Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Most qualified and motivated candidates? (Score 1) 435

by JakeBurn (#47274001) Attached to: Yahoo's Diversity Record Is Almost As Bad As Google's

And even if someone took that as being fact, it should still be irrelevant to a publicly traded company. I just left a large company with its head up its ass when it comes to hiring. I was told, as a manger, to try and hire more women and blacks, then was threatened when the best of those bunches were unable to perform at the same level as the white men they replaced. I couldn't care less about the supposed 'plight' of either group. I went to a high school that had around a 30% percent graduation rate. I went to college and didn't get a race or sex based scholarship. My tuition was paid by working during high school and all through college. To want better for myself and having been forced to work for everything I've ever had makes care nothing for people that claim they could be the best if only some benefactor would step in and pay their way. The math I look at is what are the percentages in the QUALIFIED pool? How they get there is of no concern to the company.
You say that a company hiring whites is mathematically denying itself the 'best and brightest' but put forth bullshit math to back it up. I would counter with parents that choose a criminal lifestyle, walk out on their children and do absolutely nothing to nurture them are not capable of producing the best and brightest children as their offspring are almost guaranteed to have the same traits as the parents. If they were the best and the brightest they would look around themselves and use all of those bad examples as what not to be. Some of the people I went to HS with did just that but most of them decided fuck it, I'd rather have a $150 pair of shoes than pay my phone bill. How many people riding around poorer neighborhoods in cars with $3000 sets of rims and tires have a college fund set up for their kids? How many of those kids will grow up living the same selfish lifestyle?

Comment: Re:It happens every day in my job. (Score 4, Insightful) 593

I was a manager at Home Depot for years and can tell you they do the same thing. When I got hired we had a man as a regional manager who didn't give a shit what race or sex you were. He hired the best people he could and our team became the envy of the entire company. We literally wrote the book on how to do our jobs better and most things considered 'best practices' came from our regional team at some level. Then his boss was changed to a woman who decided their were too many white men in our region things got really bad. When hiring the last three lower level managers under me I wasn't told if candidates were nearly the same, I was told I HAD to hire more females and minorities. After giving interviews for three months, and finding zero decent female or minority candidates, my new regional manager pulled me aside and basically accused me of being a racist and a sexist. I was told I had two weeks to fill the position or someone would be found to do it for me. The best of the bunch was a black woman who had been an HR department head. I had to fire her six months later for theft and was then blamed for hiring her in the first place. I ended up leaving HD because I got tired of the stupidity. At every level of the company they have gone off the rails. Management at the upper levels of the company have decided that anyone but a white male should be hired and most of the time that means not hiring the best candidate. Men are more physically capable of doing the bottom end jobs so more men are hired for those jobs. When it comes time to hire for their boss should I hire one of them who knows every aspect of his own job plus most aspects of his boss' job or a female who knows nothing about either position as an outside hire? In nearly every case it was better to hire from within but that meant I was a racist and a sexist for thinking people most capable of doing the job were the ones I should hire.

Comment: Re:Lock-in? (Score 1) 589

by JakeBurn (#46943879) Attached to: Microsoft Cheaper To Use Than Open Source Software, UK CIO Says

This is why I have little regard for 'free' or open source software. If somehow ego could be removed, these programs might have a chance of one day being usable. The issue I see is that too many of these developers start out with 'fuck ms' I can easily make a free version of this. What their arrogance always misses is that MS didn't become MS by releasing half-assed programs. They put more time and money into help systems than most of these open source programs put into their entire projects. And its always the small things that they decide aren't a priority in their quest to change the software landscape that ends up making nearly everyone but fanboys run from their products. Its funny that people are actually trying to argue with you about this. The cornerstone of every successful program is whether or not enough people who want to use your product actually can use it. Without a basic help system you can throw that software into the garbage. If the help system is junk AND there isn't a single person in that entire organization working to fix it, the entire organization is garbage. People saying its widely known that the help is junk is even more reason to stay away from anything coming from that group of developers.

Comment: Re:Cellular is the business model (Score 1) 424

by JakeBurn (#46270317) Attached to: Time Warner Deal Is How Comcast Will Fight Cord Cutters

I take it you've never been doing really well in a game on console or ever had spam email? My nephew is very good at COD and I get calls from his mom about once a week because some douche bag is flooding their ip with data in order to ruin the kid's game. If they had to pay for all of that data I could see them having a case for a lawsuit against the ISP for allowing all the data in. Spam email is usually small if you turn off images, but if you didn't a 1 meg image in 500 plus emails a week could end up really hurting an end user.

