Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Probably bullshit (Score 2) 304

I don't feel like reading the whole thing, but I have a strong suspicion that the thing is bullshit. I'll admit I don't really know, but I wouldn't trust what I was told about this unless I saw it for myself over an extended period of time, but I've worked with/in/for a lot of different companies and groups, nonprofits and businesses, and I've seen a few try various schemes to do away with "managers" and "hierarchy". At least in my experience so far, it doesn't work.

You might think that the problem is that the system breaks down and becomes chaotic, that without guidance, workers will allocate resources badly. But that's not quite the problem that I've seen. The problem is more that some kind of hierarchy always forms. In the end, someone takes the role of "the boss" and people still do what the boss says. The boss may be making speeches about how he's not "the boss", but he's your friend. He says he'll listen to you, he'll take your input and criticisms seriously, and you shouldn't feel like this is a hierarchy. He may spend quite a long time talking about the benefits of not having a "boss" or a "hierarchy", and how it continues to work out so well for your company, but when push comes to shove, he'll make a unilateral decision and expect you to go along with it. And he'll also have some people that he likes more than others-- whether for personal or professional reasons-- and those people will be able to tell other people what to do, too. They'll be the de facto middle-management.

So it really becomes an issue of terminology rather than organization. There's no "hierarchy", but some people are more important and influential than others. There are not "managers", but you'll find yourself answering to one or more of those "more influential" people. The change in terminology creates a lot of feel-goodery for the management team, but in the best cases, it's just a hierarchy by other names. Unfortunately, the informality of the hierarchy tends to lead towards cronyism rather than egalitarianism.

Comment Re:wrong premise? (Score 1) 281

I don't think it's quite that. It's more like, "adding manpower to a project will not necessarily speed it up." The famous example is "9 women can't make a baby in 1 month."

Adding manpower may help a project get done faster. It may make it take longer. It may make no real difference. It depends. It seems like what's being discussed here is that someone thinks they have disproved the concept, when really they just found one specialized situation where "it depends".

Comment Re:Rule #1 (Score 2) 281

Getting equity in a project that doesn't get off the ground will sill end up with you working for nothing. It's not really "working my ass off for others' benefit", but "working my ass off for no one's benefit". I'm not sure that's much better.

It's a gamble either way, but sometimes I'd rather get a salary than equity.

Comment Re:The movie was good because the book was short. (Score 2) 240

I liked the movie a lot, and I was surprised about how almost everything in the book made it into the movie.

Sort of. They still skipped out a lot of the description of what he's doing and why, which I thought was some of the best parts of the books. For example, there wasn't much description of how he calculated how much water he needed, why he was mixing poop in with the soil, or what he was modifying in the rover. I can understand why they did it-- it would be potentially boring and confusing to an audience who didn't understand the science. Still, I felt like there could have been a little more of him describing what's going on in his journals.

Comment Re:Break The NDA (Score 1) 366

The key here is that Apple shouldn't have the power to arbitrarily disappear an app (which may constitute speech)

First amendment protections only extend to protections against the government-- not actions by private entities. Your "freedom of speech" does not include any requirement on me to provide you with a platform to make that speech.

Consider, next time it may well be a negative review that gets someone's apps yanked. Or an allegation of wrongdoing.

Yes, actually, there are various kinds of wrongdoing that can get your app pulled. Violating the terms of the agreement you have with Apple is just one of many things, including if your app includes pornography or hate speech, or any number of other things. Ultimately, you're talking about a store that Apple is running, and they have the freedom to pull products from their shelves. Could you imagine the alternative in a brick-and-mortar situation? You own a store, and you just have to stock your shelves with anyone who wants to sell their products at your stores, regardless of whether you find their product objectionable, dangerous, or misleading, and regardless of whether those vendors honor their agreements with you?

Your good nature will bring you unbounded happiness.