Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re: It's complicated (Score 1) 184

Obama personnel didn't just attempt to "unmask" Trump staffers who were mentioned in intelligence product. Susan Rice (among others?) actually did unmask them, so that she would know their names rather than anonymous identifiers similar to "US person number 4, an advisor to a candidate for national office".

Comment Re: Finally (Score 1) 315

Yeah, and my point was that a tool could be written to filter any other log format as well. It would be maybe 10 lines of Perl, if you went for legibility over terseness. Your comparison had nothing to do with binary logs or anything else about how systemd stores logs, and everything to do with what tool ships with the logger.

Comment Re: Goes to the heart of capitalism (Score 1) 244

You've confused "capitalism" and "free market system", but as the AC pointed out, neither of those is a prerequisite for being responsible for the damages you cause to others. If you drive over a stranger who was walking down the sidewalk, you're liable for his injuries even without any agreement between you and him.

Comment Re: Bullshit, Todd. (Score 1) 244

Most countries are unlike the US in that they sharply limit liability for medical malpractice. This couple probably could not have won ongoing damages solely for malpractice. After all, they didn't sign up to raise a child that is biologically parented by some stranger -- but because of the clinic's mistake, they are now on the hook to do exactly that.

Comment Re: permissions (Score 1) 309

Yup. Software developers and software testers -- at least if they're both good -- use different skill sets. Technically, testing things before you ship them is a cost center, but most companies do not want to spend the time and money to make practically-defect-free software before testing: It requires that someone who knows what they're doing set up a strong development process, that developers consistently think hard about what they're doing, and that a lot of risks are eliminated or realized before things go out the door; in practice, this means a fairly conservative and slow development process. So if you're not spending money on that kind of process, it is very much worth it to spend money on good testers.

Unfortunately, companies seldom pay software testers anywhere near the value that a good tester brings to the company. In part, that's because it is very hard to tell who will be a good tester before they start, and bad testers cost more than their direct salaries, because they will send others down rabbit holes. If someone is willing to work as a tester for $X, where's the incentive to pay them $X*2 once they have shown that they are actually worth that much or more?

Slashdot Top Deals

The solution to a problem changes the nature of the problem. -- Peer