Most of these organizations and associations completely fail to understand how they would be able to create added value for their potential members. As an electronic engineer I'm supposed to be a member of IEEE. I can't think of a single reason why I would subscribe, and the people and letters of IEEE didn't make things better. On the contrary.
* Replacing five lightbulbs with fluorescent lights which cost more energy to produce and contain way more toxic materials will not save the world. Especially because many of them do not last longer for the simple reason that we switch on and off the lights way too often.
* If you reduce the power consumption of 10% of the users with 50%, you still only won 5%.
* Solve the real problem: The fact that I switch off one TV won't save the world. Samsung should make TVs with ultra-low stand-by power. They make millions.
Don't get me wrong, I am very worried about the future of our planet. I just don't think that environmentalists shouting at people that they should replace their lightbulbs get the whole picture. With 7 billion people, you will never be able to shout at everyone. Shout at the CEO of General Electric, Samsung, Philips, LG. THEY can make a difference.
Most of these 'researchers' who get their names on every paper are actually the managers who don't have a clue about the actual research. Their name is only there because they force the real researchers to include it in the papers. Been there, done that, quit the job.
As a former reviewer working for a very renowned research institute in Europe I can say: Peers typically don't get/take the time to do their job right, and often outsource the job to less experienced people. Reproducing results is a very expensive and time consuming job, which means: unless it is it won't happen. You must be lucky if the reviewers have at least read the paper till the end. Quite often the review happens by people who are "no experts" in the field of the paper. For many conferences, papers with a bad rating still pass because there are not sufficient good papers, or if it is easy to guess the institute the authors work for, the paper passes without proper review.
Once our institute had a paper rejected, but my boss -who was in the review team- managed to get the paper accepted anyway. High profile conference in Electronic Engineering.
As a former paper author I can say: If your paper is rejected for one conference, you simply resubmit to another until it is accepted. Publish or perish is the holy grail of research, something many bosses will make very clear to you, and quality is less important. You don't write a paper because you have results, you write a paper because this or that major conference has a deadline in two weeks. I have a few paper on my name I am ashamed of: Omitting the bad results in the measurements, compare with competitors only on the features you know you would win because the comparison doesn't make sense at all, bragging about results which are very bad, but you hide that by not comparing to (avoiding any reference to) competitors which are better.
As you might understand, I quit the job. I left research and never ever want to have anything to do with it anymore.
Sad but true. Then again, 99.9999999% of the users still wouldn't read the EULA even if they had to pay millions, so they still could get away with it.
It's not efficiency that counts most. Is't usability. The tesla is bigger and can drive 5x further. Statistics... you can always present the numbers such that they look good.
As they say: With developers like these, who needs enemies ?
Did I ever trust bitcoin ? No I didn't. Nothing has changed. Scary how easy people can trust a new system they don't have a clue about.
So instead of a binary blob that was easy to install, stable and fast you went for Ati, with a crappy driver, crappy installer and we don't give a shit attitude ? Do you have any idea why the driver has been a binary blob for so long ?
This is ideal for both parking in tight spaces (i.e., you don't have to squeeze your way out of your vehicle while trying not to bang the next car's door)
True, except that the driver of the other car still might have to do exactly that (or hit other cars from the front or rear) because some asshole with FAP-Aid parked his car too close to the others.
A company should only be allowed to use a patent in court when it is active in the field the patent describes and the use of the patent by other organizations reduces the market potential of this company. Exception are research organizations of course, for which market value must somehow be redefined. A very effective troll-be-gone method.
Is it just me who thinks Amarok is a ridiculous piece of software which is bloated to the max, yet misses basic features or makes them hard to use ? For me, the previous version was an example of everything that can be wrong with audio players. Let's see what this one has to offer.
But can I expect privacy from Slashdot ?
Link to Original Source
Fire the managers. 90% of them are overhead with no added value for the organization.They cost a lot of money and quite often are clueless about whatever division they are managing. They lack communication skills towards the working men, and therefore are unaware of the real problems of the organization. Also, their drive to "manage" typically means that problems aren't solved, but managed, which are two completely orthogonal things. I now for the first time in my life work in a company where management appears to work (kind of), basically because there are so few managers, and the managers are skilled and know the (technical!) ins and outs of the product we make.