Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Negotiating when desperate (Score 2) 412

What sibling said.

I've been socked with life events that drained all the financial liquidity I thought I had... and at the same time had to go hunt down a new job. The solution was simple - I took the first one that looked halfway decent that allowed my family to stay fed, clothed, and warm. I then busted my hump to improve my finances over a year, then went looking for a better job when it was clear the one I was at wasn't going anywhere. Turned out that I became the most valuable member of the team when I left (turnover and skill/initiative played equal roles), but by then it was too late for them (protip: never, ever accept a counteroffer!)

Now I'm doing even better than I was before SHTF. Sure, life events make you eat a shit sandwich on occasion, but you grunt through it and build back up.

Comment: Re: 1 thing (Score 4, Interesting) 412

It's even easier than that... I just short circuit the whole conversation by saying (and yes, this is a direct quote): "I'm looking for $x per year to mitigate the risks of leaving my current position and to make it worthwhile - meet the number, beat the number, or we'll both be wasting our time." ($x equals my assessment of the current market for the position).

It destroys any pussy-footing around, allows you to get right down to assessing the rest of the company. Note that I have also had polite refusals at other interviews and the conversation ended there, but those were very rare. By doing it this way, I've increased my yearly salary in the past few jobs by $13k and $27k over the past 12 months (a $13k bump to a contract-to-hire position that I'd later soured on, and a further bump of $27k to my current position's salary.)

YMMV, but it works out very well.

Comment: Re:Does this mean... (Score 1) 123

One currently popular example is officers saying "I feared for my safety and the safety of others", which seems to be the magic incantation to get out of major crimes including murder...

"...magic"? No. The law has a very clear reason for exempting someone who kills in the name of self defense and/or defense of others - otherwise you'd need a cop posted at a coverage of something like one for every 10,000 square feet of jurisdiction (...which is not very practical in rural areas, yanno). It boils down to this: Everyone has the right to defend him/herself against deadly threat with whatever force is necessary to neutralize said threat. It works partly as a deterrent (at least in rural areas), and partly as a mechanism to actually help the police keep law and order in areas/situations that they cannot reach in time.

Incidentally, it's almost an identical exemption that police have when using deadly force, save for the fact that the police officer is (ostensibly) under a greater burden of proof due to his training and because of his privilege to act as the state's agent (with deadly force if necessary) in keeping order.

Now we can quibble over the "currently popular" reasons why you brought up that example, but the underlying concepts are sound and should remain so.

Comment: Re:Good ruling (Score 1) 123

To be fair, in the vast majority of cases, this is exactly what happens... cop engages brain, realizes that the situation either either something dumb, mistaken, or impossible to prosecute (and is otherwise not a crime), says as much to the complainant, and moves on. Or, in the case of what may be a crime but turns out to not be, same-same, with maybe a stern talking-to of the 'offender' that maybe he should not be so dumb in the future, or at least don't make the activity appear so damned suspicious. ...and then there's the small minority of police officers who are either overeager newbies, had a really bad day, decides he doesn't like the guy, didn't get laid the night before, a closet sociopath, or suchlike.

About the same sample size as humanity at large, really, but with one subtle-yet-important distinction: force.

But yeah, otherwise, a blanket statement like yours is, well, a blanket statement that holds little meaning in the real world, since most police already do use their brains before acting.

Comment: Re:I've already uninstalled the windows 10 nag ico (Score 1) 298

by Penguinisto (#49814977) Attached to: Windows 10 Release Date: July 29th

I don't understand why Microsoft doesn't realize that I don't want my desktop to look and operate like my phone.

So you'll be a fan of Windows 10 then.

There's more to it than making the screen look like a desktop... Not being a Windows 10 beta-testing type, an honest question or two: have they finally gotten rid of all of the 'admin-by-easter-egg' bullshit (e.g. the Charms Bar)? Is the UI actually usable without a touch-screen, or will that still require a few of the workarounds that Windows 8/8.1/9 did?

Why not reinstall your "nag icon" and give it a go before you complain that no one understands you.

...because in an enterprise environment, that nag icon is a bullshit equivalent to spamming (e.g. wasting folks' time with a sales pitch). No other OS bothers the user with 'OMG update your shit because we need the money!' nags every time someone logs into it.

Comment: Re:Heh. (Score 5, Insightful) 255

True, though it sadly proves P.T. Barnum's maxim, and says more about a gullible public, the lack of peer review in the field of nutrition (and worse, the sheer incompetence of so-called 'nutrition journalists' and 'specialists'), than it does about a science journal's shady/sloppy practices.

Long story short, it exposes a hell of a lot more than just what the scientist initially wanted exposed.

Maybe someone could do and publish a sociology study from it?
(/me ducks and runs like hell...)

Comment: This has been played out before... (Score 4, Informative) 582

by Penguinisto (#49790943) Attached to: How Tesla Batteries Will Force Home Wiring To Go Low Voltage

...albeit this has already happened on a smaller scale before. All you need to do is ask anyone who owns or has owned an RV or Camping trailer.

