Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Twitter "Twitpocalypse" Snags Mac, iPhone Apps

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the y2k-all-over-again dept.

Social Networks 160

awarrenfells notes coverage in Macworld of what is being called "the Twitpocalypse" — Twitter applications breaking as the number of tweets exceeds 32 bits. "The first apparent victim of the Twitpocalypse was The Iconfactory's Twitterrific for iPhone, which stopped working immediately following the event. ... Atebits Software's Tweetie has also been affected by the Twitpocalypse. The program continues to function for browsing and posting tweets, but searches no longer work in the Mac version and results appear one at a time in the iPhone version."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Strangely reminiscent of a facebook group (2, Interesting)

Mr_eX9 (800448) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323281)

Re:Strangely reminiscent of a facebook group (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28323531)

How is this offtopic? OP posted a link to a facebook group about integer overflows.

Well. (4, Insightful)

dov_0 (1438253) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323283)

Which twit didn't see that one coming? Surely it should have shown up in testing?

Re:Well. (2, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323329)

In later testing, it should be dected, but to overflow 32 bits thats over 2 billion messages. For being founded as a not-so-major project, I don't think they would think that in 3 years that it would reach that much.

Re:Well. (2, Insightful)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323365)

You might start thinking about it around 1 billion though. Maybe even at 500 million (especially if you are in some sort of obscene growth phase...).

Re:Well. (2, Informative)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323471)

AFAIK, Twitter itself was unaffected, it's just client applications that failed.

Most client apps probably only handle the number internally, and never show it anywhere, so the developer possibly never even saw that it was getting close to the limit.

"Twitter itself was unaffected" (5, Funny)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323525)

Yes. When I first saw mention of this I got my hopes up but they were soon dashed.

Re:"Twitter itself was unaffected" (1)

dov_0 (1438253) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323591)

Yes. When I first saw mention of this I got my hopes up but they were soon dashed.

Same here. I think the only people calling it the 'twitpocalypse' and sensationalist journalists. Only two apps were affected and we can presume, as other free apps are available according to the article, that the number of users affected is rather small.

Re:"Twitter itself was unaffected" (2, Interesting)

Goldberg's Pants (139800) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323767)

I was one of them. I use Twitterific.

Figured it was just overhyped but around 6:30pm my time last night, the app just died. And of course with the Appstore having such a stupid approval process it'll take a while for any fix to appear.

Re:"Twitter itself was unaffected" (1)

Marcos Eliziario (969923) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324137)

Right from CSI /.

"Looks like we have anothe double fashioncide here....
Hey!!! You lieutnant! move your fat donut ass and get all these people from the scene, for goddamn's sake!
I think that we will get those web 2.0 gang's assess this time."

Re:Well. (4, Insightful)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324083)

I want to know who setup twits as signed. Are there going to be negative twits? Twits by your evil twin?

THINK about what your code does and choose the appropriate data type.

Re:Well. (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324413)

People just think "integer" and type "int". That's what happens when you learn from 5-page tutorials instead of a comprehensive spec.

Re:Well. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28323941)

I believe most all the TWiTs saw this coming, at least as soon as the twats at Twitter said something about it.

I'm just not sure what you think Leo, Alex, Andy, Colleen, Amber, Steve, Dick, Sarah, or Martin could have done about this...

I'm a TWiT.

Re:Well. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324007)

someone w/ mod pts pls mod this up!

I'm a TWiT too!

(parent forgot a few)
Leo Laporte, Alex Lyndsey, Andy Ihnatko, Colleen, Amber Mac, Steve (Spinrite) Gibson, Dick (the giz wiz) DeBartolo, Sarah Lane, or Martin Sargent..

John C Dvorak, Patrick Norton, Merlin Mann, Kevin Rose, Molly Wood, Jason (I love Audible!) Calacanis, Prager... I know I'm forgetting a few as well...

Re:Well. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324649)

It's important that all TWiTs stand united against the twats at Twitter!

Re:Well. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28325095)

I want to see some heads roll. Not over this specific problem, but over Twitter in general.

