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


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

Comment Blah Blah Shitty CEO Yadda Yadda (Score 1) 566

Yes, we get it, she was a shitty CEO. So much so that the company was actually worth less than the amount of total cash it had on hand for a while. Yahoo bad management stories aren't really "news" at this point, so much as supporting evidence. It's still a total sausage farm on the "Shittiest CEOs of the Century" list, which I think proves that boards of directors not only do not discriminate on the basis of race, gender and religion, but also on the basis of ability. They seem to be quite happy to give some arbitrary random jackass hundreds of millions of dollars to ideally do practically nothing, as at least that won't impede the company so much. And then when those people inevitably fuck up, they give them hundreds of millions of dollars more to go the fuck away. I believe our corporate batting average would be better if we just randomly assigned CEOs from the phone book. We might do better with congressional seats with that strategy, as well. Yahoo could have hired a rock at a 10th the price and performed better than they did with her. Leave her to her shame and her multi-million dollar golden parachute. We won't be hearing from her again until she publishes her book runs for president, in a few years.

Comment So... (Score 1) 410

Is there a sum of money after which you feel happy with the amount of money you have, or is it a matter of there not being enough penis in the world to fill the hole in your heart?

Honestly I don't even know why I'm asking. There's about as much chance of these being answered as there was with SCO CEO guy. What was his name again? I don't even remember. I expect unpronounceable last name guy will be equally as memorable.

Comment Re:A poor craftsman blames his tools. (Score 1) 531

Refactoring can be a continuous process -- you don't have to stop and tear down your entire project. I've seen companies do refactoring sprints where no new features were worked on, and they never seemed to be particularly successful. It always seems to work better when you're making small changes to a few classes or functions to support a specific feature or to fix a reported bug. Refactoring does require a decent understanding of the system you're working on, and on high-turnover projects most programmers haven't worked on the system long enough to do it effectively. The underlying problems are complex and don't really fit well into a paragraph, or even a few paragraphs.

It always boils down to understanding the system and having the will to fix it, though. I've worked for companies that were crippled by their bad software. In those companies, no one could explain how the entire system worked, end-to-end. The problems were always "Somebody else's problem" because each team would point their finger at some other component that they didn't know anything about, and that component owner would come back and say "That's not OUR problem!" Meanwhile the companies would not be able to effectively grow or take on new customers because the entire product generation process was so cumbersome and slow.

Comment Re:A poor craftsman blames his tools. (Score 2) 531

This is the core of the problem, here. I've been in the software industry since '89 and see the same patterns again and again. The software you're working on was always rushed. They rushed it out the door with incomplete (or no) understanding of the problems they were trying to solve, the business model and in a lot of cases, of writing software at all. They crapped out one giant piece of software with no way to verify its outputs and then went into maintenance mode where they were constantly putting out fires and digging the hole deeper and deeper. There was never time to stop and fix things ("Pay down technical debt") because there was always another emergency, another fire to put out.

A lot of these projects had no way to test changes other than to push them up to production and see what happened. The worst offenders had systems that were so tightly coupled that you could only run data start-to-finish through the entire system, which made setting up test systems difficult. In some cases, no one in the company had a complete understanding of the full system.

Even in such situations, it's still possible to drive quality in the system. It requires a whole lot of reading and understanding -- you need to know and understand the business driving the software, the requirements of the business and customers and you have to understand a lot of very convoluted code. You also have to be able to verify changes worked as expected and introduced no other bugs without having to push the software all the way to production to do so. But most of all you have to have the will to actually improve things rather than accept that this is just how this project is. Quite frequently the team in place doesn't have a lot of incentive to have that will -- if the software is ever actually good, it would threaten those fat paychecks they collect for maintaining the mess.

Comment Well In Their Defence (Score 1) 23

To be fair to them, there really aren't that many companies that want to do business with the US government and all the companies that do are probably equally as incompetent. So whether you hire this incompetent company to manage what should be some of the most secure assets in the country or another incompetent company, the outcome will most likely still be the same. It's not like there are any sort of... "laws," dictating their security, quality control or processes. Well, I guess there are, but it seems like the most profitable thing to do is ignore them and hope you don't get caught.

Comment That's It? (Score 1) 14

That sounds like a rehash of the Hero 4, with a gee whiz feature that a large part of their target demographic won't be able to use. You know what I want? I want a full 360 degree VR camera. One that doesn't pose a snag hazard when a parachute gets deployed and won't throw off my aerodynamics. Somewhere out there is a company with the vision to create such a thing, and I'll purchase my next camera from that company.

Slashdot Top Deals

"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire