False claim of bloat caused by double counting
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The article claims that Chrome used more memory than IE8, but says nothing about how the testing is done. That probably means the author opened the a bunch of tabs, totaled up the memory used by each of Chrome's processes, and compared it to the memory used by IE8. The problem is, this double counts a lot of memory. Executable code and some data structures are shared, so if there are ten tabs open, then these get counted ten times, but only stored once.
All these buzzwords you're so afraid of are just libraries. You're asking how to learn them, but the answer is: you don't. For each library that you have seen mentioned, look it up and find out what it does. For each library that you consider important, download it, do a "hello world" project with it, and skim (don't read) its manual. Then, when you actually have a project for which you need it, lean on the reference material you keep handy. Memorizing APIs is a waste of your time, because there will be always better-but-different ones tomorrow.
Next to be tested in court, the clause stating "we reserve the right to change the terms of this contract at any time without notice".
That one's already been tested, and found invalid - specifically, the "without notice" part. Contracts can do many things, but they can't change the underpinnings of contract law. It isn't possible to accept a contract which doesn't exist yet, because by definition, a contract only exists when there is offer, acceptance, and consideration. If a company changes terms without notifying you, then there is no offer or acceptance, and thus, no contract. (That said, a few words buried in the fine print on your bill might be sufficient notice.)
Are you sure about that? Sellers who got their stuff through multilevel marketing schemes generally don't disclose that fact. I don't know what percentage of spam can be traced back to MLM (determining that would take some serious investigative work), but I do know that one of the major MLM companies is Herbalife, which (a) sells drugs and (b) doesn't allow its distributors to disclose their relationship. Also, those finders fees you mention are a form of MLM themselves.
Sex would have been easier to clean up... and more fun too, or so I'm told.
The experiment was conducted on an aircraft that provides zero gravity for periods of only 30 seconds at a time. That might not be a problem for you, but most people would be left unsatisfied.
Unfortunately, even if no one ever bought a single thing from spammers, the spam would still continue. You see, spammers don't need to sell anything to make money; they only need to convince gullible merchants to pay them to spam. In fact, I suspect that this is the sole driving force between spam today; there is so much spam of such low quality that it seems highly implausible that there are enough suckers to support it all.
No, the real root problem is multi-level marketing, which turns suckers into salesmen who, having fallen for one scam already, will easily fall for another. MLM tricks people into buying huge quantities of merchandise that they can't sell, so they turn to spammers for help. That's why the overwhelming majority of spam is for the small handful of products which are sold using MLM. The rest is scams (which only need one person to fall for them) and viruses (which can persist long after their author has moved on).
I think as taxpayers they can sue for damages in the form of increased taxes.
No, they can't. Ignoring for a moment the fact that they'd just collect more taxes to pay the judgement with, governments can't be sued by their subjects unless they consent to be sued. It's called "sovereign immunity", and while it does have exceptions, no-bid contracts aren't one of them.
They have confused reasoned opinion with bias. Our mass media has decided that being unbiased means not favoring one side. This is wrong, of course; if the facts overwhelmingly favor one side, it would be dishonest not to report that fact. Unfortunately, it's easier just to take one press release from each side of a dispute and report both, without making an effort to determine which side is full of liars.
And anyone who does call a liar a liar is called "partisan". It's pathetic.
You give him too little credit. On a highway with good visibility, you will occasionally be able to see all of the cars in both directions on a stretch of road, and estimate the distance between them. If neither direction is congested, then both directions will be going at about the same speed, so the road's throughput in each direction is inversely proportional to the average distance between cars.
The real reason why this doesn't work is because local traffic adds so much noise; if there's more traffic going east at 8:30am, then it's probably going west at 5:30pm, and vise versa, but the traveler in your story didn't stick around long enough to see if that was the case.
No, election tampering is a high crime, but it is not treason. From Article III of the US Constitution: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court."
I'd really like to know what you're smoking because freedom of speech definitely does not mean freedom from consequences, and never has. It simply means that you can say what you want and no one will keep you from saying it, but if you're harming someone else then of course they can seek reparations.
