Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
OS X

North Korea's Home-Grown Operating System Mimics OS X 252

CambodiaSam sends the latest on "Red Star OS," North Korea's attempt at a home-grown operating system. Previously, it had closely resembled Microsoft Windows, but a new update now strongly mimics Apple's OS X. "Despite living in a country very much shut off from the outside world, many people in North Korea do have access to technology - including mobile phones. However, devices are heavily restricted. Internet access, for instance, is locked down, with most users able to visit only a handful of sites mostly serving up state-sponsored news. The Red Star OS is peppered with North Korean propaganda, and its calendar tells users it is not 2014, but 103 — the number of years since the birth of former North Korean leader Kim Il-sung. An earlier version of Red Star OS was made available worldwide in 2010 after a Russian student posted it online. The latest version is believed to have been released some time in 2013."

Comment "Tenure" == Due Process (Score 3, Interesting) 399

If you are against tenure, you are against the following: ... (3) due process, ...

(3) This story is in fact about due process at work. The people filing suit are against tenure and are using due process to fight it.

I really can't speak for California, but in the Northeast US ( Pensylvania and North ), Tenure == Due Process.

In my area, a new teacher ( 3years in some states, 5 in others) can be fired or "non-renewed" without a stated reason. In practice, new teachers are given good reviews mid-year and booted without comment or useful feedback. Such would-be teachers are almost unemployable after this, and the lack of feedback means that they can't work to address preceived flaws in case they do find a way to work again.

Experienced teachers can be dismissed for any legal reason. This is usually some combination of illegal activity (bank robbers can't be teachers usually), immoral behavior (porn stars are not encouraged to continue a teaching career), incompetence (yep, you can lose your job for incompetence), and insubordination (boss tells you to be on time, you aren't...). Of course, cause has to be documented. And except for the first two (illegal, immoral), a single incident is generally not sufficient grounds for action. This is good, a single parent complaint should not end a teacer's career.

The "problem" is that when ANYBODY is terminated for cause, their terminaion can be appealed in the state courts. This is not unique to teachers, but unions are in a good position financially to challenge these terminations, and so they do so nearly every time. Ex-employees of private firms generally cannot afford the legal fees to do this, and so generally don't challenge. The union provides the resources to access "due process".

The legal appeals process favors the district if the situation is well documented and if all of the rules were followed. The key to this is making sure that you have administrators with time to spend on process. A solid HR staff can help backstop this. Of course, the only thing that voters and unions agree on is that administration is a waste. And HR looks like more administration. Districts lose these cases a lot because administrators have other priorities and so don't do a great job with documentation or process.

In my current state, employees terminated for cause are not permitted to collect unemployment insurance. Private employers are more likely not to name a cause and accept the bump in their unemployment costs. This also tends to discourage lawsuits ( a bird in the hand...). School systems don't usually have this option with tenured (due process enabled) staff.

Big private companies tend to have the middle managment, HR types, and processes in place to cover themselves when they want to terminate for cause and contest unemployment. Small companies do not, but don't contest.

It's that simple.

Comment Scotsmen (Score 2) 523

Cause true libertarians believe

Libertarians are... whatever they say they are. They don't need to be defined by you; certainly they do not need to be defined into a corner as you are attempting to do here. Yes, the ideas you've discussed have been promulgated by those who would call themselves Libertarians, but these ideas are not necessarily true of all, or even most modern would-be (l)ibertarians.

The Libertarian Party has adopted questionable policy perspectives in part because they have never had a serious chance of participating in government. (l)ibertarians who have wanted to govern (in the USA...) have had to, by necessity, find a place in one of the parties that were willing and able to do so. With the expansion of programs like the NSA's data collection, with the emergence of private data, with the expansion of all of government, it's really not surprising that more people would want a third option. It may be possible for another party to participate.

You could call them Democrats who feel that Obama and co. are guilty of massive overreach.
You could call them Republicans who feel that Bush and co. were guilty of the same.
Democrats will probably call them backwards racists.
Republicans will probably call them anarchists.
But if they all start to call themselves (L)ibertarians, watch out.

But no True Scotsman expects that to happen.

Comment Re:Yea but nothing happened (Score 1) 345

Also, If he hadn't stayd his ruling, the NSA would have rushed to the appeals court and gotten an emergency stay. And it would have been granted too. By staying his own ruling, he is just doing the reasonable thing. Whatever the collective opinion of slashdot, this is a ruling that would require a substantial change on (relatively) longstanding POLICY. The appeals court WILL want to look at this. They will write opinions. They may send it back to him on a technicality, but it will go back to the appeals court again either way. It WILL be appealed to the supreme court.

Staying his ruling gives his opinion a better chance of standing on appeal. He appears reasonable, decisions by unreasonable people are easy to overturn, & the reverse is true as well. And I'm sure even appeals judges remember if they have to miss an important event to rule on an emergency stay made necessary by an unreasonable judge.

Failing to stay the ruling would have been a dick move and would not have made any diference. Unfortunately.

Comment Re:Yup (Score 1) 168

Just getting parental consent to "use the internet" or "use Google Apps" is not enough.

I suspect that it is. This is incredibly specific really. If the school tells the parents that the student will be using Google Apps, the parents can research what the service does in detail if they wish.

Unless the parents are explicitly giving their consent to the disclosure of identifying information

What does that mean though? Every school consent form I've seen in the past few years includes 'may lead to the disclosure of personal information' someplace in the body text. What level of consent is needed in your view?

Comment Re:Two separate fights (Score 0) 720

SS and Medicare are self funding.

Sorry, that's wishful thinking.

SS is almost self funding. If you assume that the SS fund balance invested in loans to the Treasury will be paid, SS still shows a deficit on the 20-30 year time scale unless something comes along to knock off the 'boomers' early. SS can probably be made self funding with some tweaks to how the payroll taxes are done, but there is no political will to fix it and 20-30 years is a long way off in the land of politics. Of course, the longer they wait, the harder it gets.

Medicare has even bigger problems. [CNN] In ~12 years, any trust fund will be exhausted and incoming funds will fall short of expenses. One estimate that I have heard is that to make it self funding with existing benefits, we would need an additional 10-12% payroll tax on top of the current levy. Bear in mind too that medicare (and its bastard stepchild medicaid) generally under pay for services forcing costs to be shifted and creating additional costs in other places.

I am all for cutting a big slice out of military spending - we are far too willing to engage in wars at great distance for little benefit - but please do not ask me to pretend that the entitlement side of the federal ledger is in good order.

Slashdot Top Deals

We warn the reader in advance that the proof presented here depends on a clever but highly unmotivated trick. -- Howard Anton, "Elementary Linear Algebra"

Working...