Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Management structure and meritocracy (Score 1) 267

"Well, you seem to be using a different definition of meritocracy from everyone else. But OK, let's use your definition."

I'm using the dictionary definition, if you have a problem with that then don't take it up with me, take it up with the whole of the rest of the world who you seem intent on rallying against.

"Well, by your definition then the Linux dev community is not a meritocracy because the asshole element is causing some of the best people to leave, lowering the overall quality of the contributors."

That's probably quite true. I can think of some examples where you're absolutely right, but I'm really not interested in flying off on a tangent and arguing about drama in the open source world. That doesn't mean that merit doesn't count for anything, of course it does, but it's certainly not the whole picture there.

"Your definition seems to be a rather holostic thing where people are promoted on merit as defined by something that optimizes the performance criteria you're interested in. That's OK, an by that definition, then yeah sure you can have a meritocracy. It's just a different definition from the one everyone else seems to use."

I don't know who this everyone else you talk of is, everyone else is typically content with the dictionary definition which defines a meritocracy as the holding of power by those with the most merit to complete the task at hand, and in business that means those most able to fulfil the business needs, such as figuring out how to can the most tuna.

Comment Re:Management structure and meritocracy (Score 1) 267

You're on one hand asserting that a meritocracy can only determine merit on one single thing - in your example, technical capability - and yet, you're then judging that meritocracy on things that are outside it's definition of merit. This is entirely nonsensical.

If you feel that niceness to team members is an important merit in your meritocracy then you must also include that in your judgement of merit. Thus someone with high technical skill but beats other members of the team up would end up with low merit.

The problem is not that a meritocracy cannot exist, the problem is that you do not understand what a meritocracy is - you're arguing that a meritocracy can only judge merit on one single trait, and this is patently untrue. You have effectively taken the GP's mistake of suggesting only technical merit is necessary and then expanded it to imply that this is true for all meritocracies and therefore meritocracies cannot exist.

A simple example is imagine I run a tuna canning factory, and all the workers sit such that they can't interfere with each other, but one worker consistently cans double the amount of tuna in a day than any of the others with no reduction in quality or other detriment to the company. I promote him because he's figured out a way to be more efficient than everyone else. That is a meritocracy.

Feel free to argue why you don't like meritocracies, or why you think they're bad (i.e. you may want to argue that they're not fair on people who only have one arm so can never can as much tuna even if those people try way harder and put more hours in), but pretending they cannot exist based on a nonsensical argument following on from an argument you're complaining about yourself doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Comment Nice spin there... US being "only" biggest spender (Score 1) 272

Or as you put it... "only about 1.5x the world average of ~2.3% of GDP".

Or... we could look at it like this...
USA spends ALONE as much as 9 (NINE) next biggest world military spenders COMBINED. And then some.
USA = China + Saudi Arabia + Russia + UK + France + Japan + India + Germany + South Korea + 14.7 billion dollars (change).
Or, you can take the other source - where USA spends more, but so does everyone else, thus USA spends "only" as much as the next top 7 spenders. And change.

Also, do note that "% of GDP" is just one of the factors one has to take in consideration when comparing military spending.
Otherwise, one might get a bright idea that Saudi Arabia has the biggest and baddest military force on the planet, from all that cherry picking.

On a side note... a large wealthy household being large still makes them assholes for spending millions on lobster and caviar.
Just like "Oh, but I have 5 kids" is not an excuse for speeding in one's Lamborghini - it actually just makes one a bigger dick.

Comment It's the same with books. (Score 1) 228

I have even done a few nasty binges where I would swear to "stop by midnight" only to look outside and see that it was dawn.

Losing oneself in a book, reading until the break of dawn cause you "just couldn't put the book down" is a common occurrence.
Often referred to with a dose of nostalgia and sympathy, along with reading with a flashlight, under the covers.

It's not the medium - it's the message.
Humans are suckers for vicarious experiences.
Particularly in the form of fiction - but they will also gladly waste hours and travel miles to watch millionaires kick or throw a ball around.

Comment That's dermatographic urticaria. (Score 1) 82

I remember when I was about 12, I had this odd skin reaction that was like just random inflammation, and I could never figure out what caused it. It used to really freak people out.. I could sometimes just take my fingernail and scratch lightly on my arm and write words and about 20 to 30 minutes later the word would swell up and turn red and look like someone had carved a word on me with a knife and then 20 minutes after that it was gone.

That's dermatographic urticaria. It's relatively common - about 5% of people have it.