Comment: Re:Not the point (Score 1) 338

by JakeBurn (#46062297) Attached to: Facebook Is a Plague That'll Burn Out In a Few Years, Says Study

I'm not sure that^^, or anything posters here are trying to imply can reliably be used to determine the fate of FB. We don't have anything like it to relate to. You could try to say 'well myspace blah blah blah' but myspace didn't have everyone's grandmothers posting recipes to each other. Myspace was only relevant because most of the people online had heard of it. At the time that wasn't a huge chunk of the general population and the people there were becoming internet connoisseurs who demanded more. Think of how quickly most people here expanded their horizons on the internet; exploring, checking out new things, etc. How many of the millions of internet-illiterate people on FB are doing those things? As far as MANY of them are concerned, FB is the internet. Most of the family members I have on FB are only just barely even checking out things like Youtube and probably half got a nasty virus the first time they googled something other than FB. Those people are likely scared into not doing anything but what they feel is safe. While many of us here on /. might move on to some other networking site, the chances we could get the millions of other people on there to go with us will fail. Until they make it too hard for the mindless drones to share and experience others' inane posts they will likely stay on top for a long time.

Comment: Re:Not neccesairly (Score 1) 324

by JakeBurn (#46018111) Attached to: In Greece, 10 Months In Prison For "Blasphemous" Facebook Page

Many of those people express those positive views based on pride that their fore-fathers were actually fighting on the right side constitutionally at the time and were willing to die for their beliefs. The Southern governments wanted slavery because the cotton gin forced agriculture there into a nearly one crop industry and it only worked with slavery. Slavery was, to them, a constitutional right not because it was in the constitution but because they had every opportunity to ban it when the document was written and chose not to. The facts of life for them was that Northern states had more people and therefore more political votes to bolster their own industries with legally gray laws and handouts then once they were secure in that, only then did they try to abolish slavery. Legally the federal government was obliged to back slave holding states in disputes of property but they turned a blind eye to people coming into Southern states and burning farmers to death, even those that didn't hold slaves. At the time, the states still looked at themselves as independent entities that were part of an alliance to a weak federal government. The people in the North didn't want to ban slavery because they wanted slaves to be free they wanted to control their monopoly of power. Why do you think Northern states still tolerated hatred, pain and suffering on Africans long after the war ended? There's a reason why some black people in the South still fly the Confederate flag and it has nothing to do with slavery.

Comment: Re:If that wasn't crueal and unreasonable... (Score 1) 1038

by JakeBurn (#45999193) Attached to: Controversial Execution In Ohio Uses New Lethal Drug Combination

Cruel and unreasonable?
The punishment should be judged by using the crime as the benchmark.
Is ten minutes of gagging or choking more cruel then the mental anguish experienced by the seven month pregnant woman he raped then killed? If not his family and lawyer should kindly go fuck themselves.

Comment: Re:This is the problem with religious people. (Score 1) 903

by JakeBurn (#45850279) Attached to: US Justice Blocks Implementation of ACA Contraceptive Mandate

What kind of genius mods this insightful? They're like most smaller companies. They don't have a la carte plans where you pick and chose what you are going to pay for. They have one plan that is as all-inclusive as it can be and were told they had to include contraceptives. It shouldn't matter why they don't want it. I can't see why anyone but a troll would try to get a job with a religious outfit if they didn't believe the same things. I had a vasectomy two years ago because I don't want to have any more kids yet I have to pay extra money on my premiums because someone I work with may or may not want a discount on contraceptives? Socialistic stupidity. I'm paying nearly double what I did last year for the same plan and its shit like this that is driving up the cost.

Comment: Re:We vote on leaders not lightbulbs (Score 1) 1146

by JakeBurn (#45719075) Attached to: US Light Bulb Phase-Out's Next Step Begins Next Month

CFL's are generally just over 4:1 against incandescents. A 60W equivalent CFL uses 14W-17W and others I know of are 40:9 and 23:100. I still won't buy them, though, as the cost is pennies across their life and I live in a colder climate. I tried them out and after coming home after dark only to stand there for 15-30 seconds while it warmed up was enough to make me reconsider. When they started failing much, much sooner than advertised I stopped using them. When a company comes out with a ballast that screws into a light fixture and a compact fluorescent bulb that inserts into that I will buy them. Not interested in paying absurd prices that are artificially jacked up because they chose to engineer them poorly by marrying the bulb to the ballast. This would also allow for manufacturing quick start ballasts that work properly when you come home to a cold house as well.

Comment: Re:Southwest.. (Score 1) 462

by JakeBurn (#45617227) Attached to: Gov't Puts Witness On No Fly List, Then Denies Having Done So

And this is why we value our private firearms and put up with high murder rates due to them. We allow our government to take certain actions because we hold the trump card; our willingness to die for our belief that governments should be restricted past a certain point. We are enjoying a decent life. When the government stoops to a level we find unacceptable we will forcibly remove them and start again. Countries like Germany were able to do what we can not because they were brain-washing their children to love the state first, family second. That's why Americans get all bent out of shape when schools try to get stupid and take authority away from a child's parent. We accept parents teaching their kids things we disagree with because once you control that aspect of a child's life entirely you have taken the first critical step in creating what the SS had in Nazi Germany.
It could happen in the USA, but its not likely. The undercurrent of distrust and dissatisfaction that used to only reside on the fringes of our society have crept into much of the mainstream. Obama, the savior of all and next greatest president, is at an all time low approval rating because he thought he could ride that wave of support and take away people's constitutional rights. Hopefully his wake-up call is realizing that his average approval rating is lower than the great Satan, George Bush. Sadly, though, he seems to honestly not give a shit about anything but his own agenda and the results will only be people being less trusting of his party.

