Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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:I wrote a letter to the CEO once (Score 2) 215

Ahh, but real dialogue can get one into trouble when dealing with the political minded. You see, there are those out there that are not working towards the same goals as you. Even if you're a part of the same team and of the same company, there are those that think the illusion of them being correct is more important than the welfare of the team.

It can be difficult to have a truly open dialogue with people of this sort, as they are quick to attack your reputation or pull rank and have you removed from the equation altogether. Imagine a World War I commanding officer that orders wave after wave of soldiers to run into the meat grinder of overlaid and well protected machine gun fire, and when it disastrously fails, they do it again. Those that complain are ordered into said meat grinder. The corporate world is no different.

I think a bigger threat to geeks in business are when they approach such situations without due caution. If you make a claim, you must be prepared to back it up to everyone that could be interested. Real concrete evidence. References. Citations. Etc. Basically, the idea is to sell your idea rather than to challenge theirs or the one in place.

Comment Re:Just kick him out. (Score 1) 338

They don't even have to 100% go through with it. Just put on a show like he is being kicked out. Give him 30 days, talk about moving constantly, etc. He'll probably have a job pretty fast. Then as soon as he has one, out on his ass he goes! Then he'll see that living on your own is kind of cool even though it's expensive.

Comment Experienced with this. (Score 1) 285

A company I used to work for tried to go paperless after I showed a couple of managers that everything was way faster electronically than on paper. I demonstrated it by doing things the old fashioned way: Print document, alter it with pen/marker, scan it, and upload it back. Took about 15 minutes. I did it in about 30 seconds or less electronically. No differences between the outcomes of the two methods except for time.

They made a big push for it, but in the end upper management wouldn't budge. They didn't know how to do it on computer, didn't want to learn, didn't even HAVE to do it, but insisted that everyone had to do it like they did. I didn't bother. I kept doing it the old way. As a result I'd process 10-20x documents more than other people would day by day.

The absolute best part of it? Having 500 blank pages in a folder on my desk to make it look like I was doing it by hand. Never got caught and eventually the company went under.

Comment Re:Serious question (Score 1) 385

We CAN cure addiction. In many different ways. America just fucking sucks at it because we'd rather send people to jail for having drugs than treat them for addiction. More money in it, I guess.

Anyway, there are a couple of different GOOD treatments, but none of them will work unless the addict wants them to work. Truly wants them to work, not just because they ran out or because they're broke.

One is replacement therapy. You can move off onto something like Suboxone (not mentioning methadone since it is literally worse than the drugs you could be addicted to and takes months to get off of), and then taper down the Suboxone. It works by filling the receptors that opiates stimulate. You don't get high, but your cravings go away...even if you continue your drug use, you don't get much pleasure as the Suboxone binds to the receptors better. Some countries say 'fuck it' and give people access to the drug of their choice, since the social effects are the worst parts of addiction anyway. Sure they might eventually die earlier or harm themselves, but that's their choice if they want to.

Another is hallucinogen therapy. We're making advances in treating people with ibogaine, MDMA, ketamine, etc. With some psychotherapy thrown in, you can help the brain to rewire to make the cravings less intense...this is best if combined with something like Suboxone therapy.

If someone really wants to quit, they can. It isn't THAT difficult with medical treatment. What really sucks is as soon as you say you want to quit, you get treated like a criminal and no one has any sympathy for you whatsoever. If you tell your doc they won't say 'oh okay let me taper your meds' they'll just tell you to go to a pain clinic which will be seeing new patients in about seven months, and they can help out. Sorry I have to drop you as a patient because wanting to get clean is drug seeking behavior.

Addiction is a complex social and medical issue. We've made very few concessions on the social side, but we've almost got the medical side completely cleared up.

Comment Re:The problem with protests. (Score 1) 584

It's not even that easy, because 15% to you or I is worth a lot more to us than 15% to a corporation. To you or I, that 15% is the difference between living in a so-so apartment to living in a GOOD apartment. To them, that 15% is just less money in the pockets of the already super rich who want golden toilets and new yachts every year.

Comment Re:Serious question (Score 1) 385

This is like treating your kid who bites their nails by having their nails surgically removed. It doesn't address the WHY of addiction, it simply removes one aspect of it. I'd wager that people who are cured of their addiction by this method are also cured of things like pleasure, joy, motivation, etc.

But I'm sure America will adopt it soon enough. We're more interested in punishing people for drugs than treating the cause behind those drugs.

