Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

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:It's a vast field.... (Score 4, Insightful) 809

by k8to (#49049807) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Portion of Developers Are Bad At What They Do?

FWIW, I think that's a mistake. Why trust the opaque "encryption" feature of the application like Excel or acrobat when you can use something well-proven?

Unless you only want to dissuade casual observation, in which case any number of simple methods may work that involve no encryption.

Comment: Re:Agreed (Score 1) 574

by k8to (#48309977) Attached to: The Great IT Hiring He-Said / She-Said

I disagree.

That's the reasonable, but minority scenario. A lot of times they want you to solve their relatively arbitrary and ridiculous problem in a very short timescale.

I give very very simple problems and hope the candidate makes small mistakes that I can watch them figure out. Sometimes they just ace them and I don't learn much but I can ask another.

A coworker asks candidates to implement the 8 queens solution using an actual computer. He doesn't care about the difference between someone who knows the answer and someone who has never considered the problem before, but expects in 90 minutes that a programmer should be able to get it working even if he has to give a few hints.

Those are what I consider somewhat reasonable questions.

However, most of my peers ask code golf questions bout C++ minutiae, or baroque algorithms questions for unusual application domains and seems to think candidates who can't rattle of answers don't know how to program. That's been the majority case at other companies I've worked at as well.

Comment: Re:One example doesn't make an "always" (Score 1) 728

by k8to (#48114253) Attached to: Why the Trolls Will Always Win

You have to show that the information is intended to cause harm as the intent, and it generally has to be false. This means that a lot of things that get called libel in the UK aren't in the US (typically things that are true!).

It also means the burden of demonstration in the US is quite high. Demonstrating intent is in some cases quite difficult.

In this sort of case, the intent is fairly easy to show, and the reckless disregard for the veracity along with the falseness is easy to show. However the cost of prosecution to the individual is prohibitive, and the actors are frequently legion by the time the problem becomes big.

Comment: Re:About time (Score 1) 118

Only the FCC dismantled any requirement that infrastructure owners be required to sell access to their lines at all, and certainly not at any kind of fair rate back in the mid-2000s, so the other providers over AT&T's fiber or copper will never be real competitors. They only exist at the whim of the wire owners.

One can't proceed from the informal to the formal by formal means.

Working...