they can be replaced by a magic 8 ball.

Comment Re:Robots are good (Score 2) 172

The problem isn't robots taking all our jobs, it's robots taking half of our jobs. How do you manage a society in which 50% of the working-age population are contributing essential work for the functioning of civilisation and the other 50% are not able to do anything that a machine can't do better? Unemployment rates of 10-20% are currently seriously problematic for western societies and cause huge economic problems. For some jobs, you can solve it by dividing the work among more people, so you have four people working a 10 hour week instead of one working a 40 hour week, but that doesn't help you to deal with the people who aren't able to do any available jobs.

Comment Re:Synonyms being used (Score 4, Insightful) 88

Any particular reason why we should just assume that only those nice, 'anonymized', 'statistics' were for sale; or that the 'anonymizing' done wasn't as pitifully weak as it often is?

Shockingly enough, people seem to be willing to pay more for data that are more or less cosmetically obfuscated, and trivial to correlate with information from other sources; and less for data that are actually anonymous enough to be impossible to reconstruct.

Comment Not really (Score 1) 334

I work far more with SQL than programming languages really, but I do work a lot with doing operations on large data sets so I definitively try to avoid looping through a million rows. I use in-memory or temp tables to chain operations without storing state. And that's all neat and well, but without a ton of state in between those set operations to say what's ready, what's running, what's done etc. I'd go nuts. The functional bits are the stretches between the state almost like barriers in computer shaders and other synchronization methods. A pure functional application well I couldn't really imagine it unless it read one file as input and spit out a result, it just flows through the whole application. Every time I try to understand state in FP my head hurts.

Comment Re:FSF = not practical (Score 1) 144

Stallman is more like the kind of political extremist who would tell everybody not to vote because it perpetuates the system. He doesn't force anybody to do anything, he only forces himself and suggests to others. Forcing is what he's against.

And how is this not wanting to use the force of law to impose his ideological views on others?

"Instead of the DMCA, which makes it a crime to show people how to break DRM, it should be a crime to make, import or lease or sell devices with DRM," Stallman says. "Both the players and the media. It should be a crime. The executives of the companies that are now pulling the strings of the W3C, they should go to jail for doing DRM. "

Comment Re:a little late to the party (Score 1) 92

"That's lock-in, not a technical advantage, as are most of the other things you list."

Call it what you want, there's real practical benefit in being able to have centralised security configuration. Knowing that when you lock out a user account on the domain, that they also can no longer log into every database server and so on has massive practical benefit.

"Well, and there are several enterprise-grade relational databases that don't come from Microsoft and don't come with Microsoft's strings attached: Oracle, DB2, and Spanner for example."

I already mentioned Oracle, and sure, DB2, though it's a small player. Spanner is neither a true RDBMS, nor used widely in the enterprise.

I get it, you hate Microsoft, that's fine. But don't pretend MS SQL server isn't widely used, and it's widely used for good reason - it's a good product.

Besides, even your argument about vendor lock-in makes no sense. SQL server for Linux is open source, the whole point being that it's easy to migrate to.

The reality is most companies would rather pay for something solid and reliable like MS SQL server that integrates well into the rest of their ecosystem, than have something free but shit like MySQL. As I said before, you may have your own reasons not to want MS SQL, or for just hating Microsoft, fine, but don't expect everyone else to agree with you when some of us actually have a wide range of RDBMS experience and aren't just pulling nonsensical theories about a particular product out of our arses as you clearly are.

Comment Re:It's not that I want to brag I'm old... (Score 1) 334

Add to that, the defining feature of a functional language is the set of things that it disallows, not the set of things that it permits. A multi-paradigm language, by definition, has to permit anything that the various paradigms permit and so doesn't gain the benefits that you get from being able to reason about your code in a language that doesn't permit unconstrained mutability or side effects.

Comment Re:a little late to the party (Score 1) 92

Probably because it has deep integration with windows networks and security that most businesses run on, coupled with the fact it's a proven reliable, fast, and highly scalable RDBMS. MySQL for example just isn't reliable, last time I ran it it would corrupt the data store on disk and you had to run a fix tool provided with MySQL to get the server to even start and load your database again.

Beyond that though it has great surrounding services for ETL, analysis, and reporting, coupled with clean and easy integration into the .NET ecosystem (which, as the other article posted recently shows is one of the most prominent languages for financial/enterprise use during the working day). There's also high quality 1st party support available with defined SLAs.

I think the mistake you're making is that you're assuming that because it's not right for you, it's not right for anyone. But you're not everyone, some companies have the cash to blow on software that's proven, and integrates fantastically with their environment. If your budget is zero or near enough then fine, of course MS SQL server isn't for you, but not everyone is doing basic zero budget stuff. There are big businesses out there that need something enterprise grade, and that typically means Oracle, MS SQL.

Comment Re:It has its uses (Score 3, Interesting) 334

This needs moderating up. Talk to an Ocaml programmer and a Haskell programmer about what makes a functional language and you'll see very different opinions and these two are languages that were actually designed as functional languages: the bits that end up in other languages are a tiny subset.

Coming from the Haskell side, I see functional programming as programming without side effects and with monads. You can implement monadic constructs in other languages, but it rarely makes code cleaner. Just having higher-order functions doesn't make a language a functional language any more than having structs makes C an object-oriented language.

If the question is 'do you think using higher-order functions simplifies the expression of some algorithms' then the answer is obviously 'yes': programmers have a lot of tools to choose from and most of them are useful at least some of the time.

Comment Re:It has its uses (Score 3, Interesting) 334

In C++14 in particular, lambdas with auto parameters dramatically reduce copy-and-paste coding. If you have a couple of lines of code that's repeated, it isn't worth factoring it out into a separate templated function (in particular, you'll often need to pass so many arguments that you'll end up with more code at the end), but pulling it into a lambda that binds everything by reference and has auto-typed parameters can reduce the amount of source code, while generating the same object code (the lambda will be inlined at all call sites).

Comment Re:Couldn't Apple remove the Uber App as a respons (Score 1) 108

This is what should have happened when Cook met with him.

Actually, what should have happened is that Cook said: Look, not only did you break our app store rules, but you actively added code to keep is from detecting it. So your app is rejected, will be removed from everyone's phone, your developer account is closed, and you won't be allowed to create a new one.

Comment Re:They simply remember your UDID (Score 1) 108

Then there's IDFA, the Identifier for Advertisers, which the user can reset at any time via system settings, and which Apple will reject your app for if they catch you using it for anything other than ad-tracking.

And every time I submit an app, they threaten me personally with all kinds of nastiness if the app does anything with the IDFA that it shouldn't. I'd say they take this seriously. And I'd say that if I worked for Uber (which I probably wouldn't), I would _not_ be the one submitting apps.

Slashdot Top Deals

I just need enough to tide me over until I need more. -- Bill Hoest

Working...