Link to Original Source
$7.2 million of intangible assets and $6.3 million of goodwill related to Slashdot Media
and have only started to realize some improvement on related sites. With ad revenue declining and not expected to pick up (read: everyone who uses Slashdot uses adblocking softwarwe), it appears that the Slashdot stewardship experiment by Dice Holdings has been a financial failure.
Since the site has been redesigned in a user-hostile fashion with a very generic styling, this reader surmises Dice Holdings is looking to transform or transfer the brand into a generic Web 3.0 technology property. The name may be more valuable than the user community (since we drive no revenue nor particularly use Dice.com's services)."
Link to Original Source
Whatever his true motivation is, it makes sense from a business standpoint. Microsoft would love to become for Windows what Apple is for OS X / iOS, and Valve doesn't want that - it's understandable. From a certain angle, Steam machines are not unlike Google+: there are some diehard fans that would kill for it, many go like "why do we need another [social network / console platform]?" and the company behind it is big enough and has enough mindshare that the product is guaranteed to have some visibility even if it is not quite on par with what the rest of the market has to offer, and eventually gain enough of a market share to make sense, even with all backwards / forwards support issues you pointed out. And for consumers more competition is always good, so sure why not.
that will automate creating a bunch of fake profiles on facebook, twitter, linkedin and whatnot given some photos. this way facial recognition software will drown in the data noise - which of them is real you? something tells me there will be a demand for this service pretty soon.
just kidding, but only half so.
How long until "disagreeing with the politics of the ruling party" becomes a mental illness?
Probably in the same timeframe as "disagreeing with the politics of the ruling party" becoming a crime.
There is a good example - Russia has a long history of "diagnosing" dissenters with "mild schizophrenia" and similar mental conditions and "sentencing" them to be treated in special prison-like institutions. It started back in tsarist days in 19th century and lasted up until at least the late Soviet period, when a bunch of dissidents were forcefully "treated" from this. (There are also some reports it's been going on in the 90s but lately there have been no high profile cases.)
Parallels can be drawn..
I'll wait for the first service pack before I install this, thanks.
Send an email to the whole team at the end of each day, summarizing what you've been doing.
What? That's exactly what the morning standup is for.
But that's exactly the point: too many people were left out early, so they would never accept it as their form of payment. Where it stands today, bitcoin is your run of the mill Ponzi scheme.
So is there an agreement that the choice is between 'professionalism' and, let's call it lack of anger management? Sounds like a false dichotomy to me.
I completely on board with Linus that 'professionalism' today does, in fact, imply many things that are bad for your karma, including office politics, hypocrisy and so on. But at the same time it also implies a couple things which are actually good. In particular, being able to give feedback to other people in such a way that they are not being offended by the form is one of them. Sure, you can always say that people should always welcome feedback in whatever form it takes, but reality is, humans are imperfect and their egos are fragile. If you have talented, motivated people who are adding value to your project, pissing them off without a good reason will simply mean your project wouldn't be as good. The cost of getting some anger management skills in place seems to be a very affordable one to pay, aside from it having an intrinsic value of being a nicer person (which some people may disagree with me on).
And as for the "he's so brilliant and kernel group kicks so much ass they don't really need people with fragile egos in there" argument, I'd draw an analogy with business. Even if you're making great money, AND you still leaving money on the table somewhere, you can improve and should improve. The culture of never stopping to improve begets great things. In the same fashion, if your manners mean someone who could have contributed to your project, did not, it means you did your project a disservice.
Well, the problem is that people who would make the best interviewers/HR specialists don't want to have that kind of job; they want to get their hands dirty with a real project. It's kinda like tech ops which has a similar problem - they need real engineering skills in that field, but not many real engineers want to work in IT, which is why people with DevOps on their resume are such a hot commodity.
Now, we need someone to figure out DevHR and things will get a LOT better...