Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


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:The first question that comes to mind (Score 1) 249

is "Are women and minorities mistreated more often, or are white men more tolerant of being mistreated?"

Unfortunately, there's no possible way to ask that question that won't produce an hysterical, blind hatred response from pretty much everybody.

Let's try this one.

It's possible either through basic expectations, or being sold a bill of goods, that many women are convinced both that they can have it all, and that the workplace is a place of fulfillment and happiness.

And yet, none of us actually has it all. I had as much as I could, but juggling a family life and professionalism, I really had to juggle my schedule, and work a lot of extra hours.

And just as a personal observation, so many women came into the workplace looking at it as a sprint to success. That somehow you would work hard for acouple years, then rest on your laurels. It's not a sprint - it's a marathon.

The final issue ties in with the second one. There is competition in the workplace. Not the beat someone in a sport or anger type competition, but one in which some people are willing to work harder and longer. I think this is a guy thing. I have it. If I am willing to work longer and harder, should I be punished for that? Because I have worked with women who do a very good job, but they put in 8 hours, and no more. I am convinced that they believe that competition between employees is mistreatment.

Some of this is conjecture, but all of it is based upon workplace experience. As for the cure, I am not so certain what will work. I think that males have made a lot of adjustments, but it is possible that to achieve equal success, that females might have to make the final adjustment. We always expect insant results, and perhaps meeting in the middle might expedite that.

Is that blind hatred?

Comment Re:The Answer Comes Around 1am (Score 1) 249

if you want to see who is most successful in IT just watch who walks out the office's front door at 1am, exhausted, stumbling to their car.

To me it does not sound like "successful" more like "loser".

Yup, and for some people, who cannot be bothered to expend any more than a minimum effort, they believe they are the ones who are winning.

I've seen enough people like that come and go over the years.

No muchacho, they lost.

I worked hard, and as needed, and I provided for and raised a family and was involved in my family, and retired at 55 because I did put in the work, and was compensated for it. The people my age who wouldn't allow the place to " take advantage of them" are either still working, and wil be for the next 12 years, or were really big winners, and were made redundant.

Comment Re:Perception is not Reality (Score 1) 249

Anybody that makes you be an asshole, or they won't do their job, is themselves a raging, festering, prolapsed asshole.

Exactly. There were people who thought I was an asshole - and I was to them, but they were dumasses who tried to throw up roadblocks to getting things done. And I was fucking mean when the occasion demanded it. My favorite was when someone gave me shit abot something I had to have done, and I'd give them a phone number to call. It was the director's direct line. Never a problem after that.

And upon reflection on a long career, being an asshole to them was exactly what they deserved. Some people seem to think simply doing their job was doing someone a favor. Anyone who was helpful to me? I'd run through a wall for them.

Comment Re:Literally in the Summary (Score 1) 249

Congratulations. You've just demonstrated the anti-male bias OP was implying exists in these types of reports. That statement from TFA applies to both female and male employees who left their job.

There is a very strong anti-male bias, even when it is approached in a friendly manner - see below.

If you dig up the actual report, you'll find that men left due to unfairness/mistreatment more than women - 40% vs 31%. You read the general stat and assumed it indicated a problem with how women are treated, when in fact it's men who more often feel they're mistreated.

I'm not surprised. I know that in my setting, we had a bit of a bias in hiring women over men, they came in at the same pay as the men, and we promoted them more quickly than men. I voluntarily gave up several promotions in order for a female co worker to get a promotion - stupid quota system with promotions.

Yet - they all left. Despite preferential treatment, they quit. Getting married, having children, just going back to live with the family were typical. One engineer woman left to become a personal trainer - musta been a helluva hit to the pocket, and another opened a daycare center. Some were let go during slowdowns, in large part because if myself or the other guy were let go, more people would be hired because they usually had a distinct list of what they would or wouldn't do.Travel, Overtime, and non standard