Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Society hypocrisy.... (Score 1) 387

by Nemyst (#48164753) Attached to: Torvalds: I Made Community-Building Mistakes With Linux

Is it that the language used is too harsh, or that today's society is just too much censored and purged from any form of negativity ? Creating thin-skinned irresponsible generations.

It's pretty much impossible in a tech company to have an opinion, not have to excuse oneself about having this opinion, and have a long and brilliant career in the company. Sometimes, this translate into worthless technical discussion where nobody is giving any counter argument. Those followers are generally also those getting promoted, but also the most incompetent. I might represent an utter minority, but I'm only giving negative feedback. What I'm being asked is to provide a technical analysis, not to be friend with my boss. It would seem that people are unable to be honest with one another.

I fully understand Linus' comment, it is sad to have to antagonize people and community, but on the other side, if you comply to every whim, you're not aiming for excellence, and stay mediocre. Compromise is the worst. While it is sad to see people unable to differentiate between a technical and personal attack, and the other way, some person making personal attack from technical point, we might just have to live with it.

All in all, I prefer to have enemies, and be true to my principle, rather than only have friends and keep compromising on my value.

Your post sounds like one giant false dilemma. You can be true to your principles without insulting or bashing people. You can have an opinion and express it firmly without rubbing it in the face of your colleagues until their skin bleeds. You can have disagreements without resorting to name-calling. You can do your work while being polite.

Also, "thin-skinned irresponsible generations"? Spoken like an old geezer alright.

Comment Re:Ebola vs HIV (Score 1) 381

by Nemyst (#48159281) Attached to: How Nigeria Stopped Ebola
Ebola spreads through many more pathways than HIV. Ebola is far more deadly than HIV, which makes it a more dangerous disease overall. Worse, there is now empirical proof that despite the high mortality rate, Ebola can spread in large population centers. Previous outbreaks could be contained because they were restricted to small villages, where isolation was possible.

The biggest problem with Ebola is the incubation period: you can move an awful lot before you realize you are a carrier, and when you do realize that you are, you've generally been infectious for a while (the first symptoms being relatively similar to a flu). This makes tracing down all people you've had contact with exponentially harder. Then there's obviously the fact a lot of people are fucking stupid and will ignore medical advice for one reason or another, and the consequences be damned. The US has been lucky for that thus far, since the people who've contracted the disease on American soil have been fairly well-behaved (it's the CDC that cocked up).

Comment Re:Pass - Had major issues with Nexus 5 (from LG) (Score 1) 201

by Nemyst (#48155785) Attached to: Google Announces Motorola-Made Nexus 6 and HTC-Made Nexus 9
Be careful sampling from forum threads. People who don't have any problem don't post. Generally speaking, I think you'll find that looking up any device will pop up a few problems. It's when a significant proportion of the devices manufactured exhibit that problem that you can say the device's design is bad or faulty. Thousands of failures due to the same issue can still only mean a sub-0.1% failure rate, which'd be stellar.

Comment Re:Only after SAFETY is established (Score 1) 193

by Nemyst (#48121943) Attached to: Experts Decry Randomized Ebola Treatment Trials As Unethical, Impractical
It's a tough balancing act for sure, but there's an assumption that you're making here: those people do NOT have access to top of the line supportive care. If survival rate is 20% with little to no care (which is what is currently happening in Western Africa) but (hypothetically) 30% with the experimental treatment regardless of care, what do you do? You're still increasing their survival chance by 50%, but it could also kill people who'd live with top care without the drug.

Never forget the big picture in situations like these. You can't handwave all of the context and do an analysis with the best case scenario when that scenario is never ever met in reality.

Comment Re: Short cuts make long delays (Score 1) 193

by Nemyst (#48121927) Attached to: Experts Decry Randomized Ebola Treatment Trials As Unethical, Impractical
The quarantine isn't working because the countries are on the verge of toppling down. They can't enforce the quarantine. Thing is, we don't have that miraculous experimental treatment you mention. First of all, we don't have enough of the currently in testing treatments like ZMapp to effectively stop propagation or reassure the population. Second of all, we don't even know if that will work. You say the population needs to see an increase in the survival rate, but what if even with ZMapp it doesn't change enough? You run the risk of people not only distrusting their government as much or even more, but also of thinking that Western medicine is powerless to fix things. That could cause hysteria even greater than is currently happening.

Slashdot Top Deals

8 Catfish = 1 Octo-puss

Close