Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Cisco's Meraki Systems Manager (Score 1) 408

by BlastfireRS (#46031473) Attached to: Short Notice: LogMeIn To Discontinue Free Access
Never said it wasn't overkill, only that it's fairly straightforward, free, and provides the same functionality (and more). Considering a lot of individuals and businesses have used LogMeIn for remote management and support, it seemed to be worth a mention to me; by all means, feel free to ignore! :)

Comment: Re:Why? (Score 4, Insightful) 996

Yeah, I get what you're saying. My point falls more along the lines of, if you lower the limit from what has been the accepted standard, you're going to end up with a lot of people falling between the new and old limits getting arrested...without a proportionate increase in safety. I get the feeling people aren't going to simply stop having that second bottle of beer with dinner because the percentage rate dropped by .03; at least not until their friends and family who were always responsible drinkers before the change start running afoul of it. Then again, I guess there's always a "user education" period...

Ultimately, I'm just always wary when the law makes it easier and easier to be a lawbreaker. I'd hate for people who legitimately exercise responsible drinking to inadvertently find themselves in trouble.

Comment: Why? (Score 5, Insightful) 996

All this will result in is more arrests. The average Joe isn't going to know the difference between .08% and .05%; the only result will be a larger probability in jail time for someone who would otherwise be considered fine to drive today. If we're going to change the numbers in this manner, why not just make it 0% and at least be clear about the message: Drink at all, and you'd better be willing to not drive for a couple of hours.

Comment: Re:So, let me get this straight... (Score 1) 475

by BlastfireRS (#42693577) Attached to: Unlocking New Mobile Phones Becomes Illegal In the US Tomorrow
I wonder if a workaround for this technicality would be for services to offer to "buy" your phone, they unlock it, and subsequently offer your previous phone for sale to you. So long as money changes hands in the right order, would this be classified as legal despite violating the spirit of the law?

Comment: Re:Public vs. Private? (Score 1) 386

by BlastfireRS (#42173697) Attached to: Khan Academy: the Future of Taxpayer Reeducation?

As an IT administrator at a large public university, I can say with absolute truthfulness that it is still the case that public [state] professionals are largely underpaid in comparison to their private-sector peers. As stated, we get great benefits, [usually] more holidays, and don't get laid off with little notice; that's the trade-off, and we know that going in.

However, we usually get annoyed when the agreed-upon terms of our employment are changed after the fact. Here in Florida, state employees were previously not required to contribute to their pensions; the current governor disagreed with this particular benefit and successfully pushed for this to be changed. At this point, we get back to the concept of promises; when I was hired, it was at a lower wage on the condition that the lower salary is offset by not contributing to my pension plan (among other things). If the government wants to save money by forcing contribution, that's fine so long as this new aspect of the terms of employment is enforced on new hires from the date this law was passed. This is not the case, and that's why the law is now being challenged in the Supreme Court.

Ultimately, it can be said that if people are so offended by this ex post facto law, they can find employment in the private sector and take a higher wage. I completely agree; while I hope the law is struck, it's not a "deal breaker" for me given the value I receive from other benefits that the state is choosing to still honor. Still, on principal, the terms of an agreement should be honored and not changed without due process, bargaining, etc., and that's what is at issue here.

Comment: I know why (Score 2) 212

by BlastfireRS (#39643311) Attached to: Apple Developing Tool To Remove Flashback
Unfortunately, security isn't that big of a deal to Apple...yet. With the increase in market penetration the bulls-eye on Macs is getting larger and a lot more tempting; hopefully they realize this before something very serious happens and take steps to bolster their in-house security research (or hell, outsource it).

Comment: Re:From the text. (Score 2) 275

Those are mostly (if not completely) social issues. Some of us Republicans feel we should respect the rights of our fellow human beings, live and let live, while also feeling that Big Government is a bad idea and fiscal conservatism is good. Not everyone that identifies with either major political party is intently "Black or White" in their ideas; in fact, I'd say those who don't identify themselves as being in the "Grey" are the people you need to worry about on both sides.

Comment: Non-issue (Score 2) 95

by BlastfireRS (#39484569) Attached to: Blackboard Buys Moodlerooms and Netspot

It's not so much that clients are specifically avoiding Blackboard; schools and such are vastly under-funded, and given the choice between competent free software with smaller support costs and a proprietary LMS, why pay the premium? My university has been steadily moving courses from Blackboard to Moodle for that reason specifically.

So long as the services and prices of these companies remain the same, I don't think clients are going to care who the owner is.

"Consider a spherical bear, in simple harmonic motion..." -- Professor in the UCB physics department

Working...