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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Damn... (Score 1) 300

by cduffy (#49556817) Attached to: Woman Behind Pakistan's First Hackathon, Sabeen Mahmud, Shot Dead

(lest see, how liberals who like to say that "you have rights for your opinion" and then mumble "but only, if we agree" assholes are going to react :)

Since you asked -- having a right to an opinion doesn't mean having a right to be protected from social consequences from your actions taken in airing that opinion.

Which is to say -- you're allowed to be an ass in public. Other people are allowed to be an ass to you in public as well; such is the market of public ideas. Mistaking people who don't want to be friends with you / listen to you / do business with you in response to your positions with people who would censor you (that is, invoke government action in response to your speech or act to make make that speech illegal) is a mistake.

You might ponder what it means that you believe in what you're saying enough to shout it from the world only from a position of anonymity (or, in Cito's case, pseudonymity). If there are people you respect for holding their convictions, did they do likewise?

Comment: Re:Well done! (Score 1) 536

by cduffy (#49525767) Attached to: George Lucas Building Low-Income Housing Next Door To Millionaires

So, in addition to "affordable" housing, in your ideal world, the poor will also be provided (by someone) with "affordable" Priuses?

Perhaps you've heard of this thing called "transit"?

Which, when done right, gets used by everyone, not just the poor. It was not so long ago a culture shock for me, as a Texan, when my (New-York-based) CEO would take the subway; now, as a transplant to Chicago, I'm very much happier not owning a car at all; my work is a 10-minute walk (hooray for urban high-rise living!), Costco a 20-minute bike ride (hooray for cargo bikes!), my more distant friends in town (or the corporate office, if I need to visit it for some reason) a $2.50, 40-minute train ride, during which my time is free to read, make notes, or otherwise do as I please.

Back to point -- no, setting up your urban environment in such a way that the poor need to drive expensive-to-maintain, expensive-to-fuel vehicles a long distance is not a necessity. Transit systems are subsidized at a higher rate than roads, but not by as much as you might think -- use taxes on highways are under 50% of their costs -- and adding capacity to a roadway system in an urban environment is prohibitively expensive -- particularly compared to adding capacity to preexisting urban rail. And if you look at the economic payoff from that subsidy -- by way of increasing folks' access to jobs -- it's an extremely clear win.

Smart urban planning -- to avoid the need for commutes in the first place by making housing as dense, and nearby to shopping and employment, as possible -- is, of course, even better.

(Back on the "expensive" part of long commutes -- you might find The True Cost of Commuting a worthwhile read, in terms of putting some actual numbers into play).

Comment: This is how big companies work (Score 2) 131

by EmagGeek (#49477287) Attached to: How Mission Creep Killed a Gaming Studio

"Escalating and unanticipated requirements, especially without added budget to meet those requirements, can have devastating effects on both a project and the larger software company."

No, this is not it at all. What this should say is:

"The customer (Microsoft) will always demand more than is agreed to, while simultaneously refusing to pay for it, and expect the vendor (Dark Side) to foot all of the expenses to meet the additional demands."

Big companies will dangle a huge carrot (or suitcase full of money) in front of a bunch of 20-somethings and their startup company to get them salivating, and almost every time those 20-somethings will chomp at it without questioning motives, analyzing risk, or even having a lawyer look at the proposed contract.

It wasn't mission creep. Mission creep is when the mission changes unexpectedly. Microsoft knew damn well what they were doing, and intended to exploit Dark Side for free work product. Maybe MS didn't anticipate them imploding like they did, but it likely didn't matter to them since they no doubt retained ownership of all of the work product anyway, which they could hand off to another firm to finish, or implode trying.

Honestly I don't see why anyone would do business with Microsoft, or any other huge, publicly-traded bureaucracy for that matter.

"I have more information in one place than anybody in the world." -- Jerry Pournelle, an absurd notion, apparently about the BIX BBS

Working...