You are absolutely wrong. Freedom of speech means freedom from consequences. If someone will take action against you for saying something, then you aren't free to speak.
The government is legally required to respect your freedom of speech; they cannot fine, imprison, harrass, or otherwise act against you because of something you have said. However, only the government is required to respect your freedom of speech; private people can do whatever they want in response to what you've said, so long as they don't break the law. For example, if you say something that I find offensive, I may refuse to hire or do business with you. I can do this because (a) I could legally have done it even if you had kept quiet, and (b) I am a private person, not part of any government.
In this case, a court has taken action against posters: it has revealed their identities, thus exposing them to harassment and other consequences from private parties. Since the court is a government agency, it can't do that.
Most advanced extraterrestrial civilizations are going to be far far ahead of us. At the point where they have constructed Matrioshka Brains. The intellectual capacity of an MBrain is roughly a trillion trillion times that of a human brain. They can simulate the history of entire humanities in seconds. We are simply not of interest to them.
Every sentence in this paragraph is a ridiculous and unjustified assumption. Until we observe an alien intelligence, we cannot know its capabilities or its motives.
GWT is NOT a Javascript library! It's a Java library and a Java-to-Javascript compiler; it saves you from having to learn or work with Javascript at all. This means that you write your client in Java, same as your server-side code, and get to use a real Java debugger.
You have obviously never lived in the suburbs. Here, "mass transit" means driving to the nearest bus or train station. You can't use public transport to get from your home to anywhere, from anywhere to your home, or even from one side of the the commercial district to the other. No one uses mass transit because it simply doesn't exist.
This is an important first step in making self-driving cars. An automated car needs to recognize hazards and road signs, and it can't afford to have bugs or make mistakes. A driver-assisting windshield does the same thing, but with less severe consequences when it screws up. Once all the bugs are fixed and the limitations are known, it can be used as part of a self-driving car.
We really, really need computers to handle our driving. A computer would be a safer driver than most of the idiots on the road. It would put a stop to all the drunk driving. But most of all, staring at the road for hours on end is a waste of time. I'd rather spend my commute talking, working or watching a movie, rather than worrying about what my car is doing.
Litestep is what you're looking for; it's a replacement window manager (for Windows), and includes virtual desktops. It's also customizable and fragmented to a ludicrous degree, but if you try a few themes you should be able to find one you like.
If I'm correct (I'm not a native English speaker) the first a is an 'a' while the second a is 'ei'. There are several more than 5 vowel sounds in English. It's just that you use only 5 characters for them. Even simple words like "race" are mind-boggling - the a is actually an 'ei', the c is actually 's' and the final e is mute!
According to my Handbook of the International Phonetic Association, American English has 11 regular vowels, 3 diphthongs and schwa. Every one of these vowels has multiple possible spellings, and almost every spelling can be one of multiple possible vowels. That's why writing in English is like a cross between Trivial Pursuit and Hebrew (which doesn't bother writing vowels at all).
If millions of people felt they were harmed in any way, what is the problem with each of them putting up $100 or $500 to control the so-called monopoly?
That never happens, even in the most extreme cases where corporations literally go raping and pillaging. That's because buying shares to stop a corporation from doing something you don't want has the opposite of the intended effect: it drives up the share price, rewarding the unwanted behavior. And unless you're a billionaire, you'll never get enough votes to force a change, so you'd be achieving the exact opposite of what you want.
It is immoral to pay for any CD which is published by an RIAA member. They use the money to corrupt our legislators, abuse our courts and ruin peoples' lives. On the other hand, copyright infringement is illegal, but not immoral; no one is harmed by it except for sleazy lawyers and businessmen.
That's right: downloading music illegally is morally better than paying for it. Ten years ago, it was not so; for indie music, it is not so; but if you pay for major-label music now, then you are helping to ruin lives.
The RIAA is doing everything they can to portray their struggle as one of morals vs. cheapness. It isn't, because they lost the moral high ground. The only remaining excuse for paying for major-label music is ignorance.
