Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:If it's the lowest salary you'll accept (Score 1) 55

It's a lot easier to decide what you're "willing to accept" than it is to actually get that amount of money. To get it, you have to find and get hired by a company that will pay you that amount. This process can be tremendously disruptive to one's life, especially if it means relocating. Sometimes, the benefits of that desired salary are outweighed by the risks or disruption. But that doesn't make it somehow "childish" to be unhappy that companies use tactics like this to keep your salary low.

Sure. I was offered a position around DC, as a "Beltway Bandit". Would have made a significant increase in pay. But doing the research showed CoL was way higher, and fighting with traffic, horrifying, less access to the natural world, and in the end, I would be making less money after all expenses. Plus my wife was a VP at her place of work. So it really wasn't all that hard a decision to say "No thanks" - turned out to be the right decision in the end as well.

Comment Re:Of course they are (Score 1) 55

But the biggest problem is that they are allowed to ask you how much you earned in your previous job and use it as a baseline.

The only answer to that question should be: "No, you don't need to know. I had been underpaid in my previous job for years before finally reaching the limits of my loyalty and leaving. So no - you tell me what I am worth to you right now".

I was never asked about how much I used to make. It was always pretty simple. I'd ask them to make an offer, if interested in me, then respond as needed. If someone mad an insulting offer, I'd just say no thank you. If it was in the ballpark I'd then ask for what I believe would be acceptable. Places would usually accommodate to what I wanted.

Know your worth, people. And if someone tries to lowball you, just thank them for their time, and scoot.

Comment Re:Yes, and it's even worse than that... (Score 1) 55

It is illegal* to ask if candidates are married.

It is illegal* to ask if candidates have children.

It is illegal* to ask if candidates live with their parents.

* In America.

Yup, I was not allowed to ask female candidates anything about family or children. I could get fired if I did.

There were a number of women I interviewed who were aware of this issue, and at some point, they would say something like "I know you aren't allowed to ask, or even react, but I am not having any more children, and will not have my family interfere with my work."

And for a lot of positions, like Team Lead, it is really important to have some idea about family matters, like are we going to have multiple team leads so that the woman can have children and take leave?

Point is, not being allowed to ask questions like that, while on the surface is protecting some sort of privacy, it also makes for a decision process that might favor male candidates in more critical positions.

I've never been in a position where I could take large swaths of time off. Some positions are like that. Even for accidents. Day after I got out of the Hospital for a broken ankle I got calls to come in. I told them I could come in the next day, but they had to understand I was quite drugged up, that I had on a bloody cast that I had to keep elevated.

Hell, the wife intercepted a call from them trying to get me to come in the day of my ankle operation. She's a professional too, but wouldn't tell me until a couple weeks later. She wasn't at all happy. note, that ended up being quite a kerfuffle. Wife was so pissed she was swearing at me, people at work were pissed, mostly at who asked me to come into work - but a little at me as well. One of our photographers grabbed a picture of me in shorts and T-shirt with my cast propped up. I think it might have been for evidence.

But even in more normal times, I'd get phone calls for some emergency while I was at the beach, or across the country. Just part of the territory.

Shit needs to get done, and team leads are often a pinch point.

Final note: I'm sure people in here will chime in calling me a psychopath, maybe a people pleaser. I know right?

Comment Re:No (Score 1) 55

Bettridge much?

My employer countered $25k more than I originally asked for. Then a year later they said we were underpaid by industry standards and gave us all 15k raises in addition to the usual merit increase.

And I got a 50 percent raise after 1 year in my present position, and on occasion, 100 percent more on the new rate. (I'm paid per project)

This whole looking at your social media to somehow find out how little money you will accept is just weird.

Employers do check on social media to see if you are disparaging them, like the woman who was fired from GameStop for posting a video ridiculing GameStop, their customers, and their products, finally showing the location of the store safe.

Or the Chili's employee who made a video about how stupid the customers were, for expecting good food and a clean rest room.

Or the Psychologist who made a twerking video while complaining about patients.

Or the nurse who took a dick pic of a well hung patient, then shared it with other nurses, and it made it onto the web (I think it was 4 nurses fired)

Or the woman who was posting her "Office Siren" journey on TikTok - an Office Siren is a woman who wears provocative party dress Club like clothing to work, and to get reactions from men, whether validation or getting men fired. She recorded her interactions with HR after men complained about her trying to provoke and probably get the men fired. Turned out HR and the company didn't like the clothing choice, the recordings with HR, or the unsafe workplace environment.