7 Swift 2 Enhancements iOS Devs Will Love 123

snydeq writes: InfoWorld's Paul Solt outlines how Apple has made good on Swift's emphasis on performance, approachability, and ease in its latest update, offering up seven worthwhile enhancements to Swift 2, along with code samples. 'Many of the enhancements to Swift, through both the Swift 2.0 update and subsequent Swift 2.1 update, have made the language more explicit and intentional, and in turns, Swift 2 code will be safer and easier to maintain for years to come (especially now that Swift is open source). New language constructs (keywords) in Swift 2 improve the readability of control flow — the order in which lines of code are executed. Thanks to these new keywords, collaborating on Swift code will be much more productive and efficient.'

Comment Re:playful workdays?! lots of nonsense criticisms. (Score 1) 428

"But playful workdays implies lowering expectations and less time working, which is the antithesis of productivity."

This is the number one thing bad managers fail to understand. Time spent working != productivity. It's quite possible to become more productive if you spend less time working and are more refreshed, happier, and more focused.

There is a balance, but the idea that more time at work inherently means more productivity is complete nonsense, there's a point where your returns not only diminish, but go into reverse. Someone working 7 hours a day who loves their job with a passion will typically still get more done than someone who works 10 hours a day and fucking hates it.

If you're in management, please step out, or learn a few things about how to make sure staff are effective and productive, because based on your comment you're part of the productivity problem.

Comment Re:There are some estimates on Wattway site. (Score 1) 405

But why even do it in your driveway when its much cheaper to put them on the roof?

Same basic reason that underlies all those "let's put it on the roads" - it's a large and mostly empty surface which has to be kept clear and uncluttered 99% of the time.
Bonus points for it being attached to the actual building where actual people would spend actual harvested electricity - instead of miles from nowhere, with all the losses of transporting the electricity to the actual households.

Sure... you COULD build a solar roof over your driveway... but maybe you need special permits and such for that.
Maybe you or your family members don't want a roof on stilts in front of your home or over your yard - while you do want more solar capacity than what your roof may provide.

A niche solution for all those niches where regular roof-mounted solar panels can't be installed, but there is free and empty walking/driving surface nearby.
Hell, even those solar-fucking hexagons make sense if you rip out most of the bullshit (LEDs, heaters, 20 tons or so of concrete "access ports" and foundation...) and use them for paving roads in parks and gardens.
IF they can be produced cheaply enough, that is.

But not compared to the cost of paving the roads - compared to cost of installing regular solar panels, on, around or over that surface.
Besides, solar fucking hexagons were the only ones retarded enough to suggest ripping out existing roads and putting in magical hexagons instead.
French Wattway assumes existing asphalt roads underneath the glued-on photovoltaics, Dutch SolaRoad is assembled from concrete slabs with a top layer of photovoltaics - which is just the thing for driveways.

Comment Heated roads are a product of mental retardation.. (Score 1) 405

incorporate heating elements

This is the most retarded part of that proposal. Even beyond the "let's put LEDs in it and forgo on paint".

Heat does not magically disappear.
Even should all of the electricity used come from solar sources, melting snow with heat is LITERALLY producing global warming.
Not climate change, not greenhouse effect - putting heaters in the ground and running power through them to evaporate ice and snow.
Literally heating the fucking surface of the globe.

It would probably be more effective AND ecologically sound to simply spray the roads with gasoline and light them on fire.
At least nobody would be driving on the roads while they burn.

Comment Not the same tech. (Score 1) 405

Dutch used 2.5 x 3.5 concrete slabs with a solar cell layer on top - for bicycles.

French are supposed to be GLUED ONTO existing asphalt roads AND they are supposedly sturdy enough to handle trucks.
Well... at least regarding weight... no mention of how they handle a truck or a bus slamming on the breaks on that glued on surface.

Comment There are some estimates on Wattway site. (Score 1) 405

What is the price per m2?

Wattway's price per m2 is to be seen in light of the production cost of electricity.
Photovoltaic energy is measured in watt-peak, which takes into account sunlight conditions.
Today, depending on the technology used and the support on which the panels are installed, prices fluctuate between 2 to 8 euros/watt-peak.
The cost with Wattway is estimated at 6 euros/watt-peak.
Furthermore, it is interesting to note that Wattway can turn an existing surface into a money-maker by providing an additional use, which has a positive impact on the final price.
With Wattway, there is no need to rent or purchase farmland to install solar panels, nor do you need to redo your entire roof to produce photovoltaic electricity!

