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


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 Work ethic alternates with generations... (Score 3, Interesting) 326

The "Greatest Generation". A bunch of over-indulgent assholes whose failings brought about the "greatest" depression.

The "Silent Generation". Raised post-depression. Extremely hard workers. Why? Because their aging parents left them no legacy except for care for them, pay for the welfare state, and fight in at least two wars. Nice.

The "Baby Boomer" generation. Another over-indulgent, entitiled, asshole generation. Why? Because their parents (the silent generation) swore that they'd never make their kids go through what they themselves had to go through. So they gave them everything.

The "X" generation. Another hard-working generation. Why? Because their parents (the baby boomers) are too busy indulging their self-entitles asses to actually care about raising their kids. Gen X-ers have had to bear low wages. Outsourced industries. And an income gap that is worse that it has ever been since ancient Egypt.

The "Millenial Generation". Another over-indulgent, self-entitled, bunch of lazy assholes. Why? Because their parents (the X generation) swore that they'd never make their kids go through what they themselves had to go through. Millennials have been doted over, helicoptered, and are living with their parents as adults at levels not seen since the Great Depression.

There's clearly a pattern. The "Greatest Generation" fucked the country. The "Silent Generation" brought it back. The "Baby Boomers" fucked the country. The "X" generation will bring it back. The "Millenial Generation" will fuck up the country. And their children will bring it back. And so on... and so forth...

Comment Good luck with that... (Score 2) 474

Your son is your time machine? I can already tell your son is very young and not that developed, yet. All newer parents talk like you. Where they believe their children are basically conduits to their own past. Where you can correct your own past mistakes by having your son not make them. You. Could. Not. Be. More. Wrong. Seriously. Do yourself a favor and stop walking down this path while you still can. Your child will be the most healthy if you treat them like they are *their own person* (which they are)... instead of an extension of yourself.

Love him. Be an influence. Be there for him when he needs you. Be unconditionally supportive (which doesn't mean agreeing with every decision he makes). That's all you need to do.

But please don't make him a prisoner to your own failures, successes, dreams, and fears. Let him develop all of those on his own. He will love you for it -- forever -- and never hold resentment.

Comment I like it, but the damned start menu is fragile... (Score 1) 376

I really like how you can open the start menu and just start typing the name of the program you want to run. Not an original idea, but certainly wasn't a standard option in Windows for a long time. However...

The damned start menu is WAY too fragile. I might be exaggerating, but it has to be one of the most complained about parts of Windows 10. Without warning, your start menu can all of a sudden stop working. Or, it will work, but the type-to-search functionality won't work. So you get all sorts of cryptic workarounds like doing a full repair, or "sfc /scannow", or stopping the Cortana service... the list is endless it seems. I have been very happy with Windows 10 otherwise, but a constantly broken start menu is absolutely terrible.

Microsoft, if you're listening, you guys have to fix this.

Comment Re:Scientists, give up. They need to be SHOWN. (Score 1) 618

Irreversible? How? The world will find equilibrium no matter what we do to it. It will take a long time to find it, but it will find it. Humans have been on the planet for a speck of time compared to how long that the earth and life in general have been around... and have evolved. Another newsflash for you, AC. We aren't going to "destroy" the planet. We will destroy each other long before we are capable of destroying the entire planet.

I definitely am positive that global warming is happening and I am also certain that a portion of this is man-made. However, nobody is certain of what the exact effects of that will be on life and humanity. It will certainly suck. There will be migrations. There will be bad weather. There will be extinctions. But we don't know what all of that means in any real context. All I know is that GW deniers cannot be convinced that GW is even an issue. So I personally have no issue with letting them drive the car into a brick wall as fast as they want.

We aren't dealing in science, anymore. We are dealing in policy, rhetoric, and ideology. When morons want to thin the herd in Darwinian fashion... I personally have no problem with it.

Comment Re: Scientists, give up. They need to be SHOWN. (Score 1) 618

You're missing the point entirely. Regardless of how many people knew that the earth was roundish or flattish... it is irrelevant. You are obviously one of those people who actually believe these deniers can be convinced of reality.

Remember, people "knew" cigarettes caused cancer. Yet still denial abounded. People died. It took decades just for deniers to finally admit the truth... and even the wrongdoing. This is different, how? You may think my arguments flimsy. But you aren't saying anything by saying that.

But I'm not arguing anything at this point except for let nature take its course. The scientists have done all they can. Short of going to war and forcing nations to change... there is nothing else that cam be done.

Comment Scientists, give up. They need to be SHOWN. (Score 1) 618

I said it in another post, but enough data has been provided. If non-scientists/engineers/skeptics/ideologues don't agree with the data or the context that it is placed in, then the discussion is over and completely useless. Nobody believes the data because they don't trust the source of the data, the people drawing the conclusions and they need to *visually* see the conclusions drawn in action. Merely showing models is not enough.

