Slashdot: News for Nerds


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!



Campaign To Kill CAPTCHA Kicks Off

poizan42 Re:Fun Fact (558 comments)

What's the problem in just typing "A"? Almost all of the characters are right in front of you on your keyboard!

about a year ago

Wayland 1.1 Released — Now With Raspberry Pi Support

poizan42 Re:remote desktop vs windows (197 comments)

Flickering and architectural problems. The first is purely cosmetic, but is impossible to fix without making chances to the core protocol. The second means that an order of magnitude more work is required to add new functionality than what could be done with a more modern design.

Daniel Stone explains the problems with X11 in great details here:

about a year ago

Wayland 1.1 Released — Now With Raspberry Pi Support

poizan42 Re:remote desktop vs windows (197 comments)

obviously by ssh admin he means whoever administrates access to ssh, and would allow X forwarding in the sshd_conf file...

You are incorrect. X forwarding still requires giving your local host permission to the x server.

I don't know which distro you use, but usually that is enabled unless whoever administrates access to ssh disables it.

about a year ago

Wayland 1.1 Released — Now With Raspberry Pi Support

poizan42 Re:remote desktop vs windows (197 comments)

Well, assuming that the ssh admin has permitted ssh forwarding. And that you invoked your ssh client with the appropriate flags. And that you export the DISPLAY variable on the remote host. And that you set your xhost permissions on your own host.

Other than that, nothing to be done.

You mean

ssh -X user@host xterm?

Damn hard that is!

about a year ago

Supreme Court Upholds First Sale Doctrine

poizan42 Re:costco vs omega (648 comments)

Doesn't matter anyways - I created a redirect page.

about a year ago

Book Review: Sams Teach Yourself Node.js In 24 Hours

poizan42 Re:Nope (112 comments)


about a year and a half ago

New Flat Lens Focuses Without Distortion

poizan42 Re:But... (202 comments)

reversesolidusdot? sloshdot maybe?

about 2 years ago

Solid State Quantum Computer Finds 15=3x5 — 48% of the Time

poizan42 Re:Can someone explain... (262 comments)

You can easily check if a factorization is correct using a conventional computer. Of course factorizing 15 is pretty useless in itself, but you have to start somewhere. To put things into perspective, assume you have a number with 1000 digits, and you want to factorize that. The best known conventional algorithm for doing that is the General Number Field Sieve with which the factorization would take in the order of 1.4 * 10^43 operations. Assuming you had a computer capable of executing a trillion operations per second it would still take about 4.6 * 10^23 years, which is 33 trillion times the age of the universe!

Now assume you had a quantum computer with enough qubits - we would need at least 3322 qubits. Let us say that it is otherwise a pretty crappy quantum computer as it only gets the factorization right 0.1% of the time. Now we try to use our quantum computer. It gives us an answer in the order of just a few billion operations. Even if it is quite slow and only capable of 1 million operations per second, it would still give an answer in less than an hour. This answer is probably wrong, however we can easily check that using our conventional computer. Checking if a number divides another is FAST. It can actually be done in slightly more than just the size of the input - the existence of a factor in a 1000 digit number would take the order of maybe 100,000 operations to check - in much less than a second.

So the time it takes to validate the answer is negligible here. We just keep on asking the quantum computer to try again until we get it right. So how long would it take? After 10000 tries we would have gotten the correct result with a probability of 99.995%. So if every try takes 1 hour, we would be pretty sure to have succeeded in less than a year (10000 hours = 1 year 1 month 21 days 6 hours). So even with this big but crappy quantum computer we would be able to factorize the integer in less than a year instead of 33 trillion times the age of the universe.

about 2 years ago

I typically interact with X-many OSes per day:

poizan42 About 4 (280 comments)

4: Windows (XP and 7), GNU/Linux (Ubuntu and Debian), Android, iOS. I consider GNU/Linux and Android as distinct OS'es as the only thing they really share is the kernel.

more than 2 years ago

Solar Geoengineering Could Lead To Whiter, Brighter Skies

poizan42 Re:Add a tag to the story (165 comments)

Already did before seeing this comment

more than 2 years ago

Judge Orders Oracle and Google To Talk, Again

poizan42 Re:Only applies if static ctors are called clinit? (89 comments)

First the abstract as well as the summary of invention directly talks about functions in class files. Of course it's the claims that are really important here.
Claim 1-5 explicitly talks about a clinit method in a class file (2-5 builds on 1).
Claim 6-11 talks about determining what code does by "play executing" it (i.e. simulating) - I can't believe this doesn't have any sort of prior art - seems a lot like some more or less standard optimizations by compilers.
Claim 12-17: again here it's talking about clinit methods in class files
Claim 18-23: "A computer-readable medium containing instructions for controlling a data processing system to perform a method, comprising the steps of: ..." - I think they are claiming rights to create a program that implements claim 6-11 here?

more than 2 years ago

Judge Orders Oracle and Google To Talk, Again

poizan42 FTFM (89 comments)

... without *ever* mentioning java in the claims.

more than 2 years ago

Judge Orders Oracle and Google To Talk, Again

poizan42 Only applies if static ctors are called clinit? (89 comments)

By skimming #6,061,520 it seems to me that google could go free from that one just by calling the static initializers something else than - I don't know if they already do that. But it somehow seems oddly specific that the patent explicitly says "clinit method(s)" instead of just saying static class constructors or something like that - like it's only targeting java without never mentioning java in the claims.

more than 2 years ago

ARM-Based Arduino Competitor At SparkFun

poizan42 none EABI? (106 comments)

Slightly offtopic, but the naming of the compiler seems strange to me. It indicates that it's not using EABI, but which ABI *is* it using then?

more than 3 years ago

Boot Linux In Your Browser

poizan42 I'm working on something similar! (393 comments)

I haven't looked at his javascript yet, but from what I can read from the technical notes it's an x86 intepreter. I'm actually working on a pc emulator in javascript, but with a dynamic translator at its core.
The project is hosted at github here:

more than 3 years ago


poizan42 hasn't submitted any stories.


poizan42 has no journal entries.

Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account