Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Well, duh. (Score 1) 75

And it's more important to take the next step of identifying what is and isn't mathematics. Chemistry applies extensive use of mathematics though I've often questioned the underlying principles underlying their means of representing objects and effects. I seem to feel as if there must be massive amount of contradicting methods to describe molecular behavior. This in itself is alright, but have we actually observed this behavior and have we corrected the chemical mathematics to properly represent these observations?

In addition, why is it that we use high school chemistry books today that are based on the same mathematics taught before the invention of the electron microscope. Did we actually understand molecular behavior so well that what we guessed before we had things like scanning tunneling microscopes was so accurate that we don't have to rewrite the books? Or are we just trying to observe only what will prove what we already know?

Comment Re:Clobbering With Statistics (Score 3, Interesting) 75

I think the mistake we often tend to make is to believe that it is either one side or the other. Computing a cure for cancer is very likely a hopeless approach. On the other hand if we can at some point understand enough about DNA to identify cancerous anomalies and target them through custom tailored retroviruses or nano-tech, I figure... sure why not?

That said, I have been "volunteering" from time to time at a university's biochem department with regards to code optimization. I do this in exchange for lab access so I can learn learn a little about biochemistry. At this point what I've learned is that we really don't know anything at all about biochemistry and instead of focusing all our attention into developing tools that could maybe allow us to actually learn about it, we prefer these insane studies of protein folding an such.

I don't necessarily agree with the original article or how it was written in such a way to sensationalize instead of inform. I think the whole Plato/Socrates conversational thing is entertaining a times, but has very little value outside of philosophy and Hollywood. I do however agree with the sentiment suggesting that there is great value in getting an education that would allow you to make valuable contributions to the study of medicine by taking a less traditional approach.

Of course, I could just be speaking out of the side of my own ass. I like the idea of making improvements to scanning tunneling technology to possibly allow full mapping of a human cell. Then focusing on observing all the molecular interactions that explain the purpose of each part of the cell. Biology labs are almost always completely full of pretty white equipment that looks really really expensive. They even have fancy looking centrifuges.... which is a machine which spins stuff.... around in circles... and it probably cost more than my car (a BMW i3). If I as a computer nerd needed such a thing, I would get a power supply, a mosfet, a motor, an arduino and maybe an IR transmitter/receiver for good luck. Total cost... $100. Biology labs should be located in the same building as machine shops and electronic and mechanical engineers.

Comment Re: these new companies trying to get around old l (Score 1, Flamebait) 261

Actually, the US is more socialist than capitalist. The US tax payer covers cost of living for employees of the largest companies like Walmart and McDonalds. The government creates jobs under the guise of protecting the nation and employs directly or indirectly (by my highly suspicious estimates) 20-25% of the working population (DoD, DoE, CIA, FBI, DHS, TSA, NASA, etc... Lockheed, Boeing mostly, etc... plus the infrastructure to support them). When a person needs a job, the government makes one for them.

The voters decide otherwise every single day. They vote all the time for what they believe will serve their own interests. What's worse is they have no idea what their own interests are. We make most of out decisions without any real information or education.

Suppose that this forum represents a class of voters. We read a headline posted by someone with an obvious bias. The people reading this site tend to take one of two positions "I love Tesla" or "I hate Tesla". They voice their opinions like "I for one believe in the rights Tesla is fighting to uphold." and someone responds about how they don't understand what they're actually saying. Of course, the response will make no impact and the Tesla lover will still love and vote "Tesla is good, I support people who support Tesla". He has no real idea why Tesla is good... all he knows is that they make "clean" electric cars. He overlooks that Elon Musk and Tesla have set some extremely dangerous precedents in the name of doing good things. We justify it by saying too good outweighs the bad, and while Musk is probably a really great guy, and while we really want him to do the things he's doing, he's basically leaving a wake behind him of sheer disaster and destruction which will be colonized by the bottom feeders under the pretense of "You told Elon Musk it was ok... it must be ok for us too!!!".

I love the idea of Elon Musk, he's a dreamer and when I pick up the newspaper each day, I look forward to the stories about him as much as I looked forward to the comics as a child. The newspaper is full of just utter shit. "This politician is a dick, that one is a dick. The world is coming to and end. 14 pages of articles about last night's killings and battlefield crap."... then there's an article about a guy who seems to be building the world of the Jetson's. He'll make us zoom around in tubes as the speed of "Holy shit my face is peeling off" and fly us to the stars. He'll build our houses out of batteries and my grandchildren will glow because of him. His popularity and the way the press treats him makes me feel like there's still room for good news and hope for the human race. He's a real life Tony Stark and I can't get enough of him.

He'll poison us with massive quantities of lithium. He'll build cars with limited life spans and no real plan for how to recycle them. He'll move from metals to plastics, polymers, etc... which have no future but land fill. He'll do lots of awesome things that will simply shit all over the planet. He'll make the environmental disaster left behind by the big three in Michigan look like child's play. Everything the guy touches is basically toxic by the time he walks past it. But holy shit, I hope he doesn't stop! I LOVE HIS STUFF!