Back when scientists were saying that the world was a globe and not flat... there was a TON of data to support that theory. The ideologues and skeptics at the time simply would not believe it. It took countries sponsoring suicide ship voyages across the ocean to prove it. It wasn't until these ships didn't fall off the edge of the earth that the skeptics and doubters believed the earth was spherical.

So I had a thought. Perhaps the quickest way to addressing climate change is to do the same thing. Sponsor a "suicide mission to the end of the ocean". Scientists should push hard to lift all regulations on fossil fuels and carbon emissions. The world needs to be *shown* catastrophe. Don't slow down the progress. Speed it up so that we can deal with it, already.

So stop funding all of this climate change research. Support the deregulation of fossil fuels and carbon emissions. Put the funds into disaster relief and global catastrophe planning. I think that actually may bear more fruit.

Comment Re:Give up scientists. The discussion is useless.. (Score 1) 504

I'm open minded, I'm willing to accept another 'truth' if people can provide the source data, I don't push my own view on to others.

"People" have provided the source data. If you don't agree with the data or the context that it is placed in, then the discussion is over and completely useless. Back when scientists were saying that the world was a globe and not flat... there was a TON of data provided to support that theory. The ideologues and skeptics at the time simply would not believe it. It took suicide ship voyages across the ocean to prove it. Nobody believed the data because they didn't trust the source of the data. It wasn't until these ships didn't fall off the edge of the earth that the skeptics and doubters believed the earth was spherical.

This is no different. The skeptics and ideologues will believe in the causes, effects, and presence of global warming/climate shift when they see it happen with their own eyes. When they truly have to deal with it. Not one minute before.

The problem with scientists is that they are too idealistic and believe that merely producing a hypothesis, supporting data, and conclusions are enough. Even if thousands of scientists do independent studies confirming the same hypothesis, producing the same data, and coming to the same conclusions... it is not enough. Scientists have not learned their lesson. The world cannot be saved until the world is ready to be saved. A country cannot have freedom until its people are ready to have it.

To me, scientists really just need to stick with near-term science. Research for advances in technology or the treatment of disease. Research for advances in farming. This kind of research produces simple, immediate results that are visible to skeptical non-scientists. But long-term global science is pretty useless. It doesn't matter how much data is produced. Skeptics believe what they see with their own eyes... and models are not enough.

Comment Give up scientists. The discussion is useless... (Score 0, Troll) 504

The world is filled with skeptics, nihilists, and ideologues. There is no point to these discussions anymore. The presentation of scientific data to most people is now considered to be the same kind of data that Malcolm Gladwell or Michael Lewis publishes. Basically, just opinions and fun facts. Scientists, climatologists, and the (minority of) people who believe in global warming need to just give up, already. You are not being listened to, anymore.

I definitely understand the impact that global warming is having. I see the data. I know it is there. But get real. We are a world who still allows genocides to occur unchecked unless there is profit to be made. We are a world who still straps dynamite to our bodies and runs into buildings. We are a world who grows and creates enough food for the whole planet to eat... but allow millions of people to die each year of starvation and illnesses related to malnourishment.

Given those things... somehow this world is supposed to give two fucks about a gradual global increase in temperature that will result in a severe climate shift and cause extinctions, deaths, and population relocation? Since when did the world at large give a shit about anything outside their own backyard? Since NEVER.

Here's reality. Climate shift and global warming will not be dealt with until it starts costing rich people a lot of money. When that happens, you'll see action. Until then, you aren't going to see shit.

As the saying goes, "Money makes the world go round".

Comment IBM has been dying for years... (Score 4, Informative) 194

I used to work at IBM (as a senior-level manager) and I can say truthfully that the only way IBM is going to make it is if it completely lets go almost all of its business units and rebuilds from the ground up. Every single LOB they have is archaic. I remember when I was first hired at IBM. They showed every new employee a propaganda video which was like a 10 minute montage of IBM's innovation since it started. That video ended with the final innovation -- landing on the moon. That's right. The last real innovation IBM truly contributed to was LANDING ON THE MOON. Fifty years ago.

In the last 20 years, all IBM has done is try to innovate through acquisitions. Buy a company. Put together a five year business plan to milk the acquiree's customers. "Blue wash" their products. Push new IBM bloatware to those customers. Get rid of 95% of the acquiree's employees through attrition... and replace them with IBM employees from other liquidated business units. Wash, rinse, repeat.

They have a requirement for all business units to ensure that a certain percentage of the workforce was offshore. Also, since their HR review process uses comparison against your peers... people get fired or put on performance plans every quarter. I remember going into ridiculous meetings where my boss would tell me that I didn't have enough of my peopl eranked as low performers... I needed to come up with some names. Didn't matter if my entire team met their personal goals. I had to rate a certain percentage a "3" or my boss would do it for me. Wonderful. IBM used to have a policy of matching 401k contributions with each paycheck. Well, they changed that to a one-time match in December. The kicker there was that if you got laid off/fired before December... then you lost all of your match. Nice, eh? It just so happened that the big layoffs came before the 401k match date. Lots of wonderful cost savings for IBM.

