Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:I'm starting to think it's this simple... (Score 1) 63 63

I don't agree with the whole patent thing, the more I hear about it, the more I get the feeling that the person it is supposed to protect (lone developers can't afford the patent process and large corporations lock the marketplace down with them).

Still, if you have a patent, you don't need to sell it. You can license the patent. That what the whole idea was about. So you could make a great smartphone invention, have a patent, and Samsung and Apple would pay you money to use the patent without you having to sell it.

Comment: Re:People are the problem (Score 1) 82 82

Actually, the opposite of what GP mentions is true.
From a dutch website that trains people in First Aid (in dutch):

Mag iedereen een AED bedienen?

Ja, iedereen in Nederland mag als goed burger een AED inzetten wanneer dit nodig is. De Minister van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport heeft in april 2002 opdracht gegeven via een Algemene Maatregel van Bestuur de Wet BIG zodanig te wijzigen dat het gebruik van de AED door medische leken is toegestaan. Hiermee is de mogelijkheid geschapen dat iedereen de AED mag hanteren. Het is niet verplicht om een AED en reanimatie cursus gevolgd te hebben, maar met name het volgen van een reanimatiecursus is wel zeer aan te bevelen.

Basically, the government amended the laws in 2002 so anyone is allowed to use an AED, even if untrained in CPR or the use of an AED. Of course, the site does recommend people do the training.

Comment: Re:This is not a simple question (Score 1) 631 631

As a currency it is just as trustworthy as any other imaginary money system. It's value is highly speculative, like the NYSE. Nobody really trusts the NYSE just as you shouldn't trust the value of BitCoin.

And this is basically the sad thing about the economy. Stock used to represent real value that a business had: The ground it stood on, the buildings it owned, it's warehouse stock, it's patents, the knowledge of the people working for it.
That has all changed into how much another fool will pay for it. If you look at the net-bubble of 2001, ISPs were being valued based on the number of subscribers to their service, times an imaginary amounts that investors though those subscriptions should be worth. However, it was never really backed by anything, other than some hope that another sucker would buy their calculation and be willing to pay even more for the same stock.

It would be nice if stocks could go back to what they were for: Investors believing in a company and supporting it by trading a percentage of that company's capital for an injection of money. Not like gambling in a casino or with art where you hope some other sucker is willing to pay more for imaginary value in the future than you did. Also my problem with intellectual property, it's usually based on imagined value, instead of actual proven value.

Comment: Re:Why government? (Score 0) 194 194

Strange, when I look back into the comments icebike, I find general comments on all kinds of articles, nothing Android or Apple specific.
Going through your history however, I see almost half is about iOS and Android, and you do seem to have a somewhat strong bias towards iOS.

I think you're confused about who the fanboy is here.

Comment: Re:Jimmy Kimmel's take on the "new" iPhone 5 (Score 1) 543 543

Actually, if you watch the video, you see that these are people who compare it to the current version (which is also the 4S) and make up all kinds of things about it.
Most of them state that it is better than the one they -have-, one of them even specifically says he has an iPhone 4S, and that this one (the supposed 5) is better.

So yes, the video does indeed show current iPhone users being silly and not even noticing that they are holding the same phone that they already own, but still thinking it is faster, lighter, better.

Comment: Re:You get what you pay/wait for (Score 1) 491 491

If you look into where Agile came from, you will see that it is a collection of best practices and insights gathered since the 60s. Agile is just a collection of common sense, nothing more, nothing less.

Everyone implementing it as a 'thou shallt...' way of working, does not understand agile.

Key focus is:
- release early and often, so you get good feedback
- TALK to your customer (and to your teammates), don't assume some email of document captures what they mean
- improve your process if you find somthing isn't working, don't just continue with rituals and procedures because someone said so.

Yes, this asks of a certain mindset from both team and customer. But if they didn't have that mindset to begin with, no matter what method you use, you will fail.

"This is lemma 1.1. We start a new chapter so the numbers all go back to one." -- Prof. Seager, C&O 351

Working...