How efficient is Wattway compared to a conventional solar panel?

Wattway panels have a 15% yield, compared to 18-19% for conventional photovoltaic panels.

So... More expensive (per watt) than conventional solar panels, with ~20% lesser yield.
Which would probably decrease by at least 30% per panel, as that is about the area of the panel that would get most tires tracking over it.
Which brings us down to ~10% yield.
While the cost stays in the upper 25%, meaning it's 3 times more expensive than the cheapest panels out there. Per watt.
Combine that with the (optimistic) reduction in yield due to dirt, and they are ~5-6 times more expensive.

Now... considering this article's claim that "4m of solarised road is enough to supply one household's electricity needs, apart from heating, and one kilometre will light a settlement with 5,000 inhabitants"...
And similar claims regarding similar but FAR MORE realistic project in Amsterdam and the claims of "enough energy to power three households" per 100 meters, later readjusted a bit to "provide a single-person household with electricity for a year" for about half a year of work, per 70 meters or road installed (which comes out to not quite but almost 3 homes per 100 meters)...
Those 4 meters of road per household seem to be calculated based on roads some 4-5 lanes wide.
Granted, not the same tech as that Dutch bike lane but that's how wide those bike lanes would have be to to provide that same amount of power.

Which is not the issue of lack of such roads... but that's a lot of potential potholes.
Which does not really sound realistic for regular roads, considering Wattway's "fresh asphalt with no deformations or ruts" policy.

How long does a Wattway panel last?

A Wattway panel lasts as long as conventional pavement, meaning at least 10 years depending on the traffic, which speeds up wear.
If the section is not heavily trafficked - a stadium parking lot for example - then Wattway panels can last roughly 20 years.

Are Wattway panels all-weather?

Wattway panels are rainproof thanks to the fact that the silicon cells are encapsulated and the junction box which provides the connection between the panels complies with IP66 sealing effectiveness standards.
The panels have even passed the snowplow test with flying colors.
Operators do, however, need to operate the machines with a bit more care on Wattway panels than on conventional pavement.

Can Wattway be installed on any type of road? Are there any constraints (roadway condition, tight curves, etc.)?

Wattway can be installed on any road with asphalt pavement that is recent, with no cracks, ruts, deformation, or asbestos.
The road must comply with stipulated technical and commercial specifications.

Wattway across France sounds not very well thought through nor very realistic in comparison to that Dutch project.
Though, I'm not disregarding it completely. It sounds like something that could become useful and economic at very large volumes, a few years down the road.
Or something that would be great for driveways.

Comment Tell it to the OP. (Score 1) 308

He pulled that article out of his ass, without being able to read it properly.
I frankly don't care about Finland or refugees or what will both sides end up telling themselves about themselves and others five or ten years down the road.

I just refuted his "arguments" by pointing out that he can't read - which leaves only the question "Why did he read something that was not there?" on the table.
Which he provided with an answer by replying with a "sell your computer right now and give it to the "brown people" you worship" tirade.

Just remember to give sources to your quotes - cause he clearly can't even google up anything for himself.
You apparently have different sources. Feel free to source him up.

Comment You understand you're off in cognitive dissonance? (Score 1) 308

Here... Let me quote you.

Everyone there pays for it through large taxes

Someone else is forced to pay for it.

Who is that mythical "someone else" if "everyone" is already paying it? Martians? God? Smurfs?
When "everyone pays", everyone pays LESS, and everyone gets to have the same (and much higher) quality of service due to the pooling and sharing of resources.
And there is no "someone else" - cause "everyone" already includes EVERYONE.
Thus everyone pays less and gets more.

That's why a bus ticket costs less than a ride in a taxi and a ride in a taxi costs less than renting a car which costs less than buying a car - same resources get used by many people thus reducing per capita costs of being driven or driving from A to B instead of walking there until you can afford a car of your own.

Comment Ah... the old "I have no arguments" canard. (Score 1) 308

But hey... you said racist. I just called you a coward.

But it's nice to see that when faced with your own ignorance and inability to refute any of the arguments (which IS kinda hard to do when facing truth) - you run and hide behind a fallacy. Or two... Or more...
While even the punctuation fails you. Or are you secretly a 12 year old? Or maybe a dog?

What a truly pathetic creature you must be.

Slashdot Top Deals

They are relatively good but absolutely terrible. -- Alan Kay, commenting on Apollos