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!

Comments

top

Interviews: Ask Bjarne Stroustrup About Programming and C++

Jay Maynard Re:C++ is an over bloated monster (427 comments)

I'm fluent in C. I understand C statics fine. What gets me is their interaction with classes and instances and...

I'm not complaining about templates mainly because I'm keeping my fingers the hell out of them!

about two weeks ago
top

Interviews: Ask Bjarne Stroustrup About Programming and C++

Jay Maynard Re:C++ is an over bloated monster (427 comments)

It's not? Interviews aren't supposed to be full of nothing but softball questions.

about two weeks ago
top

Interviews: Ask Bjarne Stroustrup About Programming and C++

Jay Maynard Re:C++ is an over bloated monster (427 comments)

Don't get me started on Boost. It's caused me more than a little headache all by itself...like, say, trying to build a specific version against a specific version of OS X.

about two weeks ago
top

Interviews: Ask Bjarne Stroustrup About Programming and C++

Jay Maynard Re:C++ is an over bloated monster (427 comments)

As I said, I learned about it by hacking on it. That's my point: you can't discover that kind of thing by hacking. With that said, got any suggestions about where I pick up what you think are the basics?

about two weeks ago
top

Interviews: Ask Bjarne Stroustrup About Programming and C++

Jay Maynard C++ is an over bloated monster (427 comments)

I learned C++ the hard way: by hacking on a million-LOC program. It's taught me to loathe the language. It's big, complex, and incomprehensible. I once spent three days chasing a bug through a twisty little maze of templates, all different. I routinely struggle with the implications of static vs. not, member variables vs. globals vs. statics, functions that are part of a class vs. those that aren't... Getting code to even compile is often an exercise in trying something, running the build process, then trying something else, lather, rinse, repeat. It's left me frustrated enough to want to drive to College Station and scream at the walls.

All of this has left me wishing for the days of C, in which I'm quite fluent.

Nevertheless, the world seems (perhaps overly) enamored of C++, and I'm probably going to have to deal with it. How do I learn to at least tolerate it, if not like it, instead of actively hating it?

about three weeks ago
top

Skype Blocks Customers Using OS-X 10.5.x and Earlier

Jay Maynard You can still run old Skype... (267 comments)

What the story doesn't mention is that, compared to Skype 2.8, the Skype 5/6 user interfere sucks. Users have been complaining ever since it was rolled out, and Skype's answer has always been to use 2.8.

Fortunately, there's a way to make the old version not check for updates: use your local DNS or hosts file to address ui.skype.com to 127.0.0.1. The update check fails, and Skype 2.8 runs, fat, dumb, and happy. I'm pretty sure this works for older versions of 5 or 6, as well.

about three weeks ago
top

EFF Releases Wireless Router Firmware For Open Access Points

Jay Maynard EFF strikes again... (56 comments)

This is just another spammer and net criminal enabler. The EFF has long fought against efforts to end spam. Encouraging wide-open net access with no accountability is just another step down that road.

The EFF: enabling spammers since the 1990s.

about a month ago
top

Critroni Crypto Ransomware Seen Using Tor for Command and Control

Jay Maynard Time to get rid of Tor (122 comments)

Tor has only ever been an enabler for spammers and other criminals, making it possible for them to hide their tracks. Time to get rid of it.

about a month and a half ago
top

When Beliefs and Facts Collide

Jay Maynard Re:CAGW is a trojan horse (725 comments)

Sorry, but the burden of proof lies with CAGW advocates, not skeptics. You're seeking to overturn the world's economic system and replace it with government control. That extreme a change requires strong proof, and it's just not there.

about 2 months ago
top

When Beliefs and Facts Collide

Jay Maynard Re:CAGW is a trojan horse (725 comments)

And I note the standard Slashdot moderation is in full effect: "I disagree with it, therefore it must be trolling."

about 2 months ago
top

When Beliefs and Facts Collide

Jay Maynard Re: CAGW is a trojan horse (725 comments)

Science isn't decided by consensus. It's decided by predictive power and explanatory power. Nothing else. CAGW has neither.

about 2 months ago
top

When Beliefs and Facts Collide

Jay Maynard Re:CAGW is a trojan horse (725 comments)

damned autocorrect.

that should be "the same old tired leftist government takeover of economies".

about 2 months ago
top

When Beliefs and Facts Collide

Jay Maynard CAGW is a trojan horse (725 comments)

I'll believe in CAGW when the scientists quit fudging the numbers and it still shows it...when they can explain historical data that contradicts the theory...and when they can explain why the warming has stopped for the last couple of decades.

As it is, he fudging is so blatant that "climate science" is nothing of the sort...it's a Trojan horse for the same lod tired leftist government takeoff of economies. That trick never works.

about 2 months ago
top

Interviews: Ask Lawrence Lessig About His Mayday PAC

Jay Maynard Re:Government regulation of political speech (308 comments)

All right, so Adelson evades the ban by paying the Times' owners $3 billion for the paper, runs his piece - indistinguishable from a full-page ad - and then sells the paper back to the owners for $3 billion less the price of a full-page ad.

There's still plenty of ways - available only to the rich - to evade your ban. You're not helping your claimed problem, you're making it worse.

about 2 months ago
top

Interviews: Ask Lawrence Lessig About His Mayday PAC

Jay Maynard Re:Government regulation of political speech (308 comments)

Your argument is like the old joke:

"Will you sleep with me if I gave you a million bucks!"

"Yeah!"

"How about $25?"

"What do you think I am??!"

