Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:PC is NOT dead and not even dying (Score 1) 392

The only thing that can kill the PC is a better product, with a more reliable operating system, and I see nothing on the horizon that prohibits that evolutional step.

And, if under Trump, computers are outlawed (it would be a typical move for he and his kind), then only outlaws will have computers.

Pundits get paid to make outrageous predictions, only to fade into obscurity when their ignorant nightmares prove inept and ill-advised. Instead, they should think beyond their own limitations and ask: "What will supercede the Personal Computer and be even more desirable?" Quantum computers, perhaps? More likely: Things we've not yet even yet imagined, as was the Intel 4004 (which, after all, was invented because Busicom Corp. wanted a "better calculator" engine).

Comment Kudos and Applause to you, Matthew Culver (Score 1) 531

So long as the minions that keep posting above abuse you for taking a stance (and, exhibit their essential ignorance of negotiating strategies), corporations will keep using current employees "at will," and then abuse them, "at will." You have taken a bold stance, and while I doubt you'll completely succeed, you may be the "Rosa Parks" of employee rights.

Salaries need to be negotiated, and if you possess unique skills that are of value to the employer, they should be compensated equitably. While I am retired, I can tell you that as a self-employed consultant for over three decades, my ultimate income was over $1,000/day (in 1990's) because of the VALUE I delivered. If the corporation wanted that value, they expected to pay for the price. But, the return they got was, for example, with one large chemical company, over $400 Million in the first year.

What US employees have to do is to show their employers (or clients) how much VALUE they create...when you do that, each client is happy to share their success with other potential clients looking for similar value. So long as you "occupy a chair" for a modest salary, you have no-doubt signed an "at will" employment clause that grants the employer all the rights in your relationship.

Matthew Culver: You are challenging that perverse relationship, and I applaud the attempt. As Inequality.org points out, "...the 1 percent has 35.6 percent of all private wealth, more than the bottom 95 percent combined." And sacking the people that actually CREATED that value, because labor costs can be reduced, producing more margin for the 1% to harvest, is one of the ways they do it. And, even it you don't win, you can be proud of initiating a movement of other employees engaging attorneys seeking out such cases with ever-evolving innovative arguments. And, if that process fails, we all may as well admit we've reintroduced slavery back into Western cultures.

Comment Re:Finally, that explains all the bugs... (Score 1) 137

Oh, and Microsoft is, no doubt, waiting for the first "change order" (which they will have built into the contract), so they'll get More money in the future for things they left out of this initial proposal. That means ratcheting up the total $$$ volume of the contract for things that will magically become "essential" once the contract starts.

I wonder how much Drumpf gets out of this deal...

Comment Finally, that explains all the bugs... (Score 1) 137

...in Windows 10 that remain to this day...and in 8.1 and 7.
They used to save money (e.g., by offloading product testing off (to the unfortunate group called "Insiders.") Now they're getting paid nearly One Billion Dollars because their product is so buggy and insecure.

What a great scam the plutocrats at the top of Microsoft have created. Now, they've "MADOFF" with our tax money by providing services to their incomplete product to the U.S. Government.

This is why we, mere citizens, stand to lose Medicare under Trump: To pay for these kinds of schemes, to take taxpayers $$$ and redistribute them to corporations who have created the very problems they'll be paid to solve.

Your tax money at work.

Comment We are not in territory... (Score 1) 184

...where Elon Musk does not know how much he doesn't know. Believe me, unless he's "boring" down 1 KM or so, he's going to have HUGE problems with existing infrastructure (not pipes, so much as pilings and things that hold up large buildings). And, there's no central compilation of those details that have been installed over the past 50 years!

Boring may be what he bends his pick on :-)

Comment Yeah, but look at the bugs M$ ADMITS to... (Score 1) 210

...notably excluding the one's they DON'T:
https://blogs.windows.com/wind...
Scroll down to "Known Issues."

Whatever happened to the concept of "testing" and "fixing" defects ("bugs") in code. Apparently, end-users are not as eager to be willing to be guinea pigs for untested code, not that they have to PAY for this kind of punishment.

Remember: If the product is claimed to be "Free," YOU are the product!

Comment Great, so long as you just "turn a crank." (Score 1) 250

But, for REAL system design and implementation, it's the professional interaction and collaboration that is the source of novel ideas, and the casual walker-by who intrudes with a few relevant facts that change the entire narrative. These have no comparable form in "discussion groups," because you have to make a specific effort to join a conversation, which eliminates the "casual listener" that sparks a radical rethink. That's why it's called "group think."

