Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:No H1-Bs for contractors (Score 1) 630

by whoever57 (#49583031) Attached to: Disney Replaces Longtime IT Staff With H-1B Workers
I write from experience. I had 2 spells on H1-B visas, both times, I was directly employed (not through a contracting firm). The first time, I went back to my home country at the end of my expat assignment. The second time, I stayed long enough to get a green card -- I had already changed jobs after starting the H1-B.

Comment: No H1-Bs for contractors (Score 5, Insightful) 630

by whoever57 (#49582553) Attached to: Disney Replaces Longtime IT Staff With H-1B Workers

The H1-B program should be changed such that only the company that is the end recipient of the work product of the H1-B worker can apply for a visa.

Those companies that provide on-site engineers to other companies should not qualify for H1-B visa sponsorship. In this way many abuses would be stopped.

Comment: Re:Why? (Score 2) 192

by whoever57 (#49574271) Attached to: Massachusetts Governor Introduces Bill To Regulate Uber, Lyft

I think your confusing Texas with California. Texas has the second largest state economy in the country and unlike the largest state economy, it isn't bankrupt.

I think you are confusing your Tea Party talking points for facts. California isn't bankrupt. In fact the state budget outlook is very good.

Comment: Re:Easy fix (Score 1) 247

by whoever57 (#49565857) Attached to: The Engineer's Lament -- Prioritizing Car Safety Issues

but the fucking deluxe fix was $11, that is it.They could have built that into the car price with virtually no impact. TFA picked one terrible example...

At the time that the Pinto was bing built, car manufacturers went to great lengths to shave fractions of a penny off the cost of a car. $11 was a huge cost addition at that time.

Comment: Re:Not the same thing (Score 1) 31

Google Fi is about combining multiple cellular networks, while Scratch Wireless only uses a single cellular network. Both let you seamlessly roam between cellular and wifi.

Which you get when using a T-Mobile phone abroad, where it can use multiple cell networks and can switch mid call between Wifi and various cellular networks, or at least the old UMA phones could do some time around 2003. Perhaps they could not go from one WiFi network to another mid-call, but will Google's phone really do this?

Comment: Re:Good (Score 4, Insightful) 302

However, if it's in the public domain, there is no monetary incentive to locate, digitize, and restore such a film. It either sits in a vault somewhere, decomposing (maybe even on nitrate film - egad!), or maybe it was transferred onto videotape before its copyright expired.

Counter argument: if the copyright holder felt that there was money to be made by transferring to another medium and selling, it would have already happened.

Instead, all those nitrate copies are locked away and will either burn or decompose. Many of those old movies have copies lurking away, open to non-copyright holders if they had the right to make updated copies and release them. But copyright prevents this.

Comment: The first time it is used, many will disable it. (Score 2) 86

Just like the ability for phones to recieve network-wide notifications, when this capability was used in California, many people turned it off, because the notification was broadcast far too wide -- across all of California for something taking place in San Diego.

I predict the same for this. The capability will be misused and then disabled by the users of the app.

Comment: Re:Yahoo is still a "tech" company? (Score 1) 194

by whoever57 (#49534295) Attached to: Yahoo Called Its Layoffs a "Remix." Don't Do That., is also dying. Thank you CEO Marissa Mayer, you have taken what used to be a valuable and interesting resource for investors and completely fucking ruined it.

Maybe it has gotten worse under Mayer, but to be fair, Yahoo finance was "unimproved" some years ago, turning from a usable set of forums to pages full of unreadable bling. What I don't understand is why Mayer (who was supposed to be responsible for Google's simple, spartan look) hasn't done the same for Yahoo. Or perhaps she has -- I can't remember the last time that I visited a Yahoo page. That's the nature of the problem -- once you drive your users away, they don't come back, irrespective of how the site changes.

Comment: Re:Minimum retrial (Score 1) 173

All we know from the study is that the false positive rate was about 89%

Exactly. We don't know the false positive rate in the cases where the evidence was used. You can't claim that my speculation is not valid, yet yours is valid.

This isn't a case of a random subset of a larger population. In every case, there was a decision made whether or not to use the hair evidence. That decision was based on the evidence available. Thus, you can't assume that you have a random subset of the larger population. Thus your projection of an 11% false positive rate on the subset isn't valid.

Finally, a lack of other evidence would suggest a higher likelihood of innocence, which would imply a higher liklihood that the hair evidence was false.

Comment: Re:Minimum retrial (Score 1) 173

There is nothing indicate that the rate would be any different among samples that were used in court.

When hair "evidence" was used in a little over 10% of the times that it was available, it's reasonable to think that a lot of selection is going on.. It's reasonable to assume that those cases where the hair evidence was used were not typical. It's very reasonable to assume that the reason the hair evidence was used was lack of alternative evidence. It's not reasonable to make the assumption that the percentages would be similar when the number of cases when hair evidence was used in court is such a small proportion of the overall percentage.

In your world, lack of evidence for a proposition is evidence of an alternative proposition? You have no evidence to support your claim that the 11% of all false positives also applied to hari evidence used in court. Nothing. Nada.

Comment: Re:Minimum retrial (Score 1) 173

it is very reasonable to assume that the 11% of false matches are over-represented in the 268 cases

Pure speculation on your part, there's nothing to support that assumption.

And your claim that the 11% false positives (of all analysis) applies to the subset cases where hair analysis evidence was used at trial? Where's your evidence to support that claim? It's no more than speculation.

You have no more evidence than I do, but at least I have a rational explanation why it's likely to be greater than 11%.

The bomb will never go off. I speak as an expert in explosives. -- Admiral William Leahy, U.S. Atomic Bomb Project