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


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: Re:Raises Don't Keep Up (Score 1) 282

by InsertCleverUsername (#47401773) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: How Often Should You Change Jobs?

Sure, I can see that. String them along--just as long as they aren't "the guy." (You know, the only guy that understands how the mission-critical systems work. I've seen companies go under when they lose that guy, without a knowledge transfer, which may take months). The replacement coder costs the new going rate, delivering a fraction of the productivity in the months before they have equivalent institutional knowledge and understand the wage refugee's code.

Ironically, even if a penny pinching manager did save a little, it's behaviors like this that drive IT wage inflation.

Comment: Raises Don't Keep Up (Score 3, Insightful) 282

by InsertCleverUsername (#47389261) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: How Often Should You Change Jobs?

The pattern I've seen time and again is that even if you find an employer that gives regular raises, the market rate for programmers moves much faster than a lame 3% cost of living raise. So, unless you're an assertive extrovert, with a high tolerance for uncomfortable moments with your boss, you probably aren't demanding a competitive raise each year. Easier to just interview every few years and get a big salary bump.

And the employers who lost you? They'll pay much more to replace you, learn nothing from the experience, then repeat the cycle again in a few years.

Comment: Re:These guys are deniers (Score 1) 560

by InsertCleverUsername (#46299103) Attached to: How Well Do Our Climate Models Match Our Observations?

If they have links to the petroleum industry perhaps you'd like to share exactly how much they have made and exactly where this money is supposed to have come from.

Admittedly, it has gotten harder. The money used to follow a much more transparent path. See http://www.scientificamerican....

Comment: Re:Minor Fluctuation? (Score 4, Informative) 560

by InsertCleverUsername (#46295513) Attached to: How Well Do Our Climate Models Match Our Observations?

As the old song goes, little things mean a lot. You couldn't see the difference between a little botulin toxin and a lethal dose without a microscope. And I'm sure you wouldn't notice a 0.7 C difference between one room in your house and another, but multiply that amount of energy to a global scale and it starts to add up. Consider what climatologist James Hansen said about the current rate of increase in global warming: “(it's) equivalent to exploding 400,000 Hiroshima atomic bombs per day, 365 days per year. That’s how much extra energy Earth is gaining each day.”

Comment: Re:Exactly 0% argue static climate (Score 1) 846

by InsertCleverUsername (#46106725) Attached to: Global-Warming Skepticism Hits 6-Year High

Climate change became the more popular phrase simply because so many people refused to accept that just because he planet as a whole is warming doesn't mean that every area also gets warmer.

In other words, the word with more play propaganda-wise got used. I go with the more accurate term.

Actually, it was Frank Luntz, a right-wing political consultant that's credited for the name change. He thought "climate change" sounded less scary and easier to ignore. Here's a quick read on Wikipedia with some of the back story on how climate science became a political football:

Comment: Re:Republicans should "go for it" (Score 1) 311

Naturally, the platform has to be mainstream enough to appeal to everyone possible. The reality is that the party has been co-opted by extremists hostile to some important pieces of science that impact policy. Here's your cites:

Exhibit A
Exhibit B (Yeah, it's Obama's list, but most would certainly embrace the denier label)
Exhibit C [youtube.com]

There are enough dangerous nuts in the great GOP Venn diagram (and a considerable overlap with elected officials) that the GP is basically correct.

Comment: Re:Reasons to be hesitant around Kurzweil (Score 1) 267

by InsertCleverUsername (#41620161) Attached to: Kurzweil: The Cloud Will Expand Human Brain Capacity

"His speech and music synthesis stuff is solid"
was solid. Now it's decades old and he has done nothing. I have come to understand he wasn't some sort of genius, but just in the right place at the right time.

Really? He just got lucky, like those morons Da Vinci and Einstein? Sounds like a vineyard of sour grapes to me.

Comment: Presented for Your Consideration... (Score 1) 532

So... Grampa finally croaks at the age of 101. Hasn't been able to see, hear, taste, smell, or think straight for the last 15 years. When his magic soul is divinely uploaded to a new, angelic, ether-based model, is his consciousness just like it was when he died? Senile, socially disengaged, and slow to understand anything going on around him? Or, as many believe, would it be transformed to its former glory, when gramps was a young adult.

O.K... Now think about how differently you looked at the world; the skills, interests, and personality you had when you were much younger. Grandfather is a categorically different person from the vital young man he once was (he'd probably yell at him to get off his lawn if they met). So, in what sense would that angelic being be the same guy that died and not more so a recreation of somebody that existed 75 years ago?

I just can't see how the Judeo-Christian concept of an afterlife is anything but a big pile of paradox.

Comment: Re:Waste of money (Score 1) 532

What a waste of money!

Why not give the money to Aubrey de Grey and/or the SENS Foundation

Amen. If de Grey, Kurzweil, and friends are right, by the end of the century religion and the clamoring for its promised afterlife will naturally extinguish. Who in their right mind would sign up for suppressing their sexual urges, spending their money building churches, and ruining several hours every Sunday, when there's no pay off?

Comment: Re:Waste of money (Score 2) 532

Belief in an afterlife being just some made up story is simply your opinion.

Finally someone who "gets" it. They keep telling me that Spiderman is a fictional character, but I have read his texts and heard his message of justice and good deeds. I know that there are different versions of his tale, but that certainly doesn't mean that my understanding of his powers isn't de facto truth.

[Crash programs] fail because they are based on the theory that, with nine women pregnant, you can get a baby a month. -- Wernher von Braun