I just bought a BMW i3... I really wanted a Tesla, but the car is too f-ing big and frankly, Tesla drivers are generally dicks and I don't want to become one. I actually drive in the normal traffic instead of the taxi/carpool lanes because I don't want to negatively impact the other drivers. Electric cars don't need those "perks" anymore since they were there for the crappy pre-Tesla cars which couldn't get to and from work on a charge in stop and go.

Comment Re:Clinton should be in jail!!! (Score 0) 223

Because if she's put in jail, Trump becomes president almost by default.

It's sickening, she's going to become president and see no repercussions from this event because the alternative option is actually somehow worse.

Let's be fair... if you have to choose between two shit bags for president, wouldn't you prefer the shit bag who is at least ... well not Trump?

What scares the ever living shit out of me is that people actually want him to be president. I don't mean because they think Hillary is worse or because he is the current choice of his team. I mean there are people who hear what he says and thinks he makes sense.

People!!!! This guy is a male Sarah Palin. Before you know it, he's going to import fucking polar bears to New York City so he can stand and shoot them from his balcony too. Maybe he'll claim diplomatic expertise because with a really big telescope he can see Canada from his living room window.

So... while it kills me to say it... Hillary Shitbag Clinton should just be let in free and clear... just forget all this legal shit and let her in. She'll be there 8 years and the republicans will spend their time trying to find a way to top even Trump. Let's face it...
    1) Palin - A woman who can barely speak... I'm not kidding, she makes sounds but no one on this planet has any f-ing idea what she's actually saying and... well neither does she.
    2) Romney - On 31 separate accounts during his campaign he said "The first thing I'll do when I get into office is...". And frankly, it was never the same thing twice. The guy couldn't remember from hour to hour what the first thing he was going to do was. Maybe he's like really super amazing and can do 31 different first things simultaneously. Maybe he can use some quantum physics magic and be in 31 places at once. He was a blathering idiot... and the bitch of it is, when he has prepared speeches, he's bloody brilliant. He just really sucks as using his own brain... well except for thinking things like "Wouldn't my car look great between the grand piano and the couch?". Who the f-ing hell puts a frigging car elevator into his living room?!?!?! It's like standing on your porch drinking a Schlitz and and shooting bears then bragging on TV about it.
    3) Trump... well... come on... I just don't even need to say anything about him. He does it all by himself.

For the love of all that is holy (like pizza) ... quit putting these fucking morons up for election or we'll never have a choice of who is president.

P.S. - You don't actually have to vote for one of these two shit bags... you can vote for another shitbag like Bernie the sellout Sanders.

Comment Don't confuse stupid with malicious (Score 4, Insightful) 528

Hillary is stupid, not malicious. Let's assume for the moment that neither Donald or Hillary are actually as evil as we make them out to be.

Let's also assume for the moment that Hillary wanted to have an e-mail address with a domain name the added to her marketing value and she asked some egg-head if he/she could make it happen. Now assume that the egghead recognizes that she's the secretary of state as well as the former first lady of a two term president.

Now the egghead hears her ask for this and he's like "Well, I can't put that on our internal servers... what else can I do to make it happen?" Of course the egghead isn't a lawyer and he/she doesn't want to be cock-blocked by some manager and then go back to Hillary and tell her/him (still not sure) that he screwed up and now her dreams of having a her marketing slogan as a domain name for her e-mail will not be possible.

So... what does he do? Well, not being a lawyer or understanding what it would mean, he sets up a new mail server that would allow her to send messages to Bill like "Make sure you leave your cigars at your intern's house before coming home... oh and buy milk." without them ending up as public record.

I honestly wonder if the e-mail is the best thing they can come up with. Hillary isn't particularly exciting, but she's pretty awful at her job... unless you consider her job as Secretary of State as a personal self-promotion, optimal for ladder climbing... where in that case, she's great at her job. She has to have incredible amounts of crap they can use on her without even digging too deep. And the e-mail thing which I'm damn near convinced is basically technical incompetence as opposed to intentional malicious deception of the country.

Let's also consider that there's absolutely nothing related to the e-mail that will cause Trump to win. He's like the golden goose or the gift that keeps giving to anyone who opposes him. After all, I think that even Dan Quayle could have won running against Trump. Al Gore could have creamed him. Instead, the country leaves Hillary as the opposition and while she looks like she has a landslide, you know you suck when it's months before election and people can still identify a possibility that Trump could possibly win.

Democrats... what the hell were you thinking when you supported Hillary?
Republicans... what the hell were you thinking when you supported Trump?

You both had better candidates and you actually chose the most entertaining ones as opposed to someone you might actually want in office.

