• Search
• Gmail
• Maps
• Android
• Google Talk
• Google Plus
• Google Voice
• Google Docs

Your argument is invalid.

Or "Butterfly Effect" to see how your brain changed when you travel into the past.

So on Slashdot of 2011, being a company that builds you software based on open source software and open sourcing every part of your software (even the parts you aren't obligated to) gets you no credit. Slashdot really was all about open source back in my day. What the fuck happened during the last few years to make Slashdot such a shit hole of trolls?

The old Slashdot would have encouraged hackers and modders being able to have a choice in their operating system or ROM. The new Slashdot thinks it's reason to get an Apple phone.
The old Slashdot would have been happy that Android was open source. The new Slashdot thinks it's a bug rather than a feature.

In reality, it's somewhere between feature and bug. It means the manufacturers can make a large number of different phones without a Legion of employees to keep them all up to date and it gives customers choice in both hardware and os. It kinda pushes people to be involved with their phone and to start hacking on their phones. Having said that, it's annoying when you outgrow the capabilities of your cheap phone before you're eligible for an upgrade.

Axim. I was third level tech support for them and ramped up a call center to support them. I had a few Axims and a Palm device with a hard drive inside it that had wifi and bluetooth. That mofo was bad ass.

Not really. There's a whole subreddit about Android full of helpful people. Slashdot has become a backwater of curmudgeons and the number and quality of comments is really disappointing. I have such great memories of Slashdot but after a bit of a hiatus I realized why I don't visit as often.

It does take more time but it's better than throwing feces at students to see what sticks, right? People are too eager to pull the trigger without actually knowing if the bullet is going to hit the target or backfire. We shouldn't be as eager to say "Reader, fire, aim!" in the Slashdot community is really my point, I guess.

The district should have run a pilot program with some volunteer students to get an idea of the projected improvement in scores so reluctant parents would have been convinced. Run a pilot and look at the numbers and you can show parents a simple graph of scores before the program vs scores after it.
That way the parents would have had an idea how their kids were going to benefit from it. It removes all the emotion from it and all the "good kids deserve perks" or "humiliation works to make things better" which are both just big generalizations. If it worked to improve the average score, go with it.
It's also the same with other incentive programs. They ran a test between three programs and the one that performed best was paying kids to read a book. Paying them to improve scores didn't do as well because it's difficult for kids to see a direct connection between their actions and test scores. Can't find the article right now. Google is not being my friend.

With twice the pay you can pay for your own benefits. They need to do a cost per employee study to see if cost savings really are being realized.

Communism and libertarianism both suffer from this. The real world is a bitch of a place for theories.