The PATRIOT act is bad, but it's not responsible for the unhealthy political climate in the US, which is what I was talking about. The worst offenses of the government have not been pieces of legislation, but illegal actions by the President and the executive branch. It's pretty obvious that the Democrats do not have enough power to fix that, and won't until Obama's term starts, so claiming it's their fault for not fighting hard enough doesn't make sense.
It probably doesn't need to be pointed out, but US politics is in poor shape. It's not the fault of either party, but a collective failure.
No, it's entirely the fault of the Republican party. Denying it makes you look impartial, but you're really just being disingenuous. Republicans manufactured perjury charges against Clinton. Republicans made a farce of two elections in a row and turned the American media into a propaganda machine. Republicans fired US attorneys for not being conservative enough. Republicans lied to the people and made a mockery of the law and the Constitution. The Democratic party is not to blame, they are the victims, and American politics will not start being sane again until the current crop of Republicans are gone.
There were a few years where I had DSL from Flashcom (now defunct). Every time AT&T did any kind of servicing for any of the telephones on the street, they would unplug our DSL connection and blame it on Flashcom. After they did it a few times too many, we would watch for their trucks, and complain before they left to force them to put it back. The only way to get them to stop was to get a line that was shared between DSL and POTS voice. Apparently, they check phone lines for a dial tone before they unplug them, and since Flashcom's DSL lines weren't also phone lines, they didn't have dial tones.
Incompetence, malice, or malice cleverly disguised as incompetence? In any case, it's wrong to give a misbehaving private company exclusive access to vital public infrastructure.
You haven't answered any of my arguments; you've just quoted topic sentences, snipped out the supporting evidence, and falsely claimed that the supporting evidence isn't there. I'm not going to waste any more time arguing with you, because your mind is obviously closed.
That is a national emergency situation and has no bearing on how normal, non-emergency situations should function. It's like arguing that the slight possibility of an alien invasion means we should always live as we would during such an emergency.
Smallpox was never a national emergency, but thanks to government-sponsored immunization programs, I don't have to worry about catching it. Ditto for polio, anthrax, measles, and many others. If vaccines were only available to those with money to spare, these diseases would never go away. If not for free clinics, you wouldn't to walk through poor neighborhoods without a hazmat suit.
"If you try to let people starve, they will steal instead.... [snip]..."More question begging. You've assumed their only choices are to starve or steal. They could also work.
And you've assumed that everyone is capable of working. There are people who want to work but can't. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 5.5% of all US citizens (over 16 million people) are currently in this position. Fortunately, we make sure those people can still eat, with a combination of welfare, charity and food subsidies. What do you think would happen without those? At best, increased crime; at worst, food riots and civil war.
"Utilities are either government owned or heavily regulated because there is only room for one sewer, one power grid and one road network; these are called natural monopolies."
Begging the question. You haven't shown that "there is only room for one" of any of those items you've claimed are "natural monopolies". That the government has deemed some property public, and decided that only one sewer/road/power line should be run on that property, doesn't make your statement true. It is simply what the government has decided to do with property it has taken by force. Ideally no property would be government-owned.
No city in the entire history of humanity has ever had two sewer systems, two independent power grids or two independent road networks. It's not that the government has decided that there should be only one of these things; it's that having more than one is so mind-blowingly wasteful that no one would even consider it a possibility.
"confused armchair economists"
You've characterized me and my statements, but have not shown why your characterizations are valid. Care to actually rebut my statements, or is that beyond your interest or capacity?
I stand by my original statement.
(By the way, the phrase 'begging the question' means rephrasing a question without adding anything. I've done no such thing, and it is dishonest to accuse me of doing so.)
Slashdot Mirror
The article claims that Chrome used more memory than IE8, but says nothing about how the testing is done. That probably means the author opened the a bunch of tabs, totaled up the memory used by each of Chrome's processes, and compared it to the memory used by IE8. The problem is, this double counts a lot of memory. Executable code and some data structures are shared, so if there are ten tabs open, then these get counted ten times, but only stored once.
All these buzzwords you're so afraid of are just libraries. You're asking how to learn them, but the answer is: you don't. For each library that you have seen mentioned, look it up and find out what it does. For each library that you consider important, download it, do a "hello world" project with it, and skim (don't read) its manual. Then, when you actually have a project for which you need it, lean on the reference material you keep handy. Memorizing APIs is a waste of your time, because there will be always better-but-different ones tomorrow.
