Biggest lie: I'm only reading slashdot because my code's still compiling.
Glad I wasn't the only one who clicked on this article expecting to make fun of a mispelling in the title.
It's the big corporation's fault for not making it clear that that would happen, and in fact making it really look quite a lot like it wouldn't. Why would you make each app developers add an option to their app, when the obvious place for that option would be global?
That would not be a CYA, it would completely make sense.
If you think that having a hobby of wasting time on the internet equals being a huge loser... why are you even here?
Why? Why *should* he do things he doesn't enjoy as much, just because you think he *should* enjoy them more?
If I lost the internet, I don't even know what I would do with my time. (If I lost web access it would be *literally* like losing the tv, since I watch all my tv online. Also like losing all my gaming consoles, half my library, not to mention would seriously impact my ability to get any work done, since most documentation is online these days.)
And yes, I also found my wife online - technically we met in real-life first, but then reconnected a couple years later online. If that hadn't happened, we would never have gotten together.
More sites should fail to protect me from using a "stupid" 30-letter-or-whatever-long passphrase just because its algorithm thinks that it's "weak" because it doesn't have 2 numbers and two special characters (but only choose from these 3 specific special characters, because we don't know how to protect against sql injection otherwise!) Let me pick my own frelling password.
Ok, so it probably makes sense to specifically bar users from using completely butt-tarded passwords like "123" and "password", but only those specifically.
> Witness how quickly SSD are replacing conventional hard drives.
So... not very quickly? SSDs are way better, yes. They're also way tinier and way more expensive. Maybe eventually SSD will replace mechanical storage, but not until you can go to a store and get a 3TB external for like a hundred bucks. Yeah, that'll probably happen sometime, but I'm not seeing any of those right now.
Actually, I've always considered that by far the best hacking(/cracking) anthem is Iris. I know it's not *supposed* to be about hacking, but seriously:
And I don't want the world to see me
'Cause I don't think that they'd understand
When everything's made to be broken
I just want you to know who I am
How is that *not* about a hacker who feels a drive to break into things, and wants to simultaneously take credit for his hacks while also remaining anonymous (because you wouldn't understand)?
That is because they have their fingers in their ears. I've been gradually getting everyone I know to switch to Ting like I did. Or at least, if they really do need an unlimited plan, telling them to stop using freaking overpriced Verizon or AT&T, because seriously why would you do that? Pay twice as much for worse service than one of the 50-bucks-or-so unlimited plans? I rarely use more than the smallest tier, though, so I definitely do *not* need an unlimited plan. As such, I generally pay Ting about 15 bucks a month, and enjoy customer service that's almost unheard of these days (i.e. if you have a problem, they'll actually fix it, instead of passing you around a dozen times and then hanging up on you.)
Because some crazy people want enforced absolute gender equality in all things, and screw what the people doing the work actually want.
It is well known that, biologically, men are, on average, more interested in high-risk/high-reward careers. That doesn't mean that all males are, or that no females are, but on average, that sort of career is going to have a lot more guys interested, just by the nature of it, and that is not primarily a social difference. That category includes "risk of physical danger" jobs like firefighting and police work, yes, but it also includes "risk of no free time and stress burnout" jobs like high finance and certain types of programming work, where you're making mad bank, but good luck finding time to enjoy it.
Thus, it would make perfect sense to me that if you separate out hours worked, men and women would be making roughly equal pay, but if you didn't, men would make more. Not because they're being paid per hour, nor because they're being "offered" longer hours, but mostly because they're working more jobs where longer hours are just *expected*.
I'm male, and working at a software company. I've been told I could probably make a lot more with the same experience if I worked at a different company, but I *like* working at a company where flexible hours are the norm, and working a standard 40 hours a week is expected. I know people who make a lot more, but working upwards of 50-100% more hours a week. No thanks. Girls (again, on average) have the right of it.
This makes me oddly want to drive around in a car shaped like a bomb-omb.
Certainly not us. We don't really have a choice. Comcast could merge with freaking Verizon, thus giving us the granddaddy of all broadband monopolies and dooming to forever pay too much money for a crappy connection and no recourse when stuff breaks (which would be often), and our choices would be to suck it up, or just suck it. So I'm not sure what he thinks we should be doing about it...?
I disagree. It would be worth it for a sufficiently large amount of money. Namely, enough money that after a few months of it, you could quit and never have to work again. The chance of getting that much money are roughly 0%, but still. For a few hundred thousand a year, I'd work hundred hour weeks, why not? Wouldn't do it for anything less than that, though.
But I'm working on a project with our DC team at work... I don't think much is going to get done on that project this week, as their internet is not the most reliable at the moment. >.>
Even if I agreed with the assessment, if they're being tasked (or tasking themselves) with technical work, insisting that they be the one to do it, and then botching it horribly, does it really matter whether or not they're good at business, or whether you're good at communicating with business people? I'd argue that it doesn't.