Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Safely??? (Score 4, Interesting) 101

I have no doubt than in ten years he can build a rocket powerful enough to reach Mars. Then if he wishes to do it safely, he would have to send several unmanned missions (I'm thinking three) before he can get a safe certification for the one year (wo)manned journey.

A hell of a lot of things can go wrong in a year, as the ISS proves, and that is within the protective realm of the earth's magnetic field.

Comment Re:Interview "Grilling" or "Testing" is Poppycock (Score 2) 227

You are confusing the fact that *you* haven't seen the data with it not existing or not being available to some of us for examination.

Does google collect data? yes. Do they search for correlations? yes. Have they claimed to find ones that lead to better employees? yes.

This is just like a reporter filing an item from abroad. You cannot be positive about what happened unless you see it with your own eyes, but at some point you have to make a judgment call and choose to trust the statements or not. Is there a reason why they would be making these things up?

Comment Re:Interview "Grilling" or "Testing" is Poppycock (Score 1) 227

The people that didn't make it through the process didn't get to work there and have their performance evaluated.

They have hired people using various different parameters which have evolved over time. Their current hiring profile is quite a bit different than ten years ago.

Comment Re:Interview "Grilling" or "Testing" is Poppycock (Score 4, Informative) 227

The idea that grilling, testing, or creating "challenging" interview questions for candidates, and thinking that it will give you ANY introspective on how they will perform on the job, is complete and total poppycock.

Except that Google keeps track of this and has the data to back it up. So on the one have you have your single anecdotal experience and on the other hand we have 10 years of Google hiring experiences.

Of course it is not perfect and they end up hiring some duds and letting some jewels go, but that is not the threshold sought, they simply aim to hire better than the average company.

Comment Re:Argumentum ad lapidem (Score 1) 311

Except that correlation in the real world works the other way: the more civilized societies, like Western Europe, have the higher taxes, while the less civilized societies, like Haiti and Somalia, have the lower taxes.

One thing is true though, in truly civilized countries the citizenry tends not to whine about having to pay high taxes for the services obtained.

Comment Re:Argumentum ad lapidem (Score 1) 311

Nope, it's taking a personal subjective opinion and trying to make it into a universal truth, a universal truth that can if fact be supported or undermined by argumentation.

For example, Federal outlays as percentage of GDP are now at the lowest level in 40 years (for real, look it up). We might still want to bring them down further, but the statement "taxes are too high" is not immune from objective argumentation.

Comment Re:Argumentum ad lapidem (Score 1) 311

You are confusing two sentiments. No one likes paying fees, be them taxes or your golf club membership. However this does not make them automatically too high.

I'm quite happy paying over $100K in taxes a year in exchange for living in a society with low crime, free health care and functioning public schools. Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society.

Now of course some people prefer to live in a country where public schools are horrible in exchange for lower taxes (though they pay them right back in private school fees). I can respect that, but it all means that "taxes are too high" is far from a universal truth that requires no argumentation on way or another.

Comment Re:Argumentum ad lapidem (Score 0) 311

Good example. I'm looking out the window and the sky is gray and overcast, which is exactly why those seemingly true statements need to be argued and qualified e.g. on a clear day the sky is blue.

We are running a deficit, which means taxes are insufficient to cover our expenditures. So if anything they are objectively too low given our outlays.

Comment Re:Argumentum ad lapidem (Score 1) 311

While it is a subjective call, it is not immune to argument. For example America has the lowest tax burden among developed nations.

Second, if it is subjective then all the more reason why the statement is incorrect. Your example is a good one "chocolate ice cream tastes bad" is not a fact. The correct thing to say is "i don't like chocolate ice cream".

Slashdot Top Deals

God made the integers; all else is the work of Man. -- Kronecker