I dealt with it myself when I had an RV: a bank of huge batteries, an inverter, and a generator. In Tesla's instance, you replace "generator" with "local power grid", but otherwise it's the same routine: Your lights and similar are low-voltage (just like most RVs), but you use an inverter for any general consumer item (TV, computer/laptop, hair dryer, whatever).

I think the only diff would be in the appliances... most RV appliances (e.g. the refrigerator, furnace blower, AC units) are made to run off of 12v DC, but most RV appliances are pretty small when compared to their house-made counterparts.

Maybe ask folks who do the hardcore solar/wind thing?

Comment: Maybe a definition is need here... (Score 1) 344

by Penguinisto (#49790765) Attached to: The Tricky Road Ahead For Android Gets Even Trickier

I agree with your post mostly, but what exactly constitutes a "power user"?

Yeah, I root my phone, parked Cyanogen on it, and spent time modding my UI to fit my needs and tastes, but I consider myself to be someone who tinkers with the thing (as part of an old sysadmin's habit), and not a 'power user'. I fully understand what goes on with the OS, and have tinkered with mobile OSes before even Familiar Linux came out, and even wrote (okay, adapted) a quickie printer driver once, long, long ago... but I'm not a 'power user'.

IMO (and little more), I've always considered a 'power user' to be someone who has an above-average grasp of the item (phone, application, etc), and has very successfully integrated it into their life's workflow, and in turn the item has boosted their productivity, entertainment, etc. in very apparent ways. However, on a technical level such folks only know enough at best to be *very* dangerous - they can follow directions on a website to root their phone w/o blowing it up, but they don't understand *how* it works.

Dunno... what do you think? I just seem slightly fuzzed when it comes to assuming what a 'power user' actually is in the mobile realm.

Comment: Re:Switching?? (Score 1) 344

by Penguinisto (#49790631) Attached to: The Tricky Road Ahead For Android Gets Even Trickier

What if a significant number of the people who adopted Android as their first smartphone move on to a platformed more refined to their now acute sense of needs and ease of use.

Thing is, this works both ways. I've puttered around with my wife's iPhone, and iPad, etc. (it's the same UI/OS/etc).

But... I'll stick with Android. Mind you, my primary personal machine is a MacBook Pro, and will continue to be so. My house is blissfully windows-free. However, for my sense of needs and ease-of-use? I don't need/want iTunes to manage or transfer my music. I want an obscene amount of storage plus the ability to expand it as desired, and don't want to pay arm+leg to get that storage (a 64GB SD chip is way cheaper than a 64GB phone). I don't want to pay $800+ for an unlocked phone with a really big screen on it. I want to mod the actual user interface and look/feel to make the phone work the way *I* want to use it

- but yeah - that's my sense of needs and ease of use. It's different from yours, and others will have theirs different from ours. This is why I really don't see it as much of a threat, really. Folks will bounce around back and forth, there will be churn, and unless a better challenger arises***, Apple and Google will happily occupy their dominant roles and cash their checks.

*** mind you, this does not mean Microsoft or Blackberry for the foreseeable future.

Comment: Re:iPhone switchers (Score 1) 344

by Penguinisto (#49790475) Attached to: The Tricky Road Ahead For Android Gets Even Trickier

...and then there's those of us who never switched, and have no intention to.

My house is almost an Apple Store in miniature now - my MBP, my wife's iPad, her iPhone... but then there's my Android phone. I even have a new phone on the way via FedEx (I always buy unlocked), and it runs Android. But then, I prefer to have root on every device I own, even my phone. Keeps the bloatware to a minimum.

As for TFA, meh... if Android wasn't there, something else would be there instead (anyone else remember Palm?)

On the plus side, Android and iOS have chastened Microsoft hard enough that they're forced to play nice now... which IMHO is pretty awesome.

Comment: Re:And what about the infrastructure issues? (Score 1) 293

by Penguinisto (#49777907) Attached to: Amtrak Installing Cameras To Watch Train Engineers

Question... was it an actual cut in current baseline funding, or a "cut" insofar as "we wanted $10 zillion extra for next year's budget, but those bastards in Congress only want to give us $9 zillion extra!" ?

If it's the former, I'd love to see proof. If it's the latter, then kindly take that partisan sound-bite-mimicking bullshit elsewhere.

Comment: Re:It only increases accountability (Score 4, Insightful) 293

by Penguinisto (#49777851) Attached to: Amtrak Installing Cameras To Watch Train Engineers

Dunno - it's pretty hard to account for why the dude was doing 100+ mph on a 50mph curve.

Not saying it's his fault, but at least the camera would have absolved/proven any culpability on his part almost immediately.

Now normally, cameras would be a bad idea IMHO, but this is a public service operated by public funds.

"There... I've run rings 'round you logically" -- Monty Python's Flying Circus