Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
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:We need free bandwidth (Score 2) 62

"Our business model depends on the fact that we don't pay for network infrastructure upgrades." - Internet content companies.

Only people who don't understand net neutrality would say that. How do you think these 800 start-ups get the Internet? They pay for it just like every other business. What they can't pay for is privileged or special access because ISPs want more money.

Comment Re: engineers are wrong? (Score 1) 709

That's a bit of an over-generalization. Have you never seen an engineer or scientist who had it wrong at some point?

That's not the point. The point is not whether they are right or wrong. This point is that he is not merely expressing his opinion; factually he's saying the engineers are wrong. In numerous articles, he contended that the calculation is wrong. "Convinced the cameras were using an out-of-date formula, he took his message to practically anyone who would listen — local TV stations, a conference of traffic engineers, and even the state board of engineer examiners."

Again, the state board has already said this issue with the lights is out of their jurisdiction as the city of Beaverton controls the lights; he needs to take up with the city. However, if he wishes to file a complaint with the state board, he may do so. So far he appears not to have sought to file a complaint.

The rest of your post is irrelevant as we already know he's doing this because he wants to be a member of the board.

You are aware that of the 11 members of the board, almost all of the positions require the registration/license that Jarlstrom says he does not need right? Can you see how it is relevant now?

Comment Re:Trust me I am a doctor (Score 1) 709

You can call yourself a 'doctor' upon completing your PhD.

You and I both know I am referring to a medical doctor.

You can call yourself a 'attorney' upon completing your law degree.

No you may not. Every single state says otherwise. Did you even research this because what you are saying is factually untrue?

I totally agree that a civil engineer has to be licensed in order to sign off on projects, but I think it's blatantly stupid if after successfully completing a study in electrical engineering at a university you still can't call yourself an engineer.

I did not say that. I said you need to be professional license to sign off on construction documents. Mechanical, chemical and petroleum engineers must do so when authorizing such documents. It is not just civil.

That's my logic. If a state doesn't trust the certificates of their universities, they better regulate those, instead of their graduates.

Again you have it backwards. A college confers a degree. The state grants a license. The state controls the designation. Are you aware that some colleges are not within the jurisdiction of states?

Comment Re:COBOL isn't hard to learn (Score 2) 210

Indeed. If there is a market for COBOL programmers (and it's clear there is), then the obvious solution is for unis and colleges to spit out more COBOL-literate CS graduates. Honestly, if I was ten years younger, I'd probably delve into it myself. It is, after all, just a programming language, and hardly on the same level of trying to learn Sanskrit.

Comment Re: treatment? (Score 1) 709

He is merely stating his opinion about medical treatment plus informing the people that he olds a doctor's degree.

Publicly stating that engineers are wrong and at the same time proclaiming he is an engineer? I think you are disregarding those two pieces of facts.

I think he can do that and should be able to do that without fear of being prosecuted by some over-zealous civil servant.

He has been told to stop using the term which he ignored. The board has no say about the merits of his claims. In fact they're already told him that the state board has no jurisdiction on the traffic lights of the City of Beaverton as that is controlled by the city.

Comment Re:Trust me I am a doctor (Score 1) 709

He passed his college's exam for the engineering education they provide, so he can call himself an engineer.

And that is where your logic falls apart. You cannot call yourself a "doctor" if you only have a medical degree but never passed the boards. You cannot yourself a "lawyer" if you don't pass the bar. Professionally some states have restrictions on who can call themselves "engineers". Now in this day and age, that title has been abused by many who have no engineering degree; that does not change the requirements.

If the state doesn't think he's an engineer by then they should regulate the colleges issuing those titles and control their examination procedures.

You want a state board to control and regulate what a college in another state (or country) does? Did you think about what you are proposing? First of all, the state board is clearly saying that in the current state for which they have jurisdiction, they can recognize titles. Second the college can award a degree; they do not award titles. Third, every state that I am aware requires the same engineering exams to get the license. The first test is called the E.I.T. The second test is called the P.E.

Comment No problem (Score 2) 41

You can have that however you have to accept a few things:

1) Costs are going to go way up. You aren't going to pay $50 or $100 for a software package, it'll be 5 or 6 figures. You'll be paying for all the additional testing, certification, and risk.

2) You won't get new stuff. Everything you use will be old tech. You'll be 5-10 years out of date because of the additional time needed to test and prove things. When a new chip or whatever comes on the market it'll be a good bit of time before it has undergone all the validation it needs to be ready for such a critical use.

3) You will not be permitted to modify anything. You will sign a contract (a real paper one) up front that will specify what you can do with the solution, and what environment it must be run in. Every component will have to be certified, all software on the system, the system itself, any systems it connects to, etc. No changes on your part will be permitted, everything will have to be regression tested and verified before any change is made.

If you are ok with that, then off you go! The way I know this is how it goes is that we have shit like this, we have critical systems out there and this is the kind of shit they go through. They are expensive, inflexible, and out of date compared to the latest mass market shit. If you look at the computers that control a fighter plane or the like you'll be amazed at how "dated" they are. Well they are that way because development took a long time and once they are developed, they continue to be used, they aren't changed often.

Now if that's not ok, if you want the free wheeling environment we have now where you can buy new tech when you like, put things together in any configuration, and run whatever you want that's cool, but accept that means problems will happen. You cannot have it both ways.

Oh and also with that critical stuff:

4) There will be no FOSS. If there's liability for losses, nobody will be willing to freely distribute their work. They aren't going to accept liability for no payment, and aren't going to accept that if their code was used by someone else they might be liable.

Comment Re:This is retarded conservatism to help 'coal' (Score 1) 461

You're right, you said "super capacitor plates" which is not entirely the same thing, but the same principle still applies: For high tech applications, purity is critical, and mineral coal is not pure.

Do you ever abstain from trying to torpedo a discussion you're losing by calling the other person a retard?
=Smidge=

Comment Re:Pay your fucking taxes instead (Score 4, Insightful) 161

And that's exactly the attitude that leads to this situation: the belief among a large subset of the population that they will eventually get rich and benefit from all of the loopholes that aid the rich. The overwhelming majority of the richest people in the world were born rich. They didn't come from being lower middle class and work hard to earn their money.

Comment Re:Makes sense (Score 1) 523

I know every generation thinks the young generation is lazy, etc., but there is real statistical evidence that the Millennial generation actually is starting to work much later. On a more anecdotal basis, I notice a very different approach to work in my kids (late teens, early 20s) and in their peers. My kids have always had to do chores and work around the house so I don't think that's the difference.

They do things like decide they're unhappy with their current employer so they just walk out, without trying to fix the problem and without trying to find another job first. I have never in my life quit a job before finding another, and it wouldn't even occur to me to do so. If my job sucks, by all means I'll make a move, but not until I have something else lined up. That's just one example, but it's typical of their whole approach. I suppose in some ways it's good to be more focused on quality of life and less on income... but not until you're safely self-sufficient.

It concerns me that I'm wandering into "get off my lawn!" territory here... but there really does seem to be a difference, a worrisome one.

Slashdot Top Deals

Too many people are thinking of security instead of opportunity. They seem more afraid of life than death. -- James F. Byrnes

Working...