Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment: I don't think that this is race related (Score 5, Informative) 1078

by jessecurry (#43608415) Attached to: Florida Teen Expelled and Arrested For Science Experiment
I don't think that this is race related, I think that the punishment is so harsh because everyone is scared of improvised explosive devices after Boston. When I first heard the story it was reported as "An Acid Bomb was Set Off At a Local High School".

Comment: Any Weapon is Inherently Dangerous (Score 1) 1013

by jessecurry (#42348429) Attached to: Using Technology To Make Guns Safer
Any weapon will be inherently dangerous, attempting to "protect" consumers from danger doesn't really apply to something that is meant to be dangerous. The loaded chamber indicator on my SR9c is my least favorite feature; I treat guns as if they are always loaded so it doesn't make a difference in how I handle the gun, it only sticks up and gets snagged on my clothes or in my holster. I'd argue that the loaded chamber indicator actually makes my gun less safe, although it is by such a small margin it is mostly inconsequential.

Comment: Re:PCs for Kids (Score 1) 291

by jessecurry (#41817159) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: What To Do With Over 500 Used DIMMs?
It's not going to allow them to upgrade for free, just reduce their taxable income.

For a simplified example assume that someone has $100,000 of taxable income, in the US they'll be taxed roughly 25% paying $25,000.

If this person is able to write off $2,000 of old equipment when they purchase new equipment they will now have a taxable income of $98,000 still taxed at roughly 25% paying $24,500, a $500 savings.

If they are able to replace $2,000 worth of equipment for $500 then they would, in essence, get the upgrade for free; otherwise they are only able to save some money by donating their old equipment to someone in need.

This person couldn't "donate" their old equipment to a friend, it has to be to a registered non-profit.

Comment: Re:It's called "Get A Grip!" (Score 1) 1127

by jessecurry (#40784807) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Preempting Sexual Harassment In the Workplace?
So there is one person who is getting positive feedback from the rest of their team (presumably improving the work environment for almost everyone) and one person who doesn't feel as effective as they could be? Why doesn't the person who feels ineffective find another job?
No matter how many laws we create the underlying feelings that lead to sexually offensive (or otherwise insensitive) language or acts will not go away. By outlawing offensive statements and actions in the workplace you are sanctioning discrimination against people who enjoy making or hearing those type of things. If a the majority of people at a particular employer enjoy that type of humor why would we restrict it? No one is forced to work anywhere these days, they always have the choice to find employment at a firm that is more in line with their character.
If a non-offensive workplace is the ideal state most workplaces will move towards being non-offensive on their own.

Comment: Re:It's called "Get A Grip!" (Score 0) 1127

by jessecurry (#40781397) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Preempting Sexual Harassment In the Workplace?
Why not just let the "market" handle it? If some place is really so bad for , then they can choose not to accept the position or leave after accepting the position... if a lack of diversity is really a negative in their industry, then the team will not be do top quality work and will eventually move towards obsolescence. I really dislike that the US has laws making it illegal to offend others.

Never appeal to a man's "better nature." He may not have one. Invoking his self-interest gives you more leverage. -- Lazarus Long