Those aren't rock-star developers. As another poster said, you likely have never worked with a rock-star developer.

Nope, worked with them, dismissed several of them because their behaviour was detrimental to the team (one got sacked because he went and told the book keepers that he was more important than they were and should do what he said).

The ones who actually make the team better dont consider themselves to be rockstars. There is a correlation between humility and talent (otherwise known as the Dunning-Kruger effect)

They are rare, but it's awesome when you see somebody that inspires others around them by what they can do.

This is how they like to imagine they are, but not what they're like in reality. In reality they are childish and petulant. If their authority and awesomeness is not recognised they will make everyone else's life hell until it is.

You sound like you work in a big company, on big teams.

Wrong again.

Largest organisation I worked for in that capacity was 80 staff with 20 developers (most in a consulting capacity). In fact that's why I ended up managing the dev teams, we didn't have enough of them to justify their own manager so it fell under my jurisdiction as IT manager.

I had a pair of senior devs who could keep the team together and moving and were great at it, I considered it my job to keep things out of their way so they could do their jobs.

This, 1000x this.

I hate managing with "rockstar" developers because they're always too arrogant and full of themselves. They detract from the team, argue and refuse to listen to others. As soon as I see anything remotely "rockstar-ish" in an interview they immediately go to the bottom of the pile.

Senior devs are the antithesis. They help the junior devs and often their time is better spent doing this than banging out code even though their code is a lot better than the juniors. Someone who can manage a team is valued for more than just their coding skills, if they've got people skills they are definitely a force multiplier.

You need all the team to be involved in the development of the product, letting one "rockstar" do their own thing means when they leave you've got an codebase no-one has any knowledge on and it's always a matter of when (people win lotto, go on sabbaticals, change career or move to a nicer climate).

Rockstar devs dont need agents, the concept of rockstar devs needs to die.

However the value of you to an agent is how much they can get out of the company for you.

This is how recruiting and head hunting currently works. The company puts out an ad or contacts a recruitment agency, basically they make their intentions known. Recruiters approach the companies on the behalf of the perspective employee and set terms that if the employee is hired they get money. If the employee lasts longer than X months they get a bonus.

All an "agent" will do is double dip. They'll still get the recruiting fee and bonus from the company and then they'll turn around and charge you for their services again.

In this scenario, the money they get from you is just icing on the cake, their working for the company, not you and because of this the recruiter has a vested interest in getting you in the door as cheaply as possible.

Exactly, it's "shut up and go away" money.

If it were a serious study, it would be 3 or more times that given to a university with an ethics board and peer review would be done... But universities have better things to do.

Because people like to have a whinge about their favourite things. Any mention of the F word on /. brings the "woe is man" crowd out of the woodwork.

At the risk of flame-baiting, in Australia we'd call them a "big girls blouse".

As a blanket statement, I disagree vehemently.

And you'd be wrong.

See also NIS (WRT healthcare rationing), overburdening the taxpayer, the insane EU rules governing everything from gasoline to what constitutes an actual croissant, etc.

First off, I assume you mean the US NIS (National Inpatient Sample) and just because the US government cant get something like healthcare right, doesn't mean others cant. The UK's NHS is far from the worlds best universal health care system, but it the system in the US makes it look positively sublime. One of the major reasons the US cant do anything right in health is the fact private corporations are too far entrenched and the government is too limp wristed to tell them to naff off (that and a large section of your government and population want to see the abuse continue).

Secondly, what EU rules on gasoline and croissants are you on about. Do you mean the Euro standards that determine things like how much sulfur can be in different types of fuel? When you drive a car that is sensitive to that you're actually grateful that someone is making sure that someone isn't shoving too much ethanol in the mix and as someone who breathes air, I'm also grateful that a lot of toxic material is removed.

You might have a point about the rule stating that only fortified wine from the Porto region can be called port, but if that's the biggest complaint you've only demonstrated that the EU is harmless.