Is it just me... (0, Offtopic)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323287)

Is it just me or does Twitter seem to be the most unreliable of all social networking sites? I mean, between these outages and the "fail whale" that appears every day or so, can't they get some decent servers? I mean, even Facebook which has way more people consuming way more bandwidth doesn't go down near this often.

Re:Is it just me... (4, Insightful)

paazin (719486) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323337)

Is it just me or does Twitter seem to be the most unreliable of all social networking sites? I mean, between these outages and the "fail whale" that appears every day or so, can't they get some decent servers? I mean, even Facebook which has way more people consuming way more bandwidth doesn't go down near this often.

Probably because they realize as soon as this fad passes, pretty much the only value they'll have are those upgraded servers.

Why is twitter hate so cool around /. (5, Insightful)

loteck (533317) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323711)

You guys have been calling twitter a fad for at least two years [slashdot.org] , meanwhile families, businesses, celebrities and politicians have been flocking to it in droves and using it extremely successfully. For example, Dell.

Also, I see a lot of "what does Twitter really do??" posts. Either these posters are simply being obtuse or /. IQ's have plummeted recently.

Re:Why is twitter hate so cool around /. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28323851)

It comes from the fact that Twitter's gotten a shitload of media hype far beyond what it deserves, to where something is important not because of its substance but because it's on Twitter. It's like when TV shows would heavily advertise their website, and their website had fuck-all for content.

There are a couple of big differences between websites of old and Twitter, though: The web offers a flexible format for content delivery and websites have eventually started to make use of this flexibility, whereas Twitter is inherently extremely limited. Also, websites are not all reliant on a single private company that has absolutely nothing resembling a viable business model -- whereas Twitter mostly certainly is.

Re:Why is twitter hate so cool around /. (0, Troll)

jo42 (227475) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323871)

IQ's have plummeted

As more and more people have gotten on the Internet, the median IQ has come way down. Thus the explosive growth of MySpace, FaceBook, Digg, and especially now, Twitter. After all, just what sort of knowledge, wisdom, experience and depth can be uttered 140 characters (or less) at a time?

For example, the Twitter version of Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace would go like this: "Some sh*t happened to a bunch of people in a foreign land."

Re:Why is twitter hate so cool around /. (2, Funny)

dpille (547949) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324103)

More on Internet drops avg IQ Thus explosive growth MySpace etc now Twitter Relevant in 140 chars? Twtr Tolstoy reads: sh*t happens 2 peeps There, fixed that for you. Sorry to make you counter your own argument.

Re:Why is twitter hate so cool around /. (1)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324939)

Everything has a life cycle. How long does something need to live before you can no longer declare it a fad? Is Linux a fad too?

Disclaimer: I am a Linux user and I've contributed to open source Linux/Unix apps.

Re:Why is twitter hate so cool around /. (1)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324969)

Urgh, Slashdot posted my reply under the wrong topic. Bug?

Re:Why is twitter hate so cool around /. (4, Insightful)

tsa (15680) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323933)

Some fads last long. See Second life, or SUVs. Both useless but it took a long time for most people to realize that.

Re:Why is twitter hate so cool around /. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324375)

Remember all the hype surrounding the Segway? I don't think anybody hates the Segway product; they just hated the hype. It is the same with Twitter. The product itself is essentialy glorifed instant messaging; big fucking deal, but not worthy of hatred by itself. But to hear everybody droning on and on about it every single fucking day like it is the second coming is a little much. We don't hate Twitter; we hate the Twitter hype machine.

Re:Why is twitter hate so cool around /. (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324425)

I hate the product. Who cares that you're brushing your teeth or climbing a particularly steep flight of stairs? Microblogging is maddeningly inane.

Re:Why is twitter hate so cool around /. (1)

drew (2081) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324405)

Eh, I know what it does. It's essentially one gigantic IRC chat room.

What I'm having a hard time figuring out is why so many people think it's such a big deal.

Re:Why is twitter hate so cool around /. (1)

paazin (719486) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324519)

Eh, I know what it does. It's essentially one gigantic IRC chat room.

What I'm having a hard time figuring out is why so many people think it's such a big deal.