Meanwhile... during periods where several consecutive quarters of revenue misses happened... and tens of thousands of people were fired... Ginni Rometty and her peers received millions of dollars in bonuses. Nice, eh?

I could go on and on. But IBM is simply a crap company. My advice to anybody would be to stay away from there. If your company gets acquired by IBM... stick around for three years. Collect your paycheck, come in late every day, go as slow as possible in your daily work, don't fret while IBM ruins your product by demanding you include 20 year-old technology into your shiny product. Then leave after you are fully vested. Leave immediately and don't look back.

If you are a new college graduate and you get hired by IBM, stick around for no more than two years. You will get a much better job elsewhere. But do not stay.

IBM is a dying company. It has been shitting the bed pan for the last five years and it is only going to get worse. Steer clear.

Comment Re:Then he's doing it wrong. (Score 1) 720

I wish I had mod points. Your post is the absolutely most concise and insightful in this entire thread. It is also completely correct. This Swedish scientist is the equivalent of one of those scientists who says that climate change isn't happening.

I also agree with one of the posters who said that this scientist having a model is a good thing -- even if it is wrong. A model lets the rest of the community put it to the test, change it, and improve it. There have been many predictive models which estimate the number of earth-like planets out there. I haven't seen a model which says that earth-like planets absolutely should not exist at all... and that earth itself is an infinitesimal anomaly.

If anything, the model should provide a nice contrast to test opposing models. Definitely a good thing.

Comment Software development has become idiotic... (Score 4, Insightful) 186

... I swear. Lean, SCRUM, XP, Agile, Waterfall, Kanban, Scrumban, TDD, BDD, Pair Programming, Code Review, User Stories... etc... etc... etc.

How about just be a responsible craftsman, understand the customer's requirements and needs, and implement your solution responsibly and with integrity? Whatever that means. If you need to pull someone in, then do it. If you don't, then don't. Christ, how complicated is this? It's one thing to be a junior developer and having to learn things. Fine. But an experienced software developer should not require constant canoodling to get their job done responsibly, with integrity, and with good quality. Is it really that hard?

I'm from a pretty old-school programming upbringing -- back when you were a "Programmer" or "Analyst" or "Programmer/Analyst". I'll tell you in those days... if a programmer demanded this kind of ridiculous hand-holding, canoodling, and process-implementation to get their job done... they would be fired. Plain and simple. This industry has become awash with process and tool zealots... while knowing the customer's needs be damned.

Comment Hope the story is good..because the minutia sucks. (Score 0) 73

The movie was better than the book. This guy is like the second-coming of Michael Crichton -- on steroids. The level of detailed minutia he creates is entertaining at first but quickly becomes tiresome. The only reason "The Martian" is remotely decent as a book is because the story he thought up was actually good. The microscope level of detail was absolutely unnecessary.

I think the guy actually has a decent ability to create and tell a story. But he doesn't need to prove the feasibility of his stories to the audience. It's fine to suspend belief sometimes. Especially in science fiction, right?

I just hope the story he tells in this new book is as good as it was in his last one. Otherwise, the book is going to be horrible.

Comment What happened to programmers testing their code??? (Score 1) 216

My first programming job was working in a food manufacturing company as a junior programmer. There was a team of programmer/analysts. We knew the business of food manufacturing. We understood our own business. We understood the day-to-day jobs of employees who had to use our software. We tested our own code. There was no formal "QA" for the software. Part of the job was testing the code. If you didn't test your code, repeatedly had failures, your ass was fired. It's as simple as that.

Most pieces of software do not require a separate formal team to test it. All it requires are programmers who understand what they are doing, what business they are in, and how their software is going to be used. What the hell has happened to this business?

Woodworkers have more capability, domain understanding, and work ethic than programmers these days. A good woodworker tests their angles for trueness. They design their cut sheets to maximize wood usage and eliminate scrap waste. They test their joints for racking. They will sand every edge of a piece to make sure no blood can ever be drawn. They will make sure that every plane is perfectly level.

If you want to be a good programmer, get off your lazy ass and make an effort to understand your customer and the business you are developing software for. Test your own code and be intellectually honest with yourself while you do. If you need to automate, fine, but automate where it makes sense. Test things that make sense. If you do that, most of your code will be free of critical bugs.

If this was Yahoo's goal, then good for them.

Submission + - Donald Trump: America should consider "closing the Internet up in some way" ( 1

Patrick O'Neill writes: Hours after Donald Trump suggested the U.S. ban Muslims from entering the United States, the leading Republican presidential candidate said America should also consider “closing the Internet up in some way” to fight Islamic State terrorists in cyberspace. Trump mocked anyone who would object that his plan might violate the freedom of speech, saying “these are foolish people, we have a lot of foolish people ... We have to go see Bill Gates,” Trump said, to better understand the Internet and then possibly “close it up.”

Slashdot Top Deals

Honesty is for the most part less profitable than dishonesty. -- Plato