This regulatory label was bought to you by the Globex corporation, Globex, we make tomorrow, today. Before we display the regulatory information please watch this short advertisement.

You cant find a citation because it isn't true.

Nissan sells 5,000,000 cars per year and made US$3 billion in profit last FY. Nissan makes good cars that sell well, pretty much the antithesis of American car corporations, so they're quite safe.

The Leaf has sold 100,000 units worldwide since 2010... which is actually 45% of the total EV's sold in that time.

Besides, I wouldn't read too much into names. Nissan made a car called the Skyline that was pretty low to the ground and the Pulsar doesn't emit radiation. Mostly they're picked because it sounds good, Mirai just happens to be good in English as well as Japanese.

If you're in the car when this happens, it's still going to be bad.

I blame hollywood for the common misconception that cars and petrol tanks explode.

2 tonnes is heavy for a car. It is fucking insane for an average.

To put the numbers into perspective. here's some weights of the top selling cars in the US from 2013 that aren't SUV's or pickups:
Honda Accord = 1500-1670 KG
Toyota Camry = 1500-1600 KG
Honda Civic = 1200-1300 KG
Nissan Altima = 1450-1550 KG
Toyota Corolla = 1250 KG

How many heavy cars are on the road to get the average to 2 Tonnes (2 tonnes is 2000 KG for the uninitiated)? A large sedan should be between 1500 and 1800 KG, a small car should be under 1200-1400 KG and a city car should be under 1200 KG.

Your heaviest Mustang (500GT convertible) weighs in at under 1850 KG and a Chysler 300 SRT-8 just inches over at 2012 KG when weighed with fluids and a full tank (basically ready to drive). 2T is stupidly high for an average weight.

But then we'd have to call them what they are, taxis... and that means they'll have to meet the same standards and requirements as regular taxis. Uber and Lyft will ultimately fail. Mini-cabbing (which is essentially what Uber is doing) has been legal in London for ages and the London black cabs are still around and going strong. In Australia, Uber isn't any cheaper than getting a legit taxi who has a license, insurance and may actually know where they're going.

Or better yet, make the entire tracking system a paid optional extra... but knowing car makers, the off switch would be a paid optional extra.

I would agree with this, but the comparison between Android and IOS is more to do with IOS looking more and more like Android in the last 4 releases.

IOS 3 and 4 looked and behaved radically different to IOS 7, I would not be supprised if we find the IOS 9 or 10 UI had more in common with Android 4 than IOS4.

My sister changed jobs last month, handed in her Iphone 5 to her old job and got a Galaxy S5 at her new job... She had no difficulty moving between the two as the UI's perform the same these days. Once she got her head around the concept of the "long press" she was fine (and this took her all of 5 minutes).

Further more, it's never actually been demonstrated that this "extensive malware" is widespread in any way, shape or form. In fact the worst thing they've been able to show is a fake app that might steal some of your personal data or show you ads. We're yet to get something really bad like a mass mailing worm, DDOS or cryptolocker.

Yep, I said "yet to", as long as there's money to be made and dumb users to install it, eventually it will happen. However with things like Masque on IOS, there's no guarantee it's going to happen on Android first any more.

Except that these can all be remote exploits.

- The Iphone 6 was pwned first via a web browser exploit allowing the exploit to escape the sandbox.
- The Samsung Galaxy S5 was second with an NFC exploit.
- The Nexus 5 was third with a Bluetooth exploit that forced a pairing between devices

All three of these can be executed remotely, however of the three only the Iphone attack escaped the sandbox. The NFC exploit used on the Samsung can be used on all NFC enabled Android phones but it uses a model specific code, so it's not a one size fits all exploit. Beyond this, the simple fix/workaround for the Android exploits is to turn off NFC and Bluetooth when not in use (I already do this anyway).

But as we're all enlightened, security minded slashdotters I'm sure none of us are keeping important information on our smartphones.

Oh, and the Windows phone was also crackd... but no-one cares about Windows phones.

B-B-B-B-But Apple said I was protected and viruses dont happen to them.