Comment: Re:Theft is theft, but... (Score 1) 1010

Are you from the United States where this occurred? Only asking because it sounds like you are talking out of your ass with a complete lack of understanding of all aspects of this situation. Walmart always has signs up indicating where their public restrooms are. The giant sign that says restrooms is understood to be for public use because they are publicly advertised. You are definitely correct that if someone went into an employee only restroom they would not seek to have you charged with theft because trespassing is a more serious charge. You are also correct that electricity is not an object that can be handled or actually taken like a bottle of soda, however it is definitely quantifiable and has value. You need to read up on theft of services. Its a different part of law than theft of property but it still counts as theft and at a minimum is a misdemeanor in most places. Most minor misdemeanors where the cop didn't actually see the crime occur will only result in a ticket and/or a summons to court but if a person admits to committing a misdemeanor or they are caught in the act the can be arrested for it.

Comment: Re:Theft is theft, but... (Score 1) 1010

by JakeBurn (#45612563) Attached to: EV Owner Arrested Over 5 Cents Worth of Electricity From School's Outlet

Your analogy sucks. Walmart has PUBLIC restrooms. That means they are offering its services, usage and water for free. Its not theft just because the 7 Up is for sale and has a price printed on it. It has a monetary value that the victim of the theft would have had to pay for if the thief wasn't caught. In this situation there is no analogy needed. It was a guy stealing electricity. If the school had this outlet obviously located and dedicated for people to charge their phones or laptops that would be a different situation. They did nothing of the sort. Some jackass thought he would get away with stealing because hey, its such a small amount he's stealing so no one would ever be mad, right? Did he ask permission or offer to pay for the electricity beforehand? Nope. He even admitted that he routinely steals from publicly accessible outlets and never asks permission because its always such a small amount. If I ever walked out of my house and saw that a neighbor had plugged into the outlet on the side of my house I would definitely call the cops. What kind of entitled douchebag would ever think it was ok to steal so long as it was a small amount? Walk into a bank, reach over the counter and grab a nickel and see if you don't get arrested.

Comment: Re:Maybe (Score 1) 293

by JakeBurn (#45294173) Attached to: Most Sensitive Detector Yet Fails To Find Any Signs of Dark Matter

Taken from "The Age and Progenitor Mass of Sirius B", (which most astrophysicists hold to be the standard when dealing with how massive the star actually is):
"This result yields in principle the most accurate data point at relatively high masses for the initial-final mass relation. However, the analysis relies on the assumption that the primordial abundance of the Sirius stars was solar, based on membership in the Sirius supercluster. A recent study suggests that its membership in the group is by no means certain."

So the only way they can determine Sirius B's mass is to first determine its age. To determine it's age they have had to make an assumption that it was part of the Sirius supercluster yet a recent study suggests that its membership in that group is by no means certain. Therefore everything they have said regarding its mass is by no means certain. If that is by no means certain than how can any observation of its gravitational relationship to nearby objects be certain? Going from that, if everything they have determined is by no means certain, than why say that it is so certain that there must be Dark Matter there to make the equations work?

Comment: Re:Maybe (Score 1) 293

by JakeBurn (#45286909) Attached to: Most Sensitive Detector Yet Fails To Find Any Signs of Dark Matter

This quote from wikipedia is the accepted reason why it is said to exist. "Astrophysicists hypothesized dark matter due to discrepancies between the mass of large astronomical objects determined from their gravitational effects and the mass calculated from the "luminous matter" they contain: stars, gas, and dust."

First and foremost the scientists that decided it needed to be created to begin with had to first decide that their ability to calculate the masses of objects, (that are too far away to reliably gauge any relevant data except through speculation or guess work), somehow had to be irrefutable. Tell me first, how the data that was collected is irrefutable. You can't. Except in a land of non-science there isn't a need to create something to prove something else unless that something else is irrefutable. There isn't a way to calculate a stars mass exactly because we have absolutely no idea what is inside their cores and at best are making educated guesses based on what we know about our own planet. You might be right, but the data set containing the correct answer could possibly be anything. How does a logic minded person step from "we made a guess and the evidence says we are incorrect" to "obviously everything we have done is infallible therefore it must be something else we need to create in order to justify our previous GUESS".
I get it. People want this to be real. But there really isn't a justification for it's existence as a serious pursuit other than ego. There is no honesty in this approach. Honesty would be admitting that maybe we don't know as much as we claim about gravity and its effect on the fabric of space and even the tiniest degree off at the start will skew the end results dramatically. Honesty would be admitting that if we guessed wrong on the mass of stars, (and it is a guess no matter how educated a guess we claim), that any answer we get is somewhat suspect and not some infallible truth that demands creation of something else. You can take any wild guess or even an outright lie and through a long progression of made up supporting data make it appear to be fact. It doesn't make it a fact it just buries your original guess or miscalculation at the bottom of a giant pile of garbage.

For every bloke who makes his mark, there's half a dozen waiting to rub it out. -- Andy Capp