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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:Too secure for insecure? (Score 1) 292

I repeat the question, PopeRatzo. Are you rationalizing Clinton's destruction of evidence as ok because the Bush administration deleted a really big number of emails?

Are you asking me for a moral or legal judgement? Morally, I find pretty much everyone who runs for this office is repugnant, with only a handful of exceptions. Currently we have a couple of morally unbalanced people running for president.

However, as a veteran, I have learned that malignant competence is always preferable to incompetent foolishness and moral depravity when it comes to running a big organization. That's why I will vote against Donald Trump in November. It's strictly damage control.

Comment Re:Too secure for insecure? (Score 1) 292

If you're a Ron Paul supporter voting for Trump, I fear that "confused" is rather an understatement of your mental state.

I think not so much "confused" as "shallow". I can see a very surface correspondence between Paul and Trump: They both like to buck the establishment. The fact that the do so in very different ways and for very different reasons requires looking past the top millimeter of each. I suppose a vote for Obama (in his first presidential campaign) could fit as well if the same incredibly shallow analysis just focused on the "Hope and Change" slogan.

Comment Re:Too secure for insecure? (Score 1) 292

And because of that the laws were changed before she took office and she still did it, because you can't touch a Clinton.

You guys, there you go again. First you say it's a moral issue, but then you say, no, it's a legal issue. Are the two things morally equivalent? Absolutely, except it's thousands of emails as opposed to TWENTY-TWO MILLION EMAILS in the case of George W Bush.

Are the two things legally equivalent? Absolutely, since the law has come down the same in both cases.

So really, your beef with Hillary Clinton is just some partisan cum sock.

Comment Re:Too secure for insecure? (Score 1) 292

I like how the argument has devolved here to "If Bush did it, then it's ok". PopeRatzo, is Dubya really your moral compass?

Twenty-two MILLION emails.

Funny, but I don't remember that being an every night issue on the evening news.

And I never, ever look to politicians for a moral compass. I gave that up when Ronald Reagan became president.

Comment Re:If they're going to do this... (Score 1) 141

Unfortunately the summary describes a 16 hour week + "additional flexible hours". Beyond that, the only clue is "30 hours per week", which is evenly divisible by five days (or six), but not four.

Hence my comment....

Personally, I've been looking forward to the four day work-week for a long time. Last time we shortened the workweek (from six days per to five) was before my father was born....

Comment Re:We need this (Score 1) 89

Seriously, we need people actively looking into making those new type of batteries instead of just researching them and never do anything with the research, like we've seen for the past 5 to 10 years.

That's right! That's why my cell phone which uses more power than my cell phone of 10 years ago with a battery less than a third the size lasts significantly longer - because everyone's been "never doing anything with the research", right?

Good research results make news. Their employment in commercial products generally doesn't.

Comment Re:They actually want to kick appliances off. (Score 1) 141

I don't "misunderstand" anything, that is exactly what the device did. It didn't precool anything, it didn't ramp anything down, it just randomly shut off when too many people had their AC on (aka, when it was hottest). And in Iowa in July, even if you did know when it was about to go off and tried to "precool" (which I assure you, does not work well), you'd be burning up long before the AC kicks back in.

Comment Drake? (Score 2) 39

We're talking about Drake here. Show of hands: Who cares if Spotify doesn't include Drake in its promoted tracks? If people want to hear Drake (which in itself is a little unsettling), then they can still listen to his music on Spotify.

"Burying" is not the same as "not promoting". The music is there, but there isn't any incentive for Spotify to promote it.

Plus, it's Drake. I mean, come on...

Comment Google does something like this (Score 1) 141

Google does something like this, on a selective basis.

I think it started as something done only for special cases, but I know a few people who arranged it. One woman I know works three days per week instead of five, for 60% of her normal salary. She has also taken a large chunk of her 18-week maternity leave and uses it one day per week, so she actually works two days per week but gets paid for three, until the maternity leave runs out. Her husband has arranged a similar structure with his employer (not Google), working three days per week so one of them is always home with the kids. She's a fairly special case, though, because she's a freakishly brilliant software engineer who any smart company would bend over backwards to accommodate.

However, it's now been expanded to be made generally available to full-time employees. It requires management approval, but the descriptions I've seen make it clear that management is expected to agree unless there are specific reasons why it can't work. Salary, bonuses and stock are pro-rated based on the percentage of a normal schedule that is worked. Most commonly, people work 60% or 80% schedules (i.e. three or four days per week instead of five). Other benefits, such as health care, etc., are not pro-rated, but either provided or not, depending on the percentage of normal hours worked.

I could see myself going to a 60% work week in a few years, having a four-day weekend every week in exchange for a 40% pay cut.

Comment Re:Yep. (Score 1) 162

One part of your experience that rings false to me is the level of support required for Windows machines vs Macs. My experience is narrower than yours, because I'm a programmer not an IT support guy, but I do get used as an IT support guy by friends and family because, you know, I "do computers". With that caveat, my experience is that the single biggest thing I can do to reduce my support burden is to get them to trade in their Windows laptop for something else. The very best alternative is a Chromebook, then a Macbook. Installing Ubuntu instead of Windows is also a good support-reducer, but not as many have gone that route.

As far as mobile devices go, I do more Android support than iOS support, but I think that's mostly because all of my immediate family, and most of my extended family, uses Android. Plus the Apple users are a little less likely to come to me for help because they know I'm an Android guy (because I work on Android system development).

Slashdot Top Deals

Dead? No excuse for laying off work.

Working...