Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Law Conference? (Score 1) 191

by bsolar (#49511221) Attached to: Assange Talk Spurs UK Judges To Boycott Legal Conference

A fugitive is the antithesis of the organisation, conference and attendees. It's a conference for and about the legal profession. As far as I'm aware, Assange has zero legal qualifications whatsoever.

He's involved in whistleblower activity detailing alleged abuses of the legal system and his status as a fugitive is likely to be linked to this more than the supposed rape accusations. But even assuming the rape accusation to be sound, his activity in whistleblowing makes him definitely relevant "for and about the legal profession".

That's like saying you should invite a convicted paedophile to your school safety talk, or a rapist to your rape counselling group. Maybe it SOUNDS good and fair and balanced, but the practicality is insanely stupid.

Why insanely stupid? It might give some insight on why these people did what they did. It's not a matter of fairness, it's a matter of having a look at the other side to try to understand. You seem to imply that merely listening to them would mean justifying them or giving them reason, which is not the case.

Criminals (and Assange is one, legally speaking, in the UK for skipping UK court bail) DO NOT get a say in how their justice system handles them, or invited to conferences about the legal profession. Reasonable outsiders make sure the law is fair and balanced for all, but the criminals themselves? No.

Talking at a conference does not in any way imply "having a say" in anything. Whoever wants to write laws fair, balanced and effective has to meet the criminals too to be able to better understand why some crimes happen, how to prevent them and/or mitigate them.

So, why not?

Comment: Re:= paracetamol (Score 2) 187

by bsolar (#49469617) Attached to: Acetaminophen Reduces Both Pain and Pleasure, Study Finds
Not sure about how it works in the USA but in Europe source is not generics' manufacturers, it's the European Medicines Agency which mandates that generics have to be manufactured with exaclty the same quality and active component dosages than the brand reference medicine: only name, packaging and inactive components can differ (and obviously, price).

Comment: Re:"Revolutionary!" (Score 1) 105

by bsolar (#49461655) Attached to: Microsoft and Miele Team Collaborate To Cook Up an IoT Revolution
As far as I know Miele already offers its own selection of recommended products to use with its appliances and for good reason, since most cheap products can be actually crap which would lower the result's quality and most important reduce the lifetime of the appliances. Since these appliances can be sold with a 10 years warranty it can be a big issue.

Comment: Re:Pao = Sexist (Score 1) 892

Is this assumption based on something more than your personal opinion? Maybe men negotiating better is the reason they are seen as confident and women negotiating not so well is the reason they are seena s bitchy. You know, "It's cultural" sounds suspiciusly like "there is a convenient excuse which shifts the blame away from the women for their subpar performance".

Comment: Re:People who are offended (Score 1) 765

by bsolar (#49315751) Attached to: A Software Project Full of "Male Anatomy" Jokes Causes Controversy

Of course they might be immature, since what they might consider "sexually inappropriate" might be perfectly fine within that specific working environment, making them the problem. If you want to work as a waitress in a topless bar and consider working topless "sexually inappropriate" the problem is yours: nobody forces you to work there as nobody forces you to contribute to this specific project.

Basically "inappropriate" sometimes just means "I personally don't like it so it should not exist at all".

Comment: Re:Simple methodology (Score 1) 347

by bsolar (#49145069) Attached to: The Programmers Who Want To Get Rid of Software Estimates
Even with bridges you might have to show a preliminary to-scale model which gets discussed and iterated upon. The difference is that with bridges there is a fundamental difference and a huge delta in costs between building a to-scale model and building the real thing. So you don't build a bridge that way because you don't have the same capabilities as with software.

Comment: Re:Last week ... (Score 1) 290

by bsolar (#49110035) Attached to: How Walking With Smartphones May Have Changed Pedestrian Etiquette

You're still missing the point. The amount of sheet metal surrounding you doesn't determine your worth but it surely determines the outcome of a collision with something else, be it your fault or not or even without a fault at all. A pedestrian has to accept reality: if he gets hit by a car he easily risks injury or death, which means that for him being careless when crossing is much more dangerous.

Common advice for "soft" street users, be it pedestrian, cyclist or motocyclists, is to assume that everyone else is either completely incompetent or actively trying to kill you since in case of accident you dont want to be right but dead, you want to avoid the accident in the first place.

You cannot force other drivers to always pay attention or always "do their jobs": it would be nice but reality begs to differ. Being defensive is the best survival strategy.

Comment: Re:Last week ... (Score 1) 290

by bsolar (#49107283) Attached to: How Walking With Smartphones May Have Changed Pedestrian Etiquette
You are missing the point. This time this pedestrian met a responsible driver who noticed him and anticipated his careless crossing but next time he might meet a distracted or intoxicated or incompetent driver and get hit: then of course the driver would be in the wrong for not "doing his job", but it would be a pretty meager consolation for the pedestrian who would be dead.

A good supervisor can step on your toes without messing up your shine.