Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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: Couldn't it be lack of talent? (Score 1) 473

by mmcuh (#38253622) Attached to: Half Life of a Tech Worker: 15 Years

Couldn't this "half-life" just as easily be explained by lack of talent and/or tendency to learn and advance your skills?

In any reasonably advanced profession, like coding, there are usually some few tasks that require relatively high skill and many tasks that require relatively little skill. The former tasks you would give to someone fresh out of university, the latter you would give to someone who has proven themselves to be capable of them, which probably means a couple of years of work experience. As time goes, the code monkey either rises to become an experienced, highly skilled coder/designer/analyst/whatever, or he doesn't. And since 25-year old code monkeys are usually cheaper than 40-year old ones even if they are doing the same work, and 25-year have some small probability of being a good investment in the long term, the older ones, who from the employer's point of view seem to have peaked already, get less and less attractive.

So someone who doesn't have the talent, dedication, interest or intelligence required to work on difficult tasks is simply going to get discarded after a couple of decades. I'm pretty sure this happens in all advanced professions.


Apple Can't Block US Sales of Samsung Devices 213

Posted by timothy
from the magic-not-strong-enough-roll-again dept.
An anonymous reader snips this good news (for Samsung fans) from Edible Apple "In April of 2011, Apple kicked off what would soon become a global and complex series of litigation disputes when it sued Samsung in the U.S. claiming that its line of Galaxy smartphones and tablets infringed upon Apple's intellectual property and were nothing more than 'slavish' copies. As part of its suit, Apple requested a preliminary injunction that would bar Samsung from selling said products in the U.S. This past Friday, Judge Lucy Koh denied Apple's motion for a preliminary injunction."

Comment: Re:You're thinking of the EU parliament (Score 2) 67

by mmcuh (#38158764) Attached to: EU Court: ISPs Can't Be Forced To Monitor All Traffic

Spelling aside, you are also factually incorrect. There are a number of different legislative methods used in the EU, but in none of them does the Council of Ministers initialise the procedure.

Depending on the type of legislation, it's either

  • Commission proposes -> Council and Parliament amends and accepts or rejects (codecision procedure)
  • Commission proposes -> Council consults Parliament -> Council ignores Parliament and amends and accepts or rejects on its own (consultation procedure)
  • Commission proposes -> Council amends and accepts or rejects -> Parliament accepts or rejects (consent procedure)
  • Commission proposes -> Council amends and accepts or rejects
  • Commission dictates!

+ - European Court of Justice: ISPs can't be forced to->

Submitted by mmcuh
mmcuh (1088773) writes "Back in 2004, Belgian copyright group Sabam managed to get a court order forcing the ISP Scarlet to filter out filesharing traffic. Scarlet took the case to a national appeals court, which in turn asked the European Court of Justice for an opinion. The opinion was delivered today: "EU law precludes an injunction made against an internet service provider requiring it to install a system for filtering all electronic communications passing via its services which applies indiscriminately to all its customers, as a preventive measure, exclusively at its expense and for an unlimited period. [...] It is true that the protection of the right to intellectual property is enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. There is, however, nothing whatsoever in the wording of the Charter or in the Court's case law to suggest that that right is inviolable and must for that reason be absolutely protected.""
Link to Original Source

+ - EU Court: ISP's don't have to filter content->

Submitted by radi0man
radi0man (191807) writes "According to a ruling of the European Court of Justice, ISP's can't be ordered to filter content that violates copyrights.

SABAM, a Belgian company representing writers, composers and editors, established in 2004 that users of an Internet service provider called Scarlet Extended SA were illegally transferring files. A Belgian court ordered Scarlet to install at its own expense a system to make that impossible. But the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled Thursday that this would require monitoring of all electronic communications of all of Scarlet’s customers, infringing on their rights, and violated EU law.


Link to Original Source

+ - EU Court: No Policing the Internet->

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "In the case of Sabam vs Scarlet (Belgian MAFIAA vs ISP), the highest European Court has concluded that an ISP can not be required to monitor its clients' traffic. As per the judgment, "Directives [..] must be interpreted as precluding an injunction made against an internet service provider which requires it to install a system for filtering [.. in order to identify] the movement of electronic files containing a musical, cinematographic or audio-visual work in respect of which the applicant claims to hold intellectual-property rights [..]"
The ruling is not quite as broad as I would have liked, since it only pertains to filtering "which applies indiscriminately to all its customers; exclusively at its expense; and for an unlimited period"."

Link to Original Source

"Pull the trigger and you're garbage." -- Lady Blue