It isn't just women - I've seen men posting about getting fired for social posting, but it is never as outlandish or memorable.

Comment Re:Socialism (Score 1) 80

A lot of people have a lot of trouble understanding

There is nothing about such a mission that mandates obsolete, 2x order of magnitude money torching. Please stop it with your commie shilling.

It doesn't really matter in the long run. Sooner or later the US with elect another (D) president and the teacher's union and/or some other pressure group will once again cut NASA's space program and take the money. After than, NASA or whomever will be forced to adopt cost effective solutions.

All you do is show your level of ignorance. I've posted nought but facts, and you act like the special child screaming "Neener neener, neener I can't hear youuuuuu!" While holding his hands over his ears. If you cannot understand a launch envelope, and why Spacex even has expendable missions, well there ya go!

Comment Re:Wow (Score 1) 26

>"What a shit show Microsoft has become."

I don't remember it NOT being. Although I guess it depends on comparisons to which point in the show.

And I thought I heard they were 'listening to their users' and trying to undo some of their "mistakes". Hmm. Any word yet of removing forced cloud logins? Ads in the menus? Changing browser choice/settings without permission? Removing artificial hardware requirements? Opting out of "AI"?

Here's my recent W11 story.

For my Digital radio classes, I picked up a Lenovo Laptop. A decent one. I wanted to have something similar to the class member's computers. So after a couple weeks of dealing with the update problems of class members, I had my first. Despite my disabling OneDrive The update re-activated it, but I didn't know until the next class, when I found out that they moved all of the non-program files with program settings and multiple instance settings and other program related folders to OneDrive. And the programs stopped working. And somehow nuked my local account, which made for an unholy mess. I also needed to create a new way to run multiple instances of a program for people, and had to publish one for W10, and another for W11.

I had to uninstall OneDrive. My first classes were during Windows 7 times. Only took 2 sessions to get everyone running. The last W-11 class ended up taking the entire course devoted to figuring out why the student's computers worked last week, but not this week.I ended up switching to my Mac because the instructor should have a working system.

The whole point is that W11 is degenerating and falling apart. Updates are more malware than malware is. At least the bad guys let your computer function, while Microsoft can leave your computer non functional.

I call it security through bricking.

The next class that recently started is me teaching Linux first, then we'll move on to the digital radio matters. This is what was requested by my students.

Comment Re:"Force-updating" (Score 1) 26

>"Your experience is not an indication of a good practice."

My experience is normally updating frequently. But it is still on my schedule, when I choose to do it. I wouldn't say it is bad practice, especially since I am aware when the rare high-priority update is released. The few that are not updated that I mentioned are those that are intentionally isolated (and are safe regardless).

>"Linux is somewhat sheltered because of its low adoption as a desktop operating system."

That is true. But it is also generally more secure, outside of its obscurity. And updates usually come out much faster. And most do not require rebooting.

I've never bought into poster's security through obscurity claims. There are plenty enough Linux machiners out there, as well as all the Apache servers - and let's not forget all those Raspberry Pis - to make a decent "attack force" for whatever the bad guys want to do.

As for the update process, here is a reason Windows forces their updates, and Linux and MacOS allow you to install them at your leisure. People don't avoid Linux and MacOS updates because the computer works afterwards. Windows? Well this article is all about yet another Windows update trainwreck

Comment Shouldn't need to be said. (Score 4, Interesting) 26

... update "was to bring 'production-ready improvements' ...

As opposed to half-assed improvements? Obviously updates/patches pushed to end-users should be "production ready". It's sad that it had to be specifically stated that Microsoft actually worked on these. I imagine people will remain dubious anyway.

... and generally ensure system stability by optimizing different Windows services."

So much better than those updates designed to do the opposite. /s

So it's ironic that some (but not all) users reported instead that the update "blocks users at the door, refusing to install or crashing midway through the process."

Ironic? Yes. Surprising? No.

Comment Re:"have left Earth orbit" ?! (Score 1) 80

Pardon? Have you not seen the barge landings?

There are many aspects of a flight profile. Some are based on where you put the payload when it is in orbit. Others are the weight of the payload. As an example, 9's Payload for a GTO orbit is 5.5t when recovered on barge, and 8.3t for an expended mission. LEO orbit, 17.5 t if recovered, 22.8t expendable.

Just because some flight profiles can land at a pad or on a barge, does not mean that this happens in all cases.

References from paper :

A Survey of Launch Vehicle Recovery Techniques

Shraddha C.

