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

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Comment Compare it to a VPN (Score 1) 203

by duguk (#56279115) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: How Can I Prove My ISP Slows Certain Traffic?

This will sound odd, but try a VPN over the same connection.

I found my ISP was slowing down all traffic, apart from to speedtest.net and other speed testing sites.
However, they were not slowing down VPN traffic.

After running all my traffic for a month over a VPN, my speeds were 10x faster and not slowing down at peak times.
Then I received a call from my ISP kindly asking me to leave. I'm now with a decent ISP.

Comment Re: House of Lords could reject it (Score 1) 88

Same here. I don't think it's foolhardy to have a tiny bit of hope though, however small. They recently delayed Tax Credit cuts, rejected the Section 5 of the Public Order Act, and some controversial plans on Trade Union changes and Child Refugees. I'm not quite sure what's going on.

Submission + - Employers Struggle to Find Workers Who Can Pass a Drug Test

Submitted by HughPickens.com
HughPickens.com writes: Jackie Calmes writes in the NYT that all over the country, employers say they see a disturbing downside of tighter labor markets as they try to rebuild from the worst recession since the Depression: the struggle to find workers who can pass a pre-employment drug test. The hurdle partly stems from the growing ubiquity of drug testing, at corporations with big human resources departments, in industries like trucking where testing is mandated by federal law for safety reasons, and increasingly at smaller companies. But data suggest employers’ difficulties also reflect an increase in the use of drugs, especially marijuana — employers’ main gripe — and also heroin and other opioid drugs much in the news. Data on the scope of the problem is sketchy because figures on job applicants who test positive for drugs miss the many people who simply skip tests they cannot pass. But Quest Diagnostics, which has compiled employer-testing data since 1988, documented a 10% increase in one year in the percentage of American workers who tested positive for illicit drugs — up to 4.7 percent in 2014 from 4.3 percent in 2013.

With the software industry already plagued by a shortage of skilled workers, especially female programmers, some software companies think now would be the wrong time to institute drug testing for new employees, a move that would further limit the available talent pool. “The acceptability of at least marijuana has shifted dramatically over the last 20 years,” says Carl Erickson. “If the standard limits those that have used marijuana in the last week, you’re surely going to be limiting your pool of applicants.” Erickson’s decision not to drug test stems from a low risk of workplace injury for his workers combined with an unwillingness to pry into the personal lives of his employees. "My perspective on this is if they want to share their recreational habits with me, that’s their prerogative, but I’m sure as hell not going to put them in a position to have to do it."

Comment Why just Gmail? How far do you want to go today? (Score 5, Insightful) 284

by duguk (#51314617) Attached to: Anti-Terrorism Hypothetical: Bulk Scanning of Hosted Files?
Other email providers exist, which ones do we force or ask to scan all their documents?
Do we force companies to scan theirs too?
Get developers to add backdoors scanners to all their software?

This isn't a new problem.
Even though it's hypothetical, it's still dumb.

Comment Re:Do you have documents from the original work? (Score 1) 480

This is certainly the best solution.

Not only that, but you should be able to demonstrate you could write the code, and explain that this was a while ago and has gone through many revisions.

This has happened to me on many occasions doing contract work - and has never been an issue. My name is not always publicly displayed on my code.

If your new potential employer refuses to understand that, then the trust between you and your new employer has already broken down - I would recommend not working for them.

Comment Re:Turn a negative into a positive (Score 2) 480

This and absolutely this. If you have explained that you've worked on behalf of another company and that they have changed the author, and they don't believe you - then the trust has already broken down with your new potential employer. Cut your losses with the new employer, but keep the work on record - and in future explain the work you've done rather than relying on your name being in the code. If your new employer doesn't believe you now, and don't understand that this happens - why would you want to work for them? From many years of contract experience, I've found this to be the best solution.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you aren't rich you should always look useful. -- Louis-Ferdinand Celine

Close