That one's already been tested, and found invalid - specifically, the "without notice" part. Contracts can do many things, but they can't change the underpinnings of contract law. It isn't possible to accept a contract which doesn't exist yet, because by definition, a contract only exists when there is offer, acceptance, and consideration. If a company changes terms without notifying you, then there is no offer or acceptance, and thus, no contract. (That said, a few words buried in the fine print on your bill might be sufficient notice.)
Are you sure about that? Sellers who got their stuff through multilevel marketing schemes generally don't disclose that fact. I don't know what percentage of spam can be traced back to MLM (determining that would take some serious investigative work), but I do know that one of the major MLM companies is Herbalife, which (a) sells drugs and (b) doesn't allow its distributors to disclose their relationship. Also, those finders fees you mention are a form of MLM themselves.
The experiment was conducted on an aircraft that provides zero gravity for periods of only 30 seconds at a time. That might not be a problem for you, but most people would be left unsatisfied.
Unfortunately, even if no one ever bought a single thing from spammers, the spam would still continue. You see, spammers don't need to sell anything to make money; they only need to convince gullible merchants to pay them to spam. In fact, I suspect that this is the sole driving force between spam today; there is so much spam of such low quality that it seems highly implausible that there are enough suckers to support it all.
No, the real root problem is multi-level marketing, which turns suckers into salesmen who, having fallen for one scam already, will easily fall for another. MLM tricks people into buying huge quantities of merchandise that they can't sell, so they turn to spammers for help. That's why the overwhelming majority of spam is for the small handful of products which are sold using MLM. The rest is scams (which only need one person to fall for them) and viruses (which can persist long after their author has moved on).
No, they can't. Ignoring for a moment the fact that they'd just collect more taxes to pay the judgement with, governments can't be sued by their subjects unless they consent to be sued. It's called "sovereign immunity", and while it does have exceptions, no-bid contracts aren't one of them.
They have confused reasoned opinion with bias. Our mass media has decided that being unbiased means not favoring one side. This is wrong, of course; if the facts overwhelmingly favor one side, it would be dishonest not to report that fact. Unfortunately, it's easier just to take one press release from each side of a dispute and report both, without making an effort to determine which side is full of liars.
And anyone who does call a liar a liar is called "partisan". It's pathetic.
You give him too little credit. On a highway with good visibility, you will occasionally be able to see all of the cars in both directions on a stretch of road, and estimate the distance between them. If neither direction is congested, then both directions will be going at about the same speed, so the road's throughput in each direction is inversely proportional to the average distance between cars.
The real reason why this doesn't work is because local traffic adds so much noise; if there's more traffic going east at 8:30am, then it's probably going west at 5:30pm, and vise versa, but the traveler in your story didn't stick around long enough to see if that was the case.
No, election tampering is a high crime, but it is not treason. From Article III of the US Constitution: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court."
There are two types of Slashdotter: Those who read the article, and those who comment on the story. These groups do not overlap.
You are absolutely wrong. Freedom of speech means freedom from consequences. If someone will take action against you for saying something, then you aren't free to speak.
The government is legally required to respect your freedom of speech; they cannot fine, imprison, harrass, or otherwise act against you because of something you have said. However, only the government is required to respect your freedom of speech; private people can do whatever they want in response to what you've said, so long as they don't break the law. For example, if you say something that I find offensive, I may refuse to hire or do business with you. I can do this because (a) I could legally have done it even if you had kept quiet, and (b) I am a private person, not part of any government.
In this case, a court has taken action against posters: it has revealed their identities, thus exposing them to harassment and other consequences from private parties. Since the court is a government agency, it can't do that.
Every sentence in this paragraph is a ridiculous and unjustified assumption. Until we observe an alien intelligence, we cannot know its capabilities or its motives.
GWT is NOT a Javascript library! It's a Java library and a Java-to-Javascript compiler; it saves you from having to learn or work with Javascript at all. This means that you write your client in Java, same as your server-side code, and get to use a real Java debugger.