Pankaj Priyadarshia

and Devendra Prakash Ghate

Institutes:

Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, Thiruvananthapuram, 695022, Kerala, India

Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology, Thiruvananthapuram, 695547, Kerala, India

A pretty good read if you have the academic credentials to access it. Clear, at a reasonably high level so not too deep in the weeds, with all manner of different flight profiles for many rockets - including StarShip. And a lot more. Otherwise, I think it is a little premature to claim the success of Starship. The Falcon's are good reliable Rockets. Starship might end up a tad problematic.

Comment Re:Reusable rockets-- (Score 2) 80

Your assignment: Find out why reusable rockets are only useable for very specific launch envelopes. If you use them out of that launch envelope, there are just as disposable as the rockets you think are some sort of complete waste.

Interesting. I've never seen this claim made before; do you have a reference?

https://www.teslarati.com/spac... Forgive the link, it is a real rah-rah piece.

CEO Elon Musk says SpaceX has successfully expanded the envelope of orbital-class rocket recovery with its 50th booster landing, meaning that all Falcon boosters will have a better chance of safely returning to Earth from now on.

https://space-offshore.com/boo... "Falcon 9 missions may need to land on a droneship instead of RTLS due to the weight of the payload or the overall mission profile." I think you have academic access. Here is a good technical report on a lot of rockets that land after use. https://www.sciencedirect.com/.... You'll need academic credentials to download it. But it has a lot more info - and as part of the launch envelopes, there is constraint based on payload as well as direction. If you are going to land, there is a significant reduction in payload.

All of this is why I find it a little amusing that many among us find the most important aspect of launching these candles is the recovery.

tl,dr - where the rocket is going, what it is carrying has a big effect on recoverability. You can force things, reducing payload, or only sending the profiles to places where the first stage can make it back to the launch site, otherwise small extensions to allow it to make it back to a barge.

Comment Re:"have left Earth orbit" ?! (Score 1) 80

"Ladies and gentlemen, I am so, so excited to be able to tell you that for the first time since 1972 during Apollo 17, human beings have left Earth orbit," NASA's Dr Lori Glaze

I can expect some random science reporter to make this mistake, but bugger me, a senior NASA executive? It shows politics are far more important than any knowledge of science at NASA today.

Not only is Orion not leaving Earth Orbit (where the fuck do they think the moon is?) , it is not even entering lunar orbit. Orion's apogee has been pushed up for one orbit, but it's perigee is right down here.

Because Orbital mechanics is pretty difficult for most to grok. She does have bona fides, Doctorate in Environmental Science and Masters in Physics.

So I'm pretty certain that she well knows that Orion is still in orbit around the earth.

But just think about it. We have people in here who think that not re-using a rocket is some sort of crime, not thinking how that first stage can only return if it is close enough to the launch site. That if you want to go to the moon or a planet, you just point your Rocket at it and it's balls to the wall time. Among other misguided notions.

All said, She is an administrator, and I believe her excitement when she said that, so I'm not quite so willing to call her a political appointee. I'd call it an audio typo.

If it was me, I might say it was the first time humans have left Low Earth Orbit since 1972. And since it is a matter of providing soundbites, I would save the Perigee and Apogee part for later. Perigee and apogee are the more interesting parts from my perspective.

Comment Re:Is the bottle half full or half empty? (Score 2, Insightful) 80

But, There is absolutely nothing exceptional here: This has been already achieved almost 60 years ago, with much, much less technology available.

This gets brought up fairly often. And yes, we did it before. Why do it all again?

The learning curve is why. I can't imagine there is anyone from the Apollo project left at NASA. So a whole new group of people have to learn how to make things work. All those people sitting at their consoles are learning, re-learning after a fashion, what the Engineers learned in the 1960's.

It's all good!

Comment Re:Socialism (Score 2) 80

Yeah, it was cool watching those four $146,000,000/each RS-25 engines return to the landing pad. Stupid capitalists.

A lot of people have a lot of trouble understanding that returning a first stage to the launch site puts a huge constraint on where in orbit you can place that rocket's payload.

You can add a bit of flexibility if you return a rocket to a barge in the ocean - but not much. And when you use a barge, you are eating hard into whatever savings there are in capture and refurb.

The first stage has to have enough fuel to make it back to the landing pad or barge. If the launch envelope takes it out of that range, it's just another disposable rocket. As an indicator, people will notice I only mentioned the first stage. Because there's no good way to recover the second. The rocket is way too far downrange, the earth is rotating. There aren't many landing sites at that point.

Slashdot Top Deals

Is a computer language with goto's totally Wirth-less?

Working...