"We've already established that. Now all we're doing is haggling over the price."

If it's wrong to spend millions to publish political speech but not billions, then you're just haggling over the price.

about 2 months ago
top

Lawrence Lessig Answers Your Questions About His Mayday PAC, Part 2 (Video)

Jay Maynard Re:Didn't answer anyone's questions directly, did (42 comments)

Amen. I was looking for a direct answer to my pointed question, and all I got were mealy-mouthed platitudes.

about 2 months ago
top

Interviews: Ask Lawrence Lessig About His Mayday PAC

Jay Maynard Re:Government regulation of political speech (308 comments)

"Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech" is, and should remain, the law of the land. Especially when it comes to political speech."

"Replace the word "especially" with "except" in that, and I agree."

In other words, you'd turn the First Amendment on its head when it comes to political speech. Fortunately, the entire history of First Amendment jurisprudence as applied to political speech disagrees with you.

This is as it should be. There is NOTHING more important in our society than the freedom to speak about political issues. Anything else eviscerates the First Amendment.

"If Sheldon Adelson wants to buy the entire newspaper and then run whatever he wants, fine. What I don't want to see is him giving a politician a bucket of money, or spending money to run ad or smear campaigns."

If you see no difference between Sheldon Adelson buying an ad in the NYTimes and buying the NYTimes itself and ordering it to run his positions, then there is no hope for you. All banning the first and permitting the second is raising the cost of the ad.

about 2 months ago
top

Interviews: Ask Lawrence Lessig About His Mayday PAC

Jay Maynard Re:Government regulation of political speech (308 comments)

But if the NYTimes publishes an editorial supporting a candidate, how is that different from someone buying the same space in the NYTimes to run an ad? You either have to ban that as the NYTimes making a campaign contribution, or else allow it and leave a giant gaping loophole that lets corporations give to campaigns as long as they can do it in something that can be labeled "news media". This inconsistency is at the heart of Citizens United, and the reason that the decision came down as it did.

Not all contributions are money, though many are just as valuable.

Further, you talk about campaign contributions of cash, but ignore contributions of cash to such things as issue advertising, not related or coordinated directly with a campaign. Are you proposing to outlaw that kind of speech as well? If so, where do you draw the line? And how do you do so without putting a faceless, unelected bureaucrat in charge of deciding what is political and what is not? If you don't, doesn't that pretty much destroy your carefully crafted regime?

And this exposes the fundamental problem: governments cannot regulate speech and do it fairly. Political speech, especially, cannot be regulated without the highest level of judicial scrutiny. Supreme Court jurisprudence is recognizing that fact at long last, and this is to be encouraged, not stifled.

"Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech" is, and should remain, the law of the land. Especially when it comes to political speech. Don't like what someone says? Reply to them. Don't like how loud they say it? Say yours louder. Get help if you need to.

Anything else strikes at the very heart of our country's freedoms, and is not to be borne.

about 2 months ago
top

Interviews: Ask Lawrence Lessig About His Mayday PAC

Jay Maynard Re:Government regulation of political speech (308 comments)

So are you willing to tell the New York Times they can't weigh in on an election, either?

And why should a million people be able to send $100 to a candidate but Greenpeace not be able to send that same $100 million from its members?

And how do you define "politician"?

The same rules must apply to all. Anything else leads to governments deciding what is and is not acceptable speech. That is simply unacceptable, period, end of discussion.

about 2 months ago

Submissions

top

IBM Breaks Open Source Patent Pledge

Jay Maynard Jay Maynard writes  |  more than 4 years ago

Jay Maynard (54798) writes "IBM has broken the pledge it made in 2005 not to assert 500 patents against open source software. In a letter sent to Roger Bowler, president of TurboHercules SA, IBM's Mark Anzani, head of their mainframe business, claimed that the Hercules open-source emulator (disclaimer: I manage the open source project) infringes on at least 106 issued patents and 67 more applied for. Included in that list is two that it pledged not to assert in 2005. In a blog entry, the NoSoftwarePatents campaign's Florian Mueller said that "IBM is using patent warfare in order to protect its highly lucrative mainframe monopoly against Free and Open Source Software." I have to agree: from where I sit, IBM likes Open Source only as long as they don't have to compete with it."
Link to Original Source
top

CodeWeavers to give away software tomorrow

Jay Maynard Jay Maynard writes  |  more than 5 years ago

Jay Maynard writes "Falling gas prices have left more money in everyone's pocket. They'll do something else: Because the price of gas has fallen below $2.79 a gallon in the Twin Cities, CodeWeavers will give away their software tomorrow. The Minneapolis Star-Tribune has the scoop: "When CodeWeavers CEO Jeremy White saw that gas was $2.79 a gallon during a recent fill-up, "I screamed, 'Woohoo!' Then I yelled, 'Oh, crap!' as I realized every American can now have my software for free — kind of upsets my fourth-quarter revenue projections," he said.""
Link to Original Source
top

Judge in Capitol v. Thomas Considers New Trial

Jay Maynard Jay Maynard writes  |  more than 6 years ago

Jay Maynard writes "The judge in Capitol Records v. Thomas said today he's thinking about granting a new trial because he may have committed a "manifest error of law" in his jury instructions. He says that his instruction that simply uploading music to a P2P network without any proof that anyone actually downloaded it may conflict with a case in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals that said "infringement of [the distribution right] requires an actual dissemination''. Briefs are due by May 29, with oral argument July 1. The judge invited friend of the court briefs by May 29, as well."
Link to Original Source

Journals

Jay Maynard has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>