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


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:Hurray! (Score 3, Insightful) 48

So you're saying artists shouldn't be allowed to sell permanent rights? Or that a past contract isn't valid?

That is exactly what we want.

These contracts have already been made. The original artists already sold permanent rights to their creations, and were compensated for it, and I don't think it's the right of the government to come in and change existing contracts.

You can buy real estate, only to have it be taken away later by eminent domain or the taxes can increase on it dramatically forcing you to sell it at a loss.

If you want, you can try to create a fund where copyright holders that are still reporting profits on an asset could apply to receive some portion of the fund. There is no way it can completely cover their loss, but it is potentially an option.

Businesses also are able to write off losses on future taxes. We'd need some tax code to make sure a bunch of businesses don't write off an infinite amount of money for the next 100 years, but there is likely a pretty straight forward solution here.

I suppose the government could step in and make it illegal for artists, in the future, to sell lasting copyrights. But I don't think it's the job of the government to disallow artists from freely entering into contracts. Artists & creators are already able to sell 28 year rights if they so choose.

It's precisely the job of the government to create laws and change those laws to reflect new realities. We must be able to roll back things if we find they are not working.

I wonder why sort of compensation was offered to slave holders after the government took their "property" away from them by forcing the freeing of enslaved people. (it makes my eyes water to think in these terms)

Comment I'm not sure why anyone even questions this? (Score 1) 301

Yes, of course. There should be disciplinary actions against employees who work on personal projects without permission on company time and on company equipment.

If you're at work for 80 hours a week, you have 88 hours when you're not at work, presumably sleeping, bathing and cooking. If you are lucky to only work 40-50 hours then you have closer to 120 hours a week to yourself.

I think it's really smart when companies offer some form of 80/20 rule. But usually that 20% is worked out to not interfere with the existing schedule, and before work begins a project is proposed. Google calls it a "creative side project", which is distinct from a "personal project". A project that doesn't necessarily have a direct market potential or doesn't cover your current area of expertise can fit in as a "side project". But the duration you're allowed to work on a side project is bounded, and you have to have some kind of results at the end, even if it's just an essay on the failure of it and what you learned from the experience.

Comment Re:No. (Score 1) 344

If I'm 70 and financially secure (house paid off, retirement funds coming in), then I wouldn't work for any amount of money. I'd rather spend time with nieces, nephews and grandchildren (if I get any). So there comes a point, eventually, when everyone is either dead or simply don't want to go to work anymore. Without new blood entering the field that doesn't change.

If you offered a ton of money, maybe someone would learn COBOL. But would they be any good? You'd be paying a high salary to someone who is rather green.

I do think it would be a disaster to port all the legacy COBOL to something trendy like Python or Ruby or Rust. That transition has to be done wisely, and it should go into a language that will have a long term mindshare. I don't have a crystal ball, I can't say what that might be. For example, maybe C or C++ has many decades left in it. Java seems an obvious choice, assuming Oracle doesn't shit the bed.

Comment Watch the best series of past decades? (Score 2) 197

There are millions of hours of television available for you to watch. If you can't watch your favorite epic series, then taking a little break to watch some classics can be a lot of fun.

Classic series (not an exhaustive list and in no particular order):
Get Smart (1965-1970)
Hill Street Blues (1981-1987)
M*A*S*H (1972-1983)
Roots [miniseries] (1977)
Danger UXB (1979)
Dallas (1978-1991)
Cheers (1982-1993)
The Muppet Show (1976-1981)
Seinfeld (1989-1998)
Taxi (1978-1982)
Twin Peaks (1990-1991)
X-Files (1993-2002)
The Twilight Zone (1959-1964)
All in the Family (1971-1979)

Or maybe some guilty pleasures:
Bonanza (1959-1973)
McHale's Navy (1962–1966)
Gunsmoke (1955-1975)
Rawhide (1959-1965)
F Troop (1965-1967)
Hogan's Heroes (1965-1971)
The Rockford Files (1974-1980)
Quantum Leap (1989-1993)
WKRP in Cincinnati (1978-1982)
The Addams Family (1964-1966)
Petticoat Junction (1963-1970)
The A-Team (1983-1987)
Dragnet [1951 series] (1951-1959)
Dragnet [1967 series] (1967-1970)
Millennium (1996-1999)
Mission: Impossible [1966 series] (1966-1973)
Mission: Impossible [1988 series] (1988-1990)

Comment Re:One of the best NES games ever too (Score 2) 111

Kirby's Dream Land, the first in the series, would have been for the Game Boy. My understanding from the article is that the GB development was done on a Twin Famicom, even though the sprite hardware and CPU were quite different.
You may be thinking of Kirby's Adventure for NES/Famicom. Which was an excellent game for that console, and fairly late in the life of the NES.

Comment Re:It's true (Score 1) 282

Moving the deadline any earlier would make it overlap significantly with the previous chip, meaning instead of 2 teams, we'd need 3, even though we have the same chip release cadence. It's not impossible, but given that we're already the most expensive chip on the block means the pressure is pushing things the opposite way.
Contractors are often not capable of doing the work. The majority of the team needs to work with the design for about 6-9 months before they are able to take on all the detail oriented work that is specific to each chip.

Crunches are fine, as long as they are well defined and short. As we have to organize our personal lives around these crunches. If I wasn't willing to live with that I would take a different job, and easier job with less pay.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Our vision is to speed up time, eventually eliminating it." -- Alex Schure