Comment Re:"Greedo Texts First!" (Score 1) 436

Not necessarily. Imagine the shit people did all the damn time that they eventually 'got over.' Like men being required to wear suits/ties 100% of the time. I imagine by the time of Alderaan, people will have mostly stopped caring about twittering/Facebooking 24/7 on their phones. It'll no longer be new. It would probably even be a very niche thing at that point...not just talking about those sites, but those KINDS of sites.

Comment Re:Not innocent (Score 1) 336

In order for this to be a more fitting analogy, someone has paid someone else to contract 10,000 car thieves to steal 10,000 cars and all come by and fling shit at your house all night. You ask the police for help and they say they can't really do anything because there's goddamn 10,000 cars and they'd have to build a prison in order to house all the car thieves.

But, your home owner's association decides to enact a temporary 'show proof of residence in this area to get through' rule and the shit-flinging is stopped. Some people are mad because now they can't get to your house and buy those yummy pies that you sell, though.

Comment Re:Mass-Media Report (Score 1) 470

Bacteria are important in our digestive system for two reasons: To extract vitamins/minerals from food more efficiently (bacteria eat it and poop out things we can better use), and to break down things we normally couldn't break down. Perhaps if the bad bacteria wasn't efficient, it would cause us to be hungrier (as we aren't getting enough vitamins/minerals) and eat more, which would in turn cause weight gain due to the vitamin/mineral to fat/carbs/etc ratio being so shitty in regular food.

Comment Re:Linux drivers? (Score 0) 51

Goddamn, I hate this. Back when I bought my last laptop I got the one with the best possible graphics card. Had something like 4GB RAM, a decent processor, and a decent video card. The shit can't run 5+ year old games at any playable resolution. The original Half Life is barely playable, I get like 15 stuttery FPS on it. It could barely run SNES emulators.

Comment Re:Not legal here. (Score 1) 286

No need for a tailgating gun. You can usually pick them out. Most people will settle into an average distance between their car and the car in front of them. You'll see five cars in a row with a decent distance between them, then you'll see a car practically touching the bumper of the car in front of them. Those are the dangerous people.

Comment Re:Once you get past competency (Score 1) 219

This. There are two major schools of thought in management: One is that managers should ride everyone's ass because as soon as the manager leaves their field of view they're going to be playing solitaire and wasting company money, the other is that all they themselves should have to do is relay orders from Up Above and then fire up solitaire themselves.

In reality, management is a logistical position. Their job is to make sure orders get relayed, everyone is cool with it (aka that it is well within their possibility to complete as requested), make sure people are keeping up to performance standards, and making sure everyone gets what they need to do their jobs. That's it. Unfortunately, it does usually require a little 'power' to do this, which is what quickly goes to peoples' heads. Instead of being logistical, they see themselves as the ones doing the REAL work. That's why you get those companies with departments consisting solely of middle management. They'll all stand around yelling at each other to take the garbage out and it'll never get done.

Financial companies and the like are the worst. My friend's department consists of four workers and EIGHT bosses. The workers bring in ~90% of the revenue for the team, the bosses go on expensive trips and bitch that their department isn't making enough revenue.

Comment Re:Exculpatory evidence? (Score 1) 297

In order for manslaughter to apply, you would have had to be found guilty of either gross negligence or malicious intent. It would not apply in your situation because simply hitting someone with a vehicle does not automatically imply either. Rather, the circumstances surrounding it do. Gross negligence means you would have had to ran a red light or failed to yield to a pedestrian pursuant to your local laws (like they were in a yield-to-pedestrians zone in a crosswalk). Malicious intent means you acted to intentionally cause harm to them. One or the other of these things must be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt by the prosecution (since it's a felony), in order for you to be found under some part of the manslaughter crime.

Someone being struck in the road by a car at night while wearing all black automatically throws up a 'reasonable doubt' that you even knew they were there, much less could you have intentionally hit them, or taken actions not to hit them.

You MIGHT have had a good case against you as a misdemeanor, but toxicology showed he was under the influence of a mind altering and intoxicating drug, so you'd probably get let go on that if your lawyer could play that card up a little.

The next phase would be warding off the civil lawsuit they'll inevitably file against you because they can't afford the $40k+ it probably took them to get patched up. Good luck to that one, I say. Your best bet is to let it play out and then counter sue for the same amount for damaging your car.

Slashdot Top Deals

"We learn from history that we learn nothing from history." -- George Bernard Shaw