Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Some stuff doesn't need to be smart. (Score 1) 77

As with all technology. Just because it exists doesn't always mean that it needs to be implemented.
For example the eject button on the remote control for your VCR/DVD/Blueray player. Sure it is technically possible, but what is the point. After from your chair you eject the disk, you will still need to get off your butt, to take the media out, and replace it with something else.

Some devices don't need internet connectivity. Just because when they are soo far away from you they are no longer useful.

Comment Re:Alternate title (Score 1) 128

So you are stating in a story that a free internet meant to be given to the poor, from a For Profit Company, however being blocked by the government because it has interests in keeping the underclass out of power, and probably have ties with other telecom companies, to block competition because they are offer lower price as a key competitive advantage. Is showing the evils of capitalism. Where in this case free market is motivated to provide free infrastructure in order to increase revenue from services offered.

Stop over simplifying things. Unregulated capitalism is bad, Over regulated capitalism is just as bad too. The details is important, not the political stance.

Comment Re:Management structure and meritocracy (Score 1) 267

"Well, you seem to be using a different definition of meritocracy from everyone else. But OK, let's use your definition."

I'm using the dictionary definition, if you have a problem with that then don't take it up with me, take it up with the whole of the rest of the world who you seem intent on rallying against.

"Well, by your definition then the Linux dev community is not a meritocracy because the asshole element is causing some of the best people to leave, lowering the overall quality of the contributors."

That's probably quite true. I can think of some examples where you're absolutely right, but I'm really not interested in flying off on a tangent and arguing about drama in the open source world. That doesn't mean that merit doesn't count for anything, of course it does, but it's certainly not the whole picture there.

"Your definition seems to be a rather holostic thing where people are promoted on merit as defined by something that optimizes the performance criteria you're interested in. That's OK, an by that definition, then yeah sure you can have a meritocracy. It's just a different definition from the one everyone else seems to use."

I don't know who this everyone else you talk of is, everyone else is typically content with the dictionary definition which defines a meritocracy as the holding of power by those with the most merit to complete the task at hand, and in business that means those most able to fulfil the business needs, such as figuring out how to can the most tuna.

Comment Re:Management structure and meritocracy (Score 1) 267

You're on one hand asserting that a meritocracy can only determine merit on one single thing - in your example, technical capability - and yet, you're then judging that meritocracy on things that are outside it's definition of merit. This is entirely nonsensical.

If you feel that niceness to team members is an important merit in your meritocracy then you must also include that in your judgement of merit. Thus someone with high technical skill but beats other members of the team up would end up with low merit.

The problem is not that a meritocracy cannot exist, the problem is that you do not understand what a meritocracy is - you're arguing that a meritocracy can only judge merit on one single trait, and this is patently untrue. You have effectively taken the GP's mistake of suggesting only technical merit is necessary and then expanded it to imply that this is true for all meritocracies and therefore meritocracies cannot exist.

A simple example is imagine I run a tuna canning factory, and all the workers sit such that they can't interfere with each other, but one worker consistently cans double the amount of tuna in a day than any of the others with no reduction in quality or other detriment to the company. I promote him because he's figured out a way to be more efficient than everyone else. That is a meritocracy.

Feel free to argue why you don't like meritocracies, or why you think they're bad (i.e. you may want to argue that they're not fair on people who only have one arm so can never can as much tuna even if those people try way harder and put more hours in), but pretending they cannot exist based on a nonsensical argument following on from an argument you're complaining about yourself doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Comment Re:That isn't trustful. (Score 1) 566

No they are stuck in the 1990s
Their rant about Linux is the same argument that was true back in the mid 1990s however Linux has matured sense then.
Some of the biggest business problems they face can be far easier fixed with a partial adoption of Linux.

I am not an open source zealot. But in terms of control, and configurability Linux is superior to Windows. That comment was to try to silence a flood of just to switch to Linux posts.

Comment That isn't trustful. (Score 4, Insightful) 566

For the enterprise version we really need it predictable so it can be managed. Even if talking to MS is harmless and overall a good thing, it means you are having your computer talk to something you may not want too.

At work we are still on Windows 7 with little chance going over to 10 because of stuff like this. (I would prefer Linux, but our management is stuck in the 1990s)

Comment Re:Well, that's pretty much a textbook violation. (Score 4, Interesting) 106

Is it?
They are not preventing Netflix or YouTube, There isn't any sign that they are slowing down their performance. It is just they are counting the data the same as any other internet download.
The only twist is that Verizon isn't charging for bandwidth for its own service.
You could say the cost of Verizon mobile is being paid from the service fee, and you are actually paying more then than the data cap fees.

Comment Re:Majority, not average. (Score 1) 127

Well I take it like a normal sales pitch. He is just happening to push Open Source software.
Do Great things, customized to your business, improve your work flow Open Source.
Do Grate things, customized to your business, improve your work flow SAS

The problem with Open source is the large projects that get all the attention and support and maintenance. Are usually the general purpose applications, not the specialized ones that people really need.

What is really needed is companies to bring back their own internal development staff with skilled developers and architects to make the workflow customized to their business and work around many of the oddities, that what vendors will say as unsupported or not best practices, or what an open source project will go that is just a stupid idea.

The normal argument would be you have the source just put your fixes yourself... Which is fine, except you are working off of someone else baggage, so the next upgrade you have to reapply your patches, and have no support. While an in-house app will do just what you want it to do.

Comment Re:You must be new here (Score 1) 1829

Agree mod as well.

Many times we get modded insightful or interesting because that is what someone else was thinking. However Insightful or Interesting should be something that they didn't think of and somehow enlightened from the comment. But for most of the time our comments are the standard dribble, not bringing anything new to the table, however you get comfort knowing that you are not alone, thus the Agree mod, or you find the common dribble against your values, however it was a decent argument, have a disagree option.

Comment Volunteering leaving is a bad thing. (Score 4, Insightful) 217

The problem with a volunteering leaving of a company is a really bad thing, almost worse than layoffs. While it makes it easier for the managers to sleep at night knowing that they don't have to let a person go, which for most humans really hate doing.
But for the company the people who are smart enough to see the writing on the wall, know to jump ship early knowing that they can get a good or better job elsewhere. The ones who stick around are often the ones who lack the experience to see the warning signs, or just don't have the skills to get another job, and gamble on not being the one who gets canned. Thus populating the company with less experience or less than ideal employees. This creates a downward spiral of less quality and causing real layoffs (as we see here) which makes allowing for growth much harder.

But when you see voluntary leaving it is a bad sign.

Comment Re:legalism is a crap philosophy. (Score 1) 579

That is the go to fix for traffic safety. Lower the speed limit.
There was an accident where I live a few years back and they figured the speed limit was too high.
Not really thinking. It was an area of 3 intersection that had 6 lanes of traffic all going in different directions where to get to your destination you need to be in the correct lane. On a steep hill Then to top it off people j-walk across this all the time while there is a good cross walk 100 meters pass this tricky traffic intersection. The thing is people rarely ever speed on this intersection. For the most part they are just trying to get to speed.
Ok a kid died in an accident that is sad. But lowering the speed limit doesn't really solve much. Especially as the study shows that traffic wants to go faster. Perhaps you should look at the problem and find a better way for safety

Slashdot Top Deals

Old programmers never die, they just hit account block limit.