Because it's part of new media and as such also part of the new economy; that is, for the cynical, selling hype with grade A marketing. ;)

Re:Is it just me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324569)

It's not that the fad will pass...that would take much longer.

But what will happen is that someone at Twitter will figure out that a) their service is incredibly popular and b) they're losing a ton of money running it. At that point, they'll come up with some short-sighted plan for monetizing their success which with either a) fail or b) alienate their users to the point where they all migrate to some new competitor that is willing to run their service at a loss for a while...the infrastructure behind distributing 140 character messages should take all of about 3 weeks to replicate, so all Twitter has going for it is the massive user base.

Their only hope is that someone with an actual business plan will be duped into thinking that they have something of value and buy them.

Re:Is it just me... (3, Interesting)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323729)

I mostly agree with you, but I'm going to take it easy on hating twitter for the time being, since it seems to be the only mass media still operating in Iran at the moment [theatlantic.com] .

Overflowing 32 bits (5, Funny)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323307)

So that means there are 2-4 billion messages (depending on if they meant signed or unsigned)? There goes the last of my faith in humanity.

Re:Overflowing 32 bits (1)

Fishchip (1203964) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323333)

It took twitter to break the camel's back for you? =P

Re:Overflowing 32 bits (2, Insightful)

johnlcallaway (165670) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323539)

Have faith .. if you ignore the orphan tweets [slate.com] , the remaining messages were only created by 37 people who aren't smart enough to realize that their friends don't really give a crap about what they are doing, or are willing to wait to hear about the important stuff when they get together to do stuff instead of sitting with deer eyes in front of the iPhone waiting for the next tweet to show up.

And... (5, Funny)

dangitman (862676) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323309)

... nothing of value was lost.

Re:And... (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323367)

... nothing of value was lost.

Actually what was lost was any hope left I had for humanity. More than 2,147,483,647 'tweets' have been 'tweeted.' God, I feel stupid just saying that. But what is that? Like half the population of earth?! And then they go so far as to call lack of mobile Twitter applications apocalyptic? Humanity has officially jumped the shark, people. Some other animal should have been given a shot at ruining the world.

I mean at least I can derive cheap entertainment from cell phone texts [textsfromlastnight.com] but Twitter transcripts have little to no value in my eyes. If anyone needs me, I'll be in the backyard building a rocket ship to seek out another planet free of Twitter. Hopefully it'll just have more minor problems like being covered in methane or a flesh eating silicon based virus ...

Re:And... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28323519)

Actually what was lost was any hope left I had for humanity. More than 2,147,483,647 'tweets' have been 'tweeted.' God, I feel stupid just saying that.

Shut up, you silly twat.

Re:And... (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323579)

If anyone needs me, I'll be in the backyard building a rocket ship to seek out another planet free of Twitter. Hopefully it'll just have more minor problems like being covered in methane or a flesh eating silicon based virus ...

You can't escape. Twitter travels at the speed of light. But this is a generational thing. For my sister, her neurons have been modified by consumption of ecstasy. Mobile phones have been cheap and available since she was 15 or so. Emailing small bits of crap around the world is a way of life for her.

Sure, I would like to live 1000 years but I am not going to like the world that distance into the future.

Re:And... (4, Insightful)

MrMista_B (891430) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323877)

You feel stupid saying 'tweet', but you're posting on a site called 'Slashdot'.

Re:And... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324823)

going to h t t p colon slash slash dot dot org doesn't inherently make me a "twit", as twitter does.

Re:And... (1)

russlar (1122455) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323409)

If anything screams for that tag, this is it.

Re:And... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28323551)

... nothing of value was lost.

I beg your pardon? _I_ use twitter!

Re:And... (1)

e9th (652576) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323621)

You send anonymous tweets?

Re:And... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28323713)

And I expect them to be modded +5 funny!

Re:And... (1)

master5o1 (1068594) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323743)

No, can't you see he tweets under the username "_I_". Clearly he would be at http://twitter.com/_I_ [twitter.com]

Re:And... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28323823)

Can't see how the content of tweets can be any less original than that very tired post & tag on /..

Let's see (5, Informative)

tqft (619476) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323339)

2^32 * 140 char is approx 2^40 = 280Gb so all the actual tweets would fit one smallish (new) hard drive

Amount of time used - a lot

Benefit? Unknown.