Comment Re: Heu.. ???? (Score 1, Interesting) 400

Odd... I tend to find that both are pretty awful and prefer to hire people with computer science education and programming experience with a solid understanding operating design, protocols and encryption. There are a lot of people out there with that skillset and what's best is that they generally don't care what language they are using for scripting but instead solve the problem, document the solution and develop deployment scripts for changes as well as rollback scripts and unit tests. Oh, and if there's a problem with the API they are calling, they write a bug report describing it and providing a reproducible test case to ensure MS can easily fix it.

Never hire IT guys if you can hire computer scientists instead.

Comment Re:Heu.. ???? (Score 2, Interesting) 400

While I'm not a huge fan of powershell, I've spent a considerable amount of time coding in it because there's simply no point to using stupid utils like puppet and chef when 90% of what you do is call powershell anyway. After all, install Windows... powershell... add user... powershell... install Hyper-V... powershell... install WDS.... powershell. So why the hell would I bother with something else when I have to use it anyway?

Now that I've figured out object orient programming, exception handling, type definitions, error management, etc... I think that PowerShell is pretty nice. It's an ugly language, but it's the only language I know of that is designed to handle automation so nicely. Whether I'm automating FreeBSD or Exchange Server, PowerShell is very capable. What's even better is that the help online is excellent. I almost never find myself wondering "Gee, I wonder how to do that" and that's been the truth since the first day of using it.

As for other shells... bash and other bournes are nice, but they handle data like shit and you spend most of your time coding new utilities for almost everything you need to accomplish.

I think that existing shell paradigms weren't good enough for handling these tasks. Most shells don't have the ability to call libraries without additional utilities. Most shells don't have the ability to employ data structures. PowerShell while somewhat grotesque to look at is really quite powerful in that sense.

I'm looking forward to powershell remoting linux.

Comment Re:Destined to REMOVE suicide from suicide truck b (Score 1) 101

I was thinking that Ford can't make the user interface of their car radios work (neither can GM) reliably. Mustangs are the only cars I've ever had to actually reboot. Shouldn't congress act quickly on behalf of the American people to stop this from happening?

The biggest problem with car companies making self driving vehicles is that they are car companies. I was just talking yesterday with some people about my BMW i3 which is an excellent example of the fall of a great company. While the things like the interior, motors and chassis are amazing in the vehicle. There are just SOOOOO many bugs in the design that they should hire Toyota (who has done electronics and software for decades) to fix it. Let's not even get into stuff like doors which don't properly close (checked the floor models too, design problem) or trunk covers which seem designed for a totally different car. And don't get me started on the touch sensor for the door lock. I drove a 2004 Prius for 11 years and the doors locked and unlocked instantly every time. The i3 requires touching, holding, rubbing... I swear, just to lock and unlock my car, I'm putting my marriage in jeopardy.

See, car companies have been more or less forced into modernizing with computers and technology. The problem is, they have absolutely no f-ing clue what they're doing. They could try and buy the tech but it wouldn't be integrated and would likely cost too much. They could develop the tech, but they have no idea how to build and maintain something that complex. You see it when the apps on the computers in the cars are the same ones a year later than they were when the car was first designed. You also see it when the API/SDKs for the computers are closed and require licensing. You see it when the computer needs to be reboot while driving down the road and it can't been done without stopping the car and powering it off. You see it when the iPhone app for the car needs 1-2 minutes to lock or unlock the doors.

I think that the real future for car companies is not to actually make their own cars anymore. I think that car companies will become manufacturing facilities for new companies with the skills required to design the next generation of transportation. I would much rather a Google, Apple or Microsoft vehicle drives me somewhere than a Ford or BMW. It's not that I believe that those three companies make good code. It's that I believe those three companies know how to maintain technology.

Oh... and so far as I know, the computer in my brand new, fully loaded BMW i3 is not able to be upgraded and likely will never be. So, while the vehicle chassis will likely never need changes, the computer which should improve and change with the times ... won't. The developers will at some point decide they need a better CPU or graphics and that will be end of life for my car.

Comment Re:Fallacy of MBA management (Score 1) 156

"Consider: Do you think a generic manager could step in and manager a newspaper without intimate knowledge of the newspaper business? How well do you think that company would do if it actually happened?"

The CEO of my wife's previous company which is the major business newspaper of Norway has no actual understanding of how a newspaper works. He buys stuff, mortgages stuff, he basically just talks to the board and plays golf and buys stuff. He remains successful primarily by buying other media which has a subscriber base and runs them into the ground by siphoning their profits to maintain the core newspaper.

I believe that since he's been there 15 years, it's extremely likely that a guy who's only real qualification is that he wears a tie can in fact keep a newspaper business running by doing little more than simply approving what the people beneath him say and schmoozing investors. ...

I actually agree with you about most of what you said, I just wanted to point out that your analogy was flawed as morons run newspapers too.

Slashdot Top Deals

Consider the postage stamp: its usefulness consists in the ability to stick to one thing till it gets there. -- Josh Billings