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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Career (Score 1) 848

You don't go above and beyond because you are guaranteed your boss will recognize you and reward you. You go above and beyond because others around you will recognize it and when they leave the company they will carry recommendations for this great guy who really knows his stuff to other companies. After a while you become known in the industry as a great guy who really knows his stuff. You'd be surprised how small every industry is and how much people talk.

Comment Re:Have you talked to anyone? (Score 1) 848

If I was your boss, I'd fire you.

You have lots of down time at work (as you said), but you developed this system my company needs on your own time and want me to pay extra for it. What were you doing during your down time that I was paying for?

I hire staff to use their brains, experience and skill to make the company thrive. Not just to push a broom and do only exactly what they are told but no more. I pay for you to solve problems as you see them. I you think you are more valuable to the company than your compensation reflects, tell me so with some real documentation to back it up. Tell about how you save the company money or make the company grow.

So, I'd fire you and hire someone who will download an open source help-desk program, install it, maybe customize it a little and give some of those improvements back to the open source community. My company gets a robust mature help-desk, my IT guy doesn't reinvent the wheel or try to extort me by working at home and charging me extra while he reads slashdot and facebook during his 'down time' at work, if this IT guy is able to help my company grow without adding staff he deserves more money, and I get the most for my money. Everyone wins. Except you, because I fired you.

Comment Re:Meat "not required" (Score 1) 172

You are parroting something you read. You obviously have never tried this or known anyone who has. I have. None of these horrible symptoms happened to me and I didn't die in two to four weeks as you claimed.
I don't know about the long term effects, as I went back to eating meat after a year. But for that year I felt fine. I lost some weight, but no scurvy, no non-healing wounds, and unless I am mistaken, no death.

(I did not take any supplements of any kind. Just vegetables, fruit, beans, nuts, grains.)

Comment Re:Nobody does that because everyone does that (Score 5, Informative) 532

I don't bitch about Microsoft Windows because its popular (though it is), I bitch about it because it makes my days unending drudgery and pain.
I know you will probably think I am drinking the Slashdot cool-aid, but I assure you 90% of the frustration in my day is caused by something Microsoft did.
I also have Apple, Linux and Solaris machines and none of them give me the "WTF were they thinking?!" headaches that Windows does.

Comment Re:What happened to innocent until proven guilty? (Score 5, Informative) 243

> Even if you cook up crack in your garage they don't take away your home.

You haven't been paying attention, have you?
The government CAN AND DOES take away any of your property they want just based on their SUSPICION that you were involved in a crime.
They call it 'civil asset forfeiture', and with some twisted logic fueled by greed and a total disregard of the rule of law they CHARGE YOUR PROPERTY with committing a crime. The cases have names like: "United States vs. one 1998 Mercedes Benz," and "California vs. 1711 Main Street,"

From Wikipedia:

Asset forfeiture in the United States

There are two types of forfeiture cases, criminal and civil. Almost all forfeiture cases practiced today are civil. In civil forfeiture cases, the US Government sues the item of property, not the person; the owner is effectively a third party claimant. Once the government establishes probable cause that the property is subject to forfeiture, the owner must prove on a "preponderance of the evidence" that it is not. The owner need not be judged guilty of any crime. In contrast, criminal forfeiture is usually carried out in a sentence following a conviction and is a punitive act against the offender. Since the government can choose the type of case, a civil case is almost always chosen. The costs of such cases is high for the owner, usually totaling around $10,000 and can take up to three years.

The United States Marshals Service is responsible for managing and disposing of properties seized and forfeited by Department of Justice agencies. It currently manages around $1 billion worth of property. The United States Treasury Department is responsible for managing and disposing of properties seized by Treasury agencies. The goal of both programs is to maximize the net return from seized property by selling at auctions and to the private sector and then using the property and proceeds for law enforcement purposes.

A form of asset forfeiture is roadside forfeiture during a vehicle stop. Usually enforcing State policies by Highway police, local law enforcement have built up seized funds and spent them with oversight only from local judges who sometimes benefit from the expenditures of such funds. The presumption is that travelers hiding large amounts of cash are transporting drug money. Often, the vehicle occupants are required to simply sign a waiver that they will leave the State and not return, thus also not attempt to retrieve their funds. Some complain that this is law enforcement action requires more oversight in order to minimize the impact on travelers who are not involved in drug money but who simply wish to avoid further involvement with law enforcement agents and sign the waiver anyway. Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, chair of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee is investigating the Tenaha, Texas Police seizures scandal.

The number of federal statutes giving the government the right to confiscate citizens’ assets has nearly doubled since the 1990s, by one count. More than 400 federal statutes allow for forfeiture for a wide range of reasons, including violations of the Northern Pacific Halibut Act.

Also read:

Comment Re:The article is much too kind ... (Score 1) 381

No, we don't need more regulation. When the government helps, it never helps. The regulations would be poorly written, probably submitted by a corporate ghost writer, and the corporations would find a way around the letter of the regulation that totally perverts the intent in days.

We need people to stop accepting being lied to. Go look at today's mail. It's full of lies. We are being lied to so much now we don't even feel any outrage towards the liars anymore. I make a point of telling companies soliciting my business that I won't buy from them after being lied to. It won't make a difference unless we all do this.

We don't need more regulation, the Internet is a fine way to spread the word about companies with bad products and services.

Slashdot Top Deals

My mother is a fish. - William Faulkner