What do people get out of it? I thought about it and don't see the point unless I am desperate for continual updates about everything. I just took a week off from my regular news sources (website - bloomberg and newspaper types), because I am not having a holiday this year and needed a break. There a few hundred unread rss messages waiting for me (/., groklaw and so on).

Educate me.

Re:Let's see (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28323437)

2^10 = 1 KB (1024)
2^20 = 1 MB (1024^2)
2^30 = 1 GB (1024^3)
2^40 = 1 TB (1024^4)

2^40 != 280GB. 2^40 != 280 Gb

((2^32)*140)/(1024^3) = 560 GB, or using 1000 instead of 1024, 601 GB.

Including some other stuff, lets make it 160 bytes/tweet for things like username or something, 640 GB.
Still, you can by drives that can hold that much for under $100.

Re:Let's see (1)

tqft (619476) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323473)

At this level of analysis being out by less than a factor of 10 is fine

Looks like I screwed converting 140 2^6 = 64 2^7 = 128 2^8 = 256 and used 2^32 instead of 2^31

Re:Let's see (1)

Mage Powers (607708) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324095)

One bit one way, one bit the other way. You did forget the usernames that the tweets belong to, and timestamps

; (12+168)*2160459012/2^30
                ~362.17516489326953887939

Re:Let's see (1)

strredwolf (532) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323513)

It's mainly chatter, so if you could fit it in a few gig with some nice compression.

Re:Let's see (2, Insightful)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323595)

What do we get out of this [slashdot.org] ? Is it any different?

Re:Let's see (1)

master5o1 (1068594) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323761)

We get a nice message stating that we have either "Bad" "Neutral" "Good" or "Excellent" karma, and occasionally some funny posts.

Re:Let's see (2, Interesting)

tqft (619476) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324091)

It just seems to me if have something worthwhile to say 140 char isn't enough.

With the volume of information I am interested in increasing I know there is a sacrifice between speed, completeness and size. I can't see getting good info from 140 char to make it worthwhile - unless we are going to play follow the link and I would rather hit a big blog (eg /. ) that has summaries and many links than try and follow a vast volume of little stuff and piece it together.

Maybe it just won't work for the way I want my information.

 

Re:Let's see (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324355)

Maybe you don't have any friends?

Seriously: you value your RSS news feeds - but can't understand the value of updates from people that you actually know?

It's just a matter of priorities.

Re:Let's see (1)

tqft (619476) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324787)

None of the people I know IRL are on twitter or and only a few are twits. Some know how to browse porn and use iTunes, but they generally have a life on the 'net.

Re:Let's see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324603)

What do people get out of it?

A feeling of being connected, part of the herd, maybe.

Perhaps it's a substitute for family or friends.

I must be getting old... (4, Funny)

religious freak (1005821) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323347)

Funny computing names like beans, cookies and web were pretty cool and hip... then came blogs, vlogs and pods, which I found rather to be rather silly words... but Twitpocalypse??? WTF?

Re:I must be getting old... (5, Funny)

Snarf You (1285360) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323783)

Just wait until 64 bits becomes too small... yes, I am referring to Twittageddon.

Re:I must be getting old... (1)

WebManWalking (1225366) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323893)

Read and wrote without a chart: 01110011 01101111 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101

Re:I must be getting old... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324321)

It could be worse:

Twigedy (tragedy)
Twitamity (calamity)
Twitaster (disaster)
Twitastrophe (catastrophe)
Twitaclysm (cataclysm)

And my personal favorite:

Twitocaust (holocaust)

Re:I must be getting old... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324925)

Ahh twitpocalypse, the fabled moment when all the twits die. Can't wait.

This is not a Twitter problem (1)

jabelli (1144769) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323415)

Please note that this is not a problem with Twitter, only some third-party clients that were not smart enough to use 64-bit integers for the tweet ID.

Re:This is not a Twitter problem (1)

JimboFBX (1097277) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324237)

actually its the clients not smart enough to use an unsigned integer.

The clients not smart enough to use 64-bit integers will have their day in a couple years.

