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


Forgot your password?

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:my experience: (Score 1) 269

by buddyglass (#49339977) Attached to: Developers and the Fear of Apple
That is my experience as well. If you look at app development from the perspective of "I'm going to do this for an employer and get paid more than I was being paid to do {some other type of development}" and not "I'm going to create the next Angry Birds and get rich overnight" then it's a lot more satisfying.

Comment: my experience: (Score 1) 809

by buddyglass (#49049319) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What Portion of Developers Are Bad At What They Do?
I've worked as a developer for the past 15 years. In that time, I'd break down the quality level as follows (roughly):

10%: Absolutely terrible; should be fired even if they were willing to work for free
40%: Not absolutely terrible, but also not someone I'd hire if I were building my own team (even if they came cheap)
40%: Someone who does decent work but isn't going to blow you away; I'd consider hiring someone in this group, but wouldn't pay a premium to bring them on board
10%: Exceptional. Not only would I hire someone in in this group, I'd be willing to pay "above market" to get them

The numbers are, obviously, rough (no to mention subject to personal bias and totally anecdotal).

One problem: plenty of people in the first two groups interview like they're in the third group. Also, some of the people in the 4th group interview like they're in the 3rd group. I submit that some of the most successful teams are successful not because they have great ideas (although that never hurts), but because they have an interview process that's able to sort people into the right "bin" more accurately than their competition can.

Comment: Re:so... (Score 1) 297

by buddyglass (#48993195) Attached to: Mississippi - the Nation's Leader In Vaccination Rates

Why? It's not like infections only happen in schools. Or that students spend 100% of their time at school. Look at the Disneyland outbreak.

The main reason to require vaccination in public schools is that they're a resource that's supposedly available to everyone. I shouldn't have to expose my kid to other kids who haven't been vaccinated in order to access the public school system. So we require vaccinations there. Private schools are private. That's why you can send your kid to a school that teaches young earth creationism if you want. Likewise, you could elect to send your kid to a school that doesn't require vaccinations. I would support a reporting requirement, though, obligating private schools to publicize in their promotional materials whether they allow un-vaccinated students to enroll. That way parents can make an informed decision.

I think that you are under the impression that it is ONLY transmitted via sex or needles.

Not really. It's transmitted by blood, or bodily fluids containing blood. That can happen without sex or needles but, outside of mother-to-child transmission during delivery, its more rare. I would be much less concerned about sending my kids to a school where some of the students weren't vaccinated against HepB than I would be about sending my kids to a school where some of the students weren't vaccinated against measles, mumps, rubella, pertussis, etc.

I've got all the money I'll ever need if I die by 4 o'clock. -- Henny Youngman