Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom - A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at 88% off. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:I'm not surprised. (Score 1) 741

Except that in an open relationship, I imagine getting to know someone you're sleeping with is probably not a good idea. Too many common interests with the bit on the side can lead to an unplanned change in relationship status.

I recently joined a poly group with 30,000 members on Fb to get more info on what it's really all about and what I've learned is that there is some of everything out there, and there's a label for everything. And there's people whose relationships are at all levels of openness from completely, to completely rules-based. And there's examples of each of these both succeeding and failing, or doing one and then the other... or vice versa.

Comment Re:ECC (Score 1) 252

No boot ROM means that a hardware device constructed from discrete logic and analog chips directly demodulates digital data from the radio, addresses the memory, and writes the data. Once this process is completed, it de-asserts the RESET line of the CPU and the CPU starts executing from an address in memory. Really no ROM!

Comment Re:Cake or death (Score 1) 741

What's wrong with that? Does she want this guy immediately fired no question asked? If it really is a first offence tell him to knock it off and move on from there,

You did not read the article, did you?

It wasn't his first offence, although HR lied about this, claiming that it was.

He didn't knock it off. Also, her career at the company was affected because she made the report.

What he did should have resulted in an instant dismissal. Retaliation should have resulted in dismissals. Covering up the prior acts by the man should have resulted in dismissals in HR.

Yep. Heck, even if it was his first offense, the subsequent retaliation is where the company crashed and burned.
IAAL, and I've studied sexual harassment law. Contrary to popular belief, it's actually really difficult to prove harassment, since you need a repeated series of events. Even if the same guy propositions a bunch of different people, if he only does it once to each, it's arguably not harassment, since he's apparently taking no for an answer from each of them and just being persistent generally. However, where companies end up killing themselves is the subsequent retaliation. Here, they explicitly told her that she could keep working for the guy, but he would give her bad reviews and there's nothing she could do. They also berated her for reporting things to HR, which is another no-no. A harassment suit might not succeed, but a retaliation suit is a slam dunk.

For example, one of my professors in law school was the attorney for a group of city employees bringing a harassment and discrimination suit against their boss. The suit initially ended in a deadlocked jury... however, every time the boss had to do something related to the suit - answer discovery questions, give a deposition, even talk to his lawyer - he'd do something nasty, like move someone's office to the basement or strip someone of a project they'd be working on. It was like clockwork.
So, after the deadlock, they amended the complaint to add retaliation claims. Next trial, got a unanimous verdict on those and judgement for $8 million.

Comment Re:I'm not surprised. (Score 2) 741

So you want to ban any kind of sexual advances?

From a superior to a subordinate? Absolutely. But the rule for harassment is that if it's unwanted, it's harassment. If you're not absolutely sure that it's desired, don't do it. Sex with coworkers is usually a bad idea anyway, because even after you stop, you still have to work together. Sure, some people are mature enough to handle situations like that. Unfortunately, there's no reliable way to identify them ahead of time. That's how you can get an astronaut in a diaper.

The second problem obviously was that it wasn't his first encounter like that, but one does have to ask whether his other encounters were with his subordinates as well, or whether it was simply with other coworkers (which is okay).

It's not automagically okay. There's lots of ways in which it can be inappropriate. If your first advance is not welcomed, then you should stop immediately. This is not that complicated, but a lot of people want to make it complicated to excuse some shit behavior that is creating hostile work environments all over the world, let alone the country.

Comment Re: Jacobin Jeopardy (Score 1) 741

I know, right? Communism never led to any abuses ever!

Communism has never been faithfully attempted at scale. It has always been a cynical ploy to fool the populace while the rich stayed rich. (Sometimes they are killed and their wealth absorbed by other rich people, but the wealth doesn't make it into the hands of the people.)

Neither did theocracies, anarchy, or monarchies!

I didn't say any of those things were good, did I?

Comment Re: Not that easy (Score 1) 95

I always thought it was odd they relied on the client to determine whether the bullet would hit.

They don't. But they rely on the client to determine whether or not the players can see one another. If you tamper with the client then you can get more information than you're supposed to have.

It ought to be easy to find the wall hacks from a tape of the game though.