Wait the most important thing was left out... (1)

immortalpob (847008) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323443)

What was the tweet that did it?

Re:Wait the most important thing was left out... (1)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323447)

fml

Re:Wait the most important thing was left out... (2, Informative)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323609)

Presumably it was this one ((2^31)+1, ids around 2.2 billion don't exist yet, so apparently the broken apps were using signed numbers):

http://twitter.com/nk/status/2147483649 [twitter.com]

Don't worry, they are rather simple to find:

http://twitter.com/statuses/show/2147483649.xml [twitter.com]

(The first url can be constructed with information from the second...)

Re:Wait the most important thing was left out... (0, Redundant)

brajesh (847246) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323685)

What was the tweet that did it?

http://twitter.com/nk/status/2147483649 [twitter.com]

Twitter uses 64bits, 3rd party apps do not (5, Informative)

ZyBex (793975) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323487)

I'm kind of tired with reading that this is Twitter's fault. Twitter actually uses 64 bits ID internally. The "problem" is with 3rd party apps that interface with Twitter's API and expect to receive only a signed 32 bit integer.

http://twitter.com/twitterapi/status/2048659057 [twitter.com]

Disclaimer: I've never used twitter.

Re:Twitter uses 64bits, 3rd party apps do not (2, Interesting)

MBCook (132727) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323521)

This doesn't surprise me. Even if they started out on 32 bit IDs, they must have realized this was coming at some point and upgraded everything to 64 bits. It's no surprise Twitter was ready for this.

It's interesting that 3rd party apps broke. Why would anyone store the ID of something in a signed variable? I can understand not thinking of using a long, but why a signed int?

Re:Twitter uses 64bits, 3rd party apps do not (2, Insightful)

ZyBex (793975) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323589)

Most occasional programmers don't think about these issues or even, god forbids, check the API's documentation. They just happily use "long a,b,c;" all over the source code. I even bet that version 0.1 of some of those apps used "int a,b,c;" ...

Re:Twitter uses 64bits, 3rd party apps do not (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323665)

For these apps, where the amount of data isn't huge and much of it is transient, storing the id as a string makes lots of sense.

It wastes some bits, but it won't overflow.

Deadly Alphanumeric (2, Interesting)

Ukab the Great (87152) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324397)

Actually, any seasoned DBA or database application developer will tell you that any numeric designator/ID number issued by someone other than yourself should always be represented and handled as a string value to deal with the situation of a numeric designator suddenly going alphanumeric.

If Twitter switched to alphanumeric designators for records, all the existing apps would not only not handle the tweets, some less well written apps would probably crash altogether.

Re:Twitter uses 64bits, 3rd party apps do not (1)

threephaseboy (215589) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323931)

Why would anyone store the ID of something in a signed variable?

You ever read the comments in the documentation on php.net?
I weep for humanity.

Re:Twitter uses 64bits, 3rd party apps do not (2, Interesting)

Marcos Eliziario (969923) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324167)

Do you realize that most of those applications were made in languages where programmers don't even need to know what a unsigned int is, don't you?

Come on.... I saw a lot of applications out there use floats to store ammounts of money, calculate compound interests.

Let's not be that harsh with those app writers.

On a related note (4, Funny)

MLS100 (1073958) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323495)

I'm quickly running out of synonyms for 'pointless' to troll all these Twitter stories.

God save us (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28323517)

Does this have to do with creating thousands of accounts [slashdot.org] that run amok around a website, pretending they're someone else??

Oh wait, wrong twitter.

In 140 chars? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28323565)

Apparently so. Perhaps even more in this age, pretending you're someone else seems a good indication that whatever it is you're doing has fa

Twitpocalypse? (3, Insightful)

Reed Solomon (897367) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323563)

Man am I glad I never got on this bandwagon.

Re:Twitpocalypse? (1)

jo42 (227475) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323883)

It's up there with "Blogosphere"...

Re:Twitpocalypse? (4, Funny)

selven (1556643) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323899)

Just wait for the Twitargeddon. And then the Twapture. Hold on a sec, let me open up my trusty thesaurus. Twitastrophe. Twinihilation. Holotwaust. Twataclysm. Twitimation. End of the tworld. Don't let Elmer Fudd find out about this cause that would be a great big Twagedy!

