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


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:Fortran (Score 1) 629

I'm not quite old enough to have used FORTRAN.

What does age have to do with anything? I took a computational linear algebra course in the late '90s that used FORTRAN nearly exclusively.

That said, I started out, like most kids in the '80s, with BASIC and assembly language (6809 and 6502, in my case). I started college early enough that the introductory computer-science courses were still in Pascal, but pretty much every course that needed to do real work used anything but Pascal...lots of C, with a systems-programming course splitting time between 8086 assembly and VAX assembly and a database course that introduced us to SQL (of course).

The computational linear algebra course mentioned above was a math course specifically for computer-science majors; other engineering students took a different linear-algebra course.

Comment Re: But Windows surveillance (Score 1) 84

Microsoft makes their money in commercial software and services all other experiments notwithstanding. Google make some money advertising to people and building profiles and people to better Target than advertising all the other experiments notwithstanding. Can you see the difference?

Not really, no. Sorry.

Microsoft makes really complete profiles on individual persons.
Google makes really complete profiles in aggregate for demographic markets.

Microsoft makes business decisions based on profile data telling them how many people they can reach with a given product.
Google makes business decisions based on profile data telling them the size of each demographic their advertiser can reach with their product.

Microsoft makes a lot of products that fail, when they try to do something new.
Google makes a lot of software and services with the intent of delivering advertising that fail, when they try something new.

Microsoft makes a lot of money, when they stick to their core competencies (a small range of OS and office productivity products).
Google makes a lot of money when they stick to their core competencies (a small range of advertising services, search, and mail).

Microsoft loses money when they step outside their core competency, and try "charge for service" models.
Google loses money when they step outside their core competency, and try "charge for service" models.

Kinda not seeing the difference, Bruno...

Comment Steve Case is high. (Score 2) 35

Steve Case is high.

The article starts out claiming AOL was there at the start of the Internet, and helped pave the way -- but really, "MeTooLand" (AOL) only connected itself to the Internet through a number of large VAX machines, in a last ditch attempt at to maintain relevance, in the face of educated kids asking their parents why they are paying so much money to AOL for what amounts to Internet access. AOL was the sugary cereal "adjacent to this complete breakfast".

He states that "innovation can happen anywhere" (it can) and that "we should be funding outside traditional central areas" (debatable).

And then his three examples are Sweetgreen, Framebridge, and OrderUp, which are all within one hour driving distance of each other in the DC/Baltimore metroplex.

In other words: he's funding outside of "traditional central areas" by declaring a new central area, and then claiming it's not central.

My interpretation of this, and the specific mention of these there portfolio companies for Revolution Growth, where Steve Case works, is that the VC is starting to see that a VC needs multiple VC's when it invests in a risk company, in order to spread the risk, and that no one is coming to their party.

Comment Re:But Windows surveillance (Score 2) 84

This is a nice reminder of who and what the REAL threat is. Windows 10 data collection is not the problem. Microsoft doesn't define it's existence on profiling and targeting people, but Google does.

Microsoft doesn't do it because they can't make a cell phone that people want to buy, to save their lives.

It's not like they haven't tried, many times, including buying most of a company that was capable of making cell phones, only to have the parts drift through their fingers, like sand at a beach.

Microsoft would definitely do it if they could work it out, or buy a company that doesn't dissolve as a result of being bought by them.

Comment Re:Reminds me of the Pico Brewer (Score 2) 359

I kind of liked home brewing. But home bottle sterilizing was a fucking bore.

That's why I started kegging after a couple or three years. Sanitizing the bottles wasn't too bad (a trip through the dishwasher would suffice, either with heated drying or (if available) the sanitizing option enabled), but it's much easier and faster to fill one keg than 50+ bottles. You can also dry-hop in a keg.

Comment Re:Seriously? (Score 4, Informative) 359

why would someone buy a $400 machine that requires you to buy prepackaged produce to be squeezed out of it...?

Consider this quote from TFA: "Tech blogs have dubbed it a 'Keurig for juice.'" Then consider how Keurig machines and the coffee pods they use have sold over the past few years. Nobody ever went broke overestimating people's laziness.

Comment Re: Texas Instruments.. (Score 1) 857

the only way to choose in assembly was to use PEEK, POKE, and CALL from within TI BASIC

Did TI BASIC even have PEEK and POKE? Maybe it did and I just never knew what to do with them due to a lack of available documentation, but as I recall, those commands weren't in the console. They might've been in Extended BASIC, but I didn't have that cartridge back in the day. I have one now, as well as a bunch of other things (such as a PEB) that I didn't have back then, but a lack of space has kept it packed away the past few years.

Comment Re:TI-99/4A (Score 1) 857

Started with one that my parents had picked up cheapish ($150?) as the prices were starting to come down. Peripherals were still expensive as hell, though, and the console by itself didn't support much real work without them. Combine that with TI exiting the computer business a few months later and you can probably see where this is going: two years later, we ended up getting an Apple IIe (this time, with a couple of floppy drives, a monochrome monitor, and a printer), which got me through high school and a fair bit of college.

Comment Re:Working from home is career suicide (Score 1) 73

I've worked in 3 employee companies, and 30.000+ ones, east, west, and midwest. The only stack ranking, ever, occurred only when there were impending "layoffs." And that ranking was alway done by direct management, and not cliquish peers. Shove your business-talk terminology (really, "Nash equilibrium?" Are you a fcking leach of an MBA, unable to produce value on your own?) where it won't see the sun, because it's part of the toxic culture.

I'm not an MBA. I've worked at IBM, Apple, Google, and half a dozen other companies. Only the small ones -- mostly startups -- didn't do stacked ranking.

If your 30,000+ employee companies that don't practice peer review, they must not be Fortune 500 technology companies, because in any technology firm of any size: stacked ranking with peer review" is how it's done.

You may think it's toxic; I prefer to think of it as "a very very large paycheck".

Comment Re:Working from home is career suicide (Score 1) 73

You work in a very toxic environment. I have no desire to work there.

Well, I can definitely sympathize with not wanting to work for a company of more than 50 employees in the technology sector, but it kind of is what it is. If you worked an agricultural job, unless you remote control a "robot" tractor (is a waldo/drone really a robot? Since when?), your in every day.

There's a great belief in sympathetic magic in this sector, where if you "Do like Google/Facebook/Twitter/Apple/Microsoft/Amazon/... does, and you will be successful, like Google/Facebook/Twitter/Apple/Microsoft/Amazon/... are".

Stacked ranking is one of those things, and so that's what the cargo cult imitates -- particularly since it's what they know, given that the startups are primarily being shed like dandruff off these companies, as soon as a group of enough likeminded employees all get an RSU payday at more or less the same time.

There are certain emergent properties to stacked ranking, and one of them is "The remote employee gets thrown under the bus, when graded on a curve, by peers, and your ability to keep your job is a competition".

Anyone who has done a mathematical regression analysis and a study of the corporate culture, can tell you what the other emergent properties are.

Get pissy, don't like it, call it eco-unfriendly to commute instead of working at home -- it is what it is, and the Nash Equilibrium is what the math makes it.

So lump it.

Comment Re:Working from home is career suicide (Score 1) 73

For knowledge workers, it's mostly dependent on their ability to contribute. Technology provides many ways to collaborate without physical presence.


If it's remote you, or my in the office lunch buddies... who do you think we are all going to throw under the stacked ranking bus, come peer performance review time?

Slashdot Top Deals

Logic is the chastity belt of the mind!