It seems to me like there ought to be a log of every shot in the game; timestamp, initiating actor, a list of who took damage and how much they took and whether it was direct or splash damage, and the positions and facing of all the relevant actors. Ideally you would actually log literally everything for later replay, every single event. Now that would be professional.

Comment Re:Cheating at Tournaments (Score 1) 95

A hundred years ago people were saying the exact same thing about people playing just a 'game' aka football.

Some of us are saying the same thing about it now. It's understandable why this has happened:propaganda works, which is why advertising exists — and professional sports exists as an advertising substrate. Look at who's applying the majority of the money.

There isn't much difference betweeen regular sports, chess, and computer games.

Sure there is. There's loads of differences. Granted, some computer games are just like chess, and some computer games are sort of like sports, albeit only the ones which involve moving your body more than wiggling your thumbs and fingertips. But as a whole, each of these things are very different.

Comment Re:Caring (Score 2) 95

I have no right then to rob then bank if because they ignored me. It is still illegal regardless of how cool you think it is.

Yes, that would be illegal. And what he is actually doing is also illegal. He's not taking anything from the bank. What he's doing is equivalent to breaking into the bank vault, which is visible from the bank floor for the purposes of this simile, and shouting at the customers about how shit the bank security is to the point that they can't talk to the tellers and actually conduct any business. It's trespassing, it's harassment, it's denial of service, but it is not theft. This is basically the copyright infringement vs. theft argument all over again. Just like that argument, we know it is different because there are whole bodies of law which apply specifically to what he is actually doing. If everything you didn't like were theft, we would only need laws about theft. That's not how the world works, so please, stop shouting theft.

Comment Re:I'm not surprised. (Score 4, Interesting) 741

If hitting on a coworker were illegal sexism, a good part of the slashdot audience wouldn't be here, because their parents never would have hooked up.

It's not appropriate for someone to send messages like this to a subordinate, period, the end. It creates a hostile work environment because they have to worry about whether they'll be penalized for saying no.

The appropriate response to someone walking in with a fistful of evidence that someone is engaging in sexual harassment is to fire the harasser, immediately. This is especially true anywhere that has had sexual harassment training. And basically all tech companies are doing that now, and this sort of thing is evidence that it is necessary; both the event, and all the jerkoffs scrambling to defend what is clearly unacceptable behavior.

Uber has a rule against sex between drivers and riders, no matter what. I guarantee you that their employee code of conduct bans sexual harassment, and clear sexual advances like these without invitation are a clear case of sexual harassment.

Finally, it wasn't actually his first offense, that was just a lie told by HR. Because HR is not your friend. Get that part straight right now. They work for the company and their job is to smooth the rough, pacify the angry, and meet legal requirements. It is not to help you.

Comment Re:Jacobin Jeopardy (Score 1) 741

What is, "capitalism"?

It really does boggle my mind that people haven't figured out that the whole system of capitalism might as well be designed to create opportunities for abuse. Since we have reason to believe that human nature hasn't changed appreciably throughout history — the more we look, the more ways we find in which we're similar to other primates, let alone humans of old — we know these opportunities will be taken.

The dictionary definition is that capital controls the means of production. That always used to come down to human hands, which meant people controlled by money. Now it's going to mean cogs and gears, and they're going to work for the people who are already wealthy. What will they choose to grind out? I guarantee it won't be sunshine and happiness for all mankind.

Comment Re:No feel (Score 1) 85

Today, well trained humans are far better at this than well trained AI using far superior, often almost cheating, sensing technologies.

But there is no cheating! They simply can have more senses than we can... as many as you can cram onto the car, along with enough hardware to make sense of the input. That's why they will be better than we are at driving cars. They can see things we can't. A sufficiently expensive and complicated laser system can not only tell that there's liquid on the track, but what it is, even if the sunlight is shining off of it. For example, in this press release they talk about identification of hydrocarbons at forty meters. Let's say they can only do it at twenty. That's still plenty of time to identify an oil slick and make decisions about it.

Today, you can get superior results having a human handle the whole vehicle as compared to having a computer handle the whole vehicle. You could have 0 computers on the car and still do better. But those days are numbered, and I suspect the number is relatively small.

Slashdot Top Deals

Their idea of an offer you can't refuse is an offer... and you'd better not refuse.