Re:Twitpocalypse? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324123)

My girlfriend has a severe case of Twataclysm. It's a serious malady and not in the last bit funny, you insensitive clod!

Re:Twitpocalypse? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324129)

...Twitastrophe. Twinihilation. Holotwaust. Twataclysm. Twitimation...

I think I saw a porno named twataclysm once...

Can you see the point? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28323705)

"I don't see the point". That's a lazy response. Millions of people are sending billions of tweets, surely not every single one of them is completely a fool, deserving to be humbled by your genius' stated lack of understanding?

Whatever the reason, you seem to think it's important to tell everyone how much you don't understand, and really it just looks silly.

Maybe you say "I tried it for a while and I didn't get it". OK, you tried to understand, and couldn't, so you gave up. It's not any more impressive than just outright telling us you don't understand.

Understanding why people do things, even if you disagree, is a good thing. Understanding lets you work with people. Understanding gives you insight towards changing their mind. You should strive for understanding, rather than wallow in telling people how much you don't understand. "I don't see the point" is a step on the road towards anti-intellectualism.

Re:Can you see the point? (1)

ResidntGeek (772730) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324437)

Not seeing the point isn't the same thing as not understanding why people do it.

Also, you seem to be suggesting that attempting to elevate one's self above others is a bad thing. Okay, so ivory towers and arrogance are bad, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't think that dumb things are dumb.

why use a signed integer for that? (2, Insightful)

MrBallistic (88770) | more than 5 years ago | (#28323987)

if you know you're getting a positive number back, why not just use uint?

Re:why use a signed integer for that? (1)

Marcos Eliziario (969923) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324185)

Because you're using a language where all variables are signed by default?
Because the CS course at the prestigious University you attended thought that they should adapt to the market and teach you Java, Python, RUP, Scrum and the PMBOK?
And that because of that, you use floats to store money because, well, they have cents....

Like what language (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324315)

Because you're using a language where all variables are signed by default?

The Mac and iPhone API's use NSUInteger all over the place for ID values - you can guess the typedef...

If developers had followed that lead they wouldn't have run into this wall.

Re:why use a signed integer for that? (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324833)

Maybe -1 would be a code for something, like, post not found? I know it doesn't seem to make sense to used a signed integer for things that can only be positive at first but here's a few things about using signeds instead :

  • you can use the negatives for some extra stuff like codes
  • it can avoid you some bugs if you do a subtraction of integers and use the result for some more maths (so you get 4 billion something instead of -1)
  • and then concerning the range, there are only a few cases when 2 billion numbers is not enough but 4 billion is always enough. If you care about range it doesn't matter whether you get 31 or 32 bits, either you have enough with 2 billions or you use 64-bit integers.

Doh (1)

J05H (5625) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324101)

Some clients didn't plan for growth?

Yet another reason... (1)

polymerousgeek (1196703) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324163)

to use unsigned 128-bit integers for everything.

Re:Yet another reason... (1)

Waccoon (1186667) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324795)

Great. Now all of your molecules can join in on the fun!

31 bits, not 32 (1)

pescadero (1074454) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324195)

A bit of nitpicking, but 2 billion (and change) is only the maximum value for 31 bits. So only apps which treat this number as a signed int are affected. Apps that treat it as an unsigned int won't be affected for another year or two (when the count passes 4 billion and change).

Y2K (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324217)

Oh boy..haven't they learn from Y2K bug?

Wondering if (0, Troll)

metachimp (456723) | more than 5 years ago | (#28324385)

Is 'twat' the past tense of tweet?

Python (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28324431)

Interestingly, the Twitter client I use is written in Python, so this wasn't even an issue. :)

Twitter is full of twats (1)

B33RM17 (1243330) | more than 5 years ago | (#28325021)

I too had my hopes dashed when this did not confirm Twitter no longer worked as well

It provides nothing of intrinsic value. Just the illusion that some semblance of human interaction is taking place.

And to any jackass that defended twitter in their comment... Why?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?