Many programmers like the solitude of doing their work alone, and when I'm writing code, I shut the door for just that reason. But the number of times in my career when I've overhead some dialog in the hallway (well, I do have go to the "can," once in a while) and injected a diametrically opposed viewpoint and made a difference in the outcome convinces me that there is a reason to work together in the same space.

Ultimately, we need both: Solitude, and Bullpen. Either extreme as a sole choice is a losing end game for careers and for ideas.

Comment Java is a Bag o' Bugs (Score 1) 295

How about Oracle focus on its' well-deserved greedy reputation, and resolve to actually produce products that have been designed for reliability and verified by competent testers before unleashing bags of bugs on the Internet?

The whole POINT of Java has been: Make the platform open source, and license the developer half of the project: Developers pay for the tool, and right to run on the freely distributed platform.

The whole RESULT of Java has been: Customers have to frequently update "free" Java to "fix bugs," which--in the process--makes prior dependent code unreliable.

The entire idea is founded on a thin layer of fermenting bullshit, and I wish we'd just all abandon it. In fact, all platforms serve a (usually short) useful life, compared to other durable products. If we developed cars like we develop most commercial software, we'd still be driving V8.111 of the original Nash Rambler, with its' monthly required return to the shop for repairs.

Comment Re:Write off (Score 3, Insightful) 399

Of course Alphabet gets the tax write-off. That's why the "banker" at the top changed the rules. To that mindset, employees are just a drag on revenues and not worth what they're paid...no matter how low. And, now, with a new appointment to leadership for the Department of Labor, we can expect any "floor" on earnings in general (e.g., "minimum wage") to evaporate to zero.

We are merely serfs working in the world created by, and enjoyed solely by, the 1% who own more net worth than the 99% of the rest of us (http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35339475).

Know your place, serf. You exist only to benefit the wealthy...unless you ARE wealthy.

Comment Re:Unfortunately no and I have a reason (Score 1) 381

You need the flexibility of mind that comes from learning more languages. In the computer field I've written code in over 50; all I have to figure out at the start is which objects this language uses...the rest is easy; there are only sequence, alternation and iteration at the root of them all. It's the implied attributes of the various data structures that can be created, and the linguistic elements that refer to them that makes one language different from another. Compare Windows CMD with PowerShell, to see what I mean.

On the other hand, in the realm of natural languages I have command of one, and remanents of the Japanese I learned living there in the late 1950s.

Comment Yes...but not very useful in my career (Score 1) 381

I still have Volumes 1, 2 and 3...gathering dust.

I first started programming in 1962, on IBM 1401 (dearly loved it's variable-length memory management) and IBM 704 (briefly, before it was replaced with a 709, then the 7090). I used to take a massive printout of the IBSYS operating system for the latter to understand how real people wrote code to achieve an outcome; that was back when programmers still felt it was essential to write comments to explain what/why that specific code was there, and its' purpose). At the same time, I was a junior member of a group of "code sharers" at C-E-I-R; we evolved a punched-card deck for the IBM 1401 that became the basis of every program we subsequently wrote (I ran into the deck, called "CELIB"--for CEIR Library--several years later in a consulting gig in Australia, where they'd been using it for more than a decade after originally getting as part of a contract delivery...which my name in some of the comments). I was also engaged in running huge "linear programming" models on the 7090, such as one that forecast the likely economic consequences to the U.S. of removing the tobacco industry (i.e., abolishing the manufacture and sale of products), but the code was written by my more mathemathically endowed superiors, Eli Hellerman and William Orchard-Hays and you may know it as LP90, which was posted to the SHARE library at IBM; I just wrote some utilities.).

So, by the time Knuth published, I was an experienced programmer, and I devoured his books with interest. Like many programmers and professionals in allied fields, there were lessons to glean (like, "Wow, that's clever," or "Hmm, that's an interesting way to look at that problem"). I'm sure they influenced me, but it was not a "cookbook" to me. After I read them, they went on a shelf, and moved from home to home, and they still reside in a prominent place on my bookshelf, but gathering dust.

Programmers, today (especially those under 35 years of age) seem to eschew the idea that anybody else's code could be educational, and I find that an odd and juvenile approach to the world. We must stand on the shoulders of giants, and I still, to this day, learn new techniques and insights (and folly) in others' code. But, I got here (now aged 75, and still writing the odd bit of code; even CMD language) by learning from others, for no ONE of knows as much as ALL of us.

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes. -- Henry David Thoreau

Working...