Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:EUgle? (Score 1) 237

by kabulykos (#48477535) Attached to: Google Should Be Broken Up, Say European MPs

As there is in search.

Consumers' money? I don't recall spending money to use a search engine.

As a society its reasonable proposition that we would want our search engines to be competing on simply being the best search engine, without risk of it quietly subverting its integrety to push any other agenda / product / viewpoint / etc. Unbundling them from commercial interests would be a part of that goal.

That presumes much about what a "search engine" is, actually. If I query Bing with [how tall is Kim Jong Un], and it flat out tells me, rather than pointing me to Wikipedia or whatever, am I harmed? Is Wikipedia?

Most of the complaints the EU competition office is fielding are from other purveyors of information â" commercial information â" on the Internet, and most of what's at issue regards consumers attempting to conduct commercial activity. If you ask for the lowest-cost flight from London to Istanbul, what should the "best search engine" tell you?

I'm thus still at a loss as to what this "behaviour you don't want from google" is, precisely.

Comment: Re: how many small businesses has Obama killed? (Score 1) 739

by kabulykos (#48280969) Attached to: Statisticians Study Who Was Helped Most By Obamacare

Another anecdote: my copays are going way up, though my deductibles are staying stable and my employer is incentivizing me to switch to a high-deductible plan (with a generous HSA contribution to offset.) Basically, some well-paid professionals who had a lot of income by way of cushy health coverage are going to see some of that slip away as the new regulations ("Cadillac Tax") essentially close that loophole.

If you were used to being well-paid via colonoscopies, yeah this change sucks. If you've been at all concerned with healthcare inflation (via Medicare) destroying the federal budget in your lifetime, then it seems an okay tradeoff.

Comment: Re:Being Gay is still technically "abnormal" (Score 1) 764

by kabulykos (#48275727) Attached to: Tim Cook: "I'm Proud To Be Gay"

My English teacher taught me how to interpret both literal definitions (denotation) as well as those containing subtext (connotation).

"Abnormal" has a negative connotation — its usage typically implies something is different *and shouldn't be.* Consider an abnormal growth in your chest, for instance.

If one wishes to neutrally or positively highlight something a few standard deviations away from the mean, there are plenty of more appropriate English words for that, cf. "rare", "unusual", "exceptional", "extraordinary."

English, as a language, is great (and challenging for non-native speakers) because its million-plus words allow people to say a lot with subtlety.

Hit me back when you find Mensa documentation welcoming folks to their abnormal membership.

Comment: Re:Discrimination of girls is bad and unethical (Score 1) 673

by kabulykos (#46728623) Attached to: Google: Teach Girls Coding, Get $2,500; Teach Boys, Get $0

In most parts of the US, a basketball program paid to have more white players would be called a private school. Nothing wrong with those...

I for one could also imagine myriad other ways to pump money into schools that would advance my goals better, but clearly my goals, and yours, and perhaps those of society do not line up perfectly with those of Ye Giant Company at issue here.

Women are of course different from men in ways perceivable by corporations who do hiring. The justification could be as simple as helping stoke a larger female share of STEM candidates, so the company can be as or more discriminating in hiring for talent while maintaining diversity goals that help avoid Github-like workplace cultures (and the resulting productivity hiccups they create). There's really no need to pin programmes like this on the hat of misguided liberalism.

If you suspect a man, don't employ him.