You have obviously never lived in the suburbs. Here, "mass transit" means driving to the nearest bus or train station. You can't use public transport to get from your home to anywhere, from anywhere to your home, or even from one side of the the commercial district to the other. No one uses mass transit because it simply doesn't exist.
This is an important first step in making self-driving cars. An automated car needs to recognize hazards and road signs, and it can't afford to have bugs or make mistakes. A driver-assisting windshield does the same thing, but with less severe consequences when it screws up. Once all the bugs are fixed and the limitations are known, it can be used as part of a self-driving car.
We really, really need computers to handle our driving. A computer would be a safer driver than most of the idiots on the road. It would put a stop to all the drunk driving. But most of all, staring at the road for hours on end is a waste of time. I'd rather spend my commute talking, working or watching a movie, rather than worrying about what my car is doing.
Litestep is what you're looking for; it's a replacement window manager (for Windows), and includes virtual desktops. It's also customizable and fragmented to a ludicrous degree, but if you try a few themes you should be able to find one you like.
According to my Handbook of the International Phonetic Association, American English has 11 regular vowels, 3 diphthongs and schwa. Every one of these vowels has multiple possible spellings, and almost every spelling can be one of multiple possible vowels. That's why writing in English is like a cross between Trivial Pursuit and Hebrew (which doesn't bother writing vowels at all).
That never happens, even in the most extreme cases where corporations literally go raping and pillaging. That's because buying shares to stop a corporation from doing something you don't want has the opposite of the intended effect: it drives up the share price, rewarding the unwanted behavior. And unless you're a billionaire, you'll never get enough votes to force a change, so you'd be achieving the exact opposite of what you want.
It is immoral to pay for any CD which is published by an RIAA member. They use the money to corrupt our legislators, abuse our courts and ruin peoples' lives. On the other hand, copyright infringement is illegal, but not immoral; no one is harmed by it except for sleazy lawyers and businessmen.
That's right: downloading music illegally is morally better than paying for it. Ten years ago, it was not so; for indie music, it is not so; but if you pay for major-label music now, then you are helping to ruin lives.
The RIAA is doing everything they can to portray their struggle as one of morals vs. cheapness. It isn't, because they lost the moral high ground. The only remaining excuse for paying for major-label music is ignorance.
The PATRIOT act is bad, but it's not responsible for the unhealthy political climate in the US, which is what I was talking about. The worst offenses of the government have not been pieces of legislation, but illegal actions by the President and the executive branch. It's pretty obvious that the Democrats do not have enough power to fix that, and won't until Obama's term starts, so claiming it's their fault for not fighting hard enough doesn't make sense.
No, it's entirely the fault of the Republican party. Denying it makes you look impartial, but you're really just being disingenuous. Republicans manufactured perjury charges against Clinton. Republicans made a farce of two elections in a row and turned the American media into a propaganda machine. Republicans fired US attorneys for not being conservative enough. Republicans lied to the people and made a mockery of the law and the Constitution. The Democratic party is not to blame, they are the victims, and American politics will not start being sane again until the current crop of Republicans are gone.
There were a few years where I had DSL from Flashcom (now defunct). Every time AT&T did any kind of servicing for any of the telephones on the street, they would unplug our DSL connection and blame it on Flashcom. After they did it a few times too many, we would watch for their trucks, and complain before they left to force them to put it back. The only way to get them to stop was to get a line that was shared between DSL and POTS voice. Apparently, they check phone lines for a dial tone before they unplug them, and since Flashcom's DSL lines weren't also phone lines, they didn't have dial tones.
Incompetence, malice, or malice cleverly disguised as incompetence? In any case, it's wrong to give a misbehaving private company exclusive access to vital public infrastructure.
You haven't answered any of my arguments; you've just quoted topic sentences, snipped out the supporting evidence, and falsely claimed that the supporting evidence isn't there. I'm not going to waste any more time arguing with you, because your mind is obviously closed.
(By the way, the phrase 'begging the question' means rephrasing a question without adding anything. I've done no such thing, and it is dishonest to accuse me of doing so.)