Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 25% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY25". ×

Comment Re: Result: Non-breeders jumping ship (Score 1) 108

The insane part is that you think working that late is okay. I'd say you need a union to better negotiate your time, but you're probably a libertarian anti-union nutjob who will simultaneously defend your free-market right to work as damn much as you please while bemoaning the people who say "enough is enough, work-life balance matters more to me than finishing this tonight" and leave at a reasonable time. Hell, if half your company does it, then obviously management is okay with people leaving that early, so you are only staying because you want to and are just trolling for no reason.

(If you start leaving early, and you are called on it, point out the other people that leave early. Just make sure to get it on a recording if they say it's because "they have children" and you'll be set for life if they fire you, since those anti-discrimination laws protect your non-child status as much as it protects their child status.)

Comment Re:Result: Non-breeders jumping ship (Score 1) 108

Your company ought to have a senior, experience employee that can move over and be productive on your team for four months. There are people who love to jump around and "save the day" on each project, and are actually good at it. At the end of the period, he or she can move on to the next group who just lost someone else.

If your company doesn't do that, then yes, you should start looking for a job. But you should do so because you work for a horrible company, not because your company offers this specific benefit. (Your company probably does already offer sick leave and even short-term disability benefits, right? So this exact same scenario could happen because of other benefits. If that's a problem to you, find a new job now.)

Comment Re:Austin? (Score 3, Informative) 464

Austin has gotten pretty expensive, yes. We bought into a central Austin neighborhood at the bottom of the recession (thanks luck we both had jobs) and rode it up. We couldn't afford to buy in our own neighborhood now. Sister-in-law wanted to buy a year and a half later and the only houses in the price range in the city were on the periphery of the core city area. Now you mostly have to go to the suburbs or the funny offshoot bits of the city, and getting from those into downtown (or even in the core periphery area where most of the tech companies are) takes a long time.

On the other hand, if you live central and work at a tech company on the periphery, you commute against traffic. My ~10 mile commute takes 11-15 minutes.

Comment Re:Countdown to Lawsuit in 3...2...1... (Score 1) 412

I think "you can't deny housing because someone has kids" is pretty Equal Protection-y regardless of the age of those kids. And it was totally prone to abuse (no quotes required) prior to regulation, exactly as in my facetious example.

If anything seems illegal, it's probably the senior living facilities, not kids in this dorm thing.

Comment Re:Countdown to Lawsuit in 3...2...1... (Score 2) 412

Well if you have kids living with you then you're already not in their intended market, this sort of thing is a "singles only" sort of place.

...which is likely illegal depending upon the local housing ordinances. "Oh, Jennifer in 7B had her baby last week? Time to write up the eviction notice."

Comment Re:Predestiny? (Score 1) 144

That's all just VW screwing up. The researchers who found this did so because they were running a BMW and VW side-by-side and saw weird fluctuations in emissions in the VW. The BMW was consistently good.

So an SCR system has been "proven not to work" - VW's in their 2.0L TDI. Other SCR systems work fine.

Comment Re:Good (Score 1) 173

Asset seizure without due process has been in the spotlight recently, and many organizations including sheriff offices cannot simply take your stuff any more when they stop you. This is mostly due to local policy changes due to pressure from the media and activists IIRC, not any court action, so it's not ideal, but at least one blatantly unconstitutional process* is winding down.

* what SCOTUS said about it is irrelevant because they were wrong

Comment Re:Just what we need.. (Score 1) 211

This is important, because this is how we can reign in corporate "free speech". The Constitution, so sayeth SCOTUS, might give corporations the rights of people, but nothing in the Constitution gives certain types of people a favorable tax status over others.

Now, we have a long tradition of granting favorable tax status to certain groups, but that tax status often comes with restrictions attached. For example, to be a non-profit corporation, a corporation person is often required to publish quite a lot more financial data than a for-profit corporation would of similar size and ownership. Those non-profit corporations might also be restricted from using their funds for political speech. If they violate these rules, they haven't necessarily broken a criminal law, but their favorable tax status can be revoked.

So why don't we just do the same with regular for-profit corporations? If you want any of the speech rights of a person, above and beyond trade speech required to market, sell, and service your products, you have to pay income tax on your gross, not net. If you and your shareholders prefer your favorable tax status, so you can go about your business of being a business, then stop pretending you are a person, limit your speech to trade speech, and go back to being what you are supposed to be.

Comment Re:Maybe (Score 1) 420

IIRC the VW problem was found while the researchers were testing a BMW X5 side-by-side, and noticed that the VW's emissions varied widely over the test parameters while the BMW's didn't.

In other words, while the tests might not represent typical driving conditions, at least one company figured out how to build engines and emission systems that meet standards in more varied and realistic driving conditions. Diesel can be clean (enough to meet the spirit and letter of the law), but at least one vendor (and possibly many others) bend or break the rules rather than invest in the necessary technology to achieve those goals.

(Disclaimer: We have a BMW X5 diesel. The car is about four years old, and we had to have its horse piss tank refilled this summer because the car had started a countdown towards "vehicle will not start in X miles" unless we kept that emission system functional.)

C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas l'Informatique. -- Bosquet [on seeing the IBM 4341]