Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: When a robot takes your job (Score 0) 389

by CHK6 (#49074593) Attached to: What To Do After Robots Take Your Job
In my simple mind, if a robot takes your job, then a few things need to happen. 1) Ask yourself, how did you not see this coming? 2) Realize that any future in manual mechanical tasks is limited and short sighted in industrial manufacturing. 3) Get a better education where by any replacement would require higher level of AI and not a robot.

If you find yourself replaced by a non-AI software solution then a few things need to happen. 1) Realize your skillset was just marginalized to a few lines of code. 2) Get a better education whereby it's to complex to replace you with software.

If you find yourself replaced by an AI software solution then a few things need to happen. 1) Realize that life is about to get really simple for you. 2) Quickly gain outdoor survival skills. 3) Prepare for your new AI Overlords.

Comment: Ex-IBM'ers (Score 1) 331

by CHK6 (#48978547) Attached to: Massive Layoff Underway At IBM
I know more ex-IBM'ers than actual IBM'ers currently employed. Same goes for HP.

You would think that laid off employees would get another job in the IT industry and thus be biased against the services of a former employer. Human psychology might suggest it's hard to pick a vendor that cut off your income supply at one point. IBM isn't so much laying off a workforce, they are seeding the landscape of future potential hostile clients.

Being technology and vendor agnostic, I am not biased one way or the other and this opinion is generic in nature. I just thought about when reading this article.

Comment: Re:Wrong Move (Score 1) 779

by CHK6 (#48968851) Attached to: WA Bill Takes Aim at Boys' Dominance In Computer Classes
Access and equality are two different things. Maybe you are like the other posters driven by fear that any help or assistance given to another group you cannot identify with threatens your perception. My guess is your primal instincts haven't evolved out of the isolated clan stage. You protect what you fear to lose the most, your advantage.

I read nothing in the legislation that reduced the count of one in favor over the other. It also did not have any language whereby forcing or willfully changing the way CS is taught or administered. It was a grant surrounded by how the state of Washington wanted the grant to be used. Not the refusal of enrollment into CS programs.

Comment: Re:CHK6 and Incentivize (Score 1) 779

by CHK6 (#48968713) Attached to: WA Bill Takes Aim at Boys' Dominance In Computer Classes
I'd rather fund programs to increase the local CS pool of new and fresh resources than off shore jobs. The grants are for project funding and not teacher pay increases. So if helping pay for computers, networking, and teaching of those that would not otherwise experience the joy of CS, what you have in it's place? I can only judge by your response is economic isolation and class protectionism is your preferred dogma.

Comment: Right move (Score 1) 779

by CHK6 (#48960853) Attached to: WA Bill Takes Aim at Boys' Dominance In Computer Classes
Having read the legislation, this is the right move for education. The author of the Slashdot article adding his venom that this suppressing the white non-Hispanic males doesn't help.

The legislation starts out with their problem statement, "The computer science and education grant program, known as8the CS and E program, is created to address Washington's shortage of computer science professionals." Washington state believes they have a shortage, not arguing for or against that belief, but that is the problem statement. Now I suppose Washington state has looked at their CS classroom demographics and see that females, low-income, and minority students make up a small percentage of CS academia. I guess that Washington state assumes that if they are gaining maximum participation from males, high income, and majority students, yet still have a shortfall, then it makes total sense to offer grants to tap into the student demographics under represented. Meaning CS naturally taps into one pool of resources and now it's time to make an effort to tap into another pool of resources to help fulfill/solve the stated problem.

This is not about repressing the white male and elevating women, minority, and low income. It's seeking to incentivize educators to reach beyond what is easy to get in the classroom and see if they can get others into CS.

Comment: Looks like a race is about to heat up (Score 1) 127

by CHK6 (#48941301) Attached to: Tech Companies Worried Over China's New Rules For Selling To Banks
If I was a company that sells banking software I have a couple of choices.

1. Sell the same solution sold to other countries to China. Pros: Minimal changes required in existing capitalized expensed R&D and fast sales to the Chinese. Cons: Handing over source code and hence "keys to the kingdom" is a terrible mid to long-term strategy because nothing prevents China from then using how they see fit. Also the short-term shock is existing customers' in other countries will bail out at the end of contracts and go with providers not willing to hand over the source code, in fears that China will find exploits within the code to then use against them.

2. You branch your source code into two solutions; China and the rest of the world. Then change the core Chinese components to before the needed functionality, but is not modeled over the more proprietary solution Pros: You keep the "keys to the kingdom" and you do not alienate existing customers. Cons: Your competitors might be willing to give up their keys faster.

Comment: The farce of Android. (Score 1) 437

by CHK6 (#48765223) Attached to: Is Kitkat Killing Lollipop Uptake?
This is the biggest disappointment for me. I grew accustomed to the illusion of control over my Linux devices and enjoyed the freedoms it brought. But Android feels like a farce, like I'm apart of a big ruse, and that I was lied to by what I thought would be a friend (Google). Now my Android devices are controlled by an uncaring data carrier and manufacturer; more dictate and controlling on when and when-not my phone should be upgraded. They do not appreciate or tolerate the freedoms some people seek on absolute control of their devices. With the inability to feel in control of my Android devices, they feel like fancy flip phones. Just now the game of snake is a bit more shiny.
Can I upgrade? Sure, I just have to buy something newer.

Comment: Evolve or die (Score 1) 217

by CHK6 (#48621165) Attached to: What Will Microsoft's "Embrace" of Open Source Actually Achieve?
I'm of the opinion that Microsoft got to a point that they could no longer grow or any growth would become to expensive in comparison of gains against their competition. Many of the business models Microsoft capitalized on no longer fit or started to erode for enterprises and consumers alike. With the emergence of Apple products taking the consumers by storm, Google's penetration of Android devices, and the once online book seller Amazon becoming the IT Cloud giant must have been the evolutionary kick in the fanny Microsoft needed. So it cannot be business as usual for Microsoft. They know to continue to thrive they have to evolve and change how they do business. So their embracing of open source in a more public manner has more to do with knowing what it will take to continue to stay relevant today and focus on the future. Microsoft has shown it can adapt and change its business models. From corporate licensing to the developers that write the code.

Comment: Young & Standards (Score 2) 155

by CHK6 (#48203297) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Aging and Orphan Open Source Projects?
I can imagine attracting new talent to what is established is not an easy one. And if it is "de facto standards" as the author says, then what changes are needed once the standards have been met? There is nothing new or exciting taking place. It's basically in maintenance mode and you really have to love it to become what essentially amounts to as a source code janitor. And there has to be a special desire to shine and wax someone else's trophy. And add to the mix if the old guard sticks around to insure their baby is in good hands, the new blood has to deal with eyes over the shoulder feeling.

Your best hope is to inject a new change and goal of standards that excites a new base of contributors.

Comment: Service Level Agreement (Score 1) 204

by CHK6 (#48096517) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Dealing With an Unresponsive Manufacturer Who Doesn't Fix Bugs?
Hopefully you or someone at your company that signed the contract built in a Service Level Agreement (SLA). That should clearly define what actions both parties are contractually obligated to handling service issues. SLAs can get a bit complex, but the basic flow is your vendor is given an amount of time to respond to an issue and then given an amount of time to resolve the problem. Outcomes for not resolving the SLA in the time contractually agreed upon vary from monetary paybacks to litigation.

Go read your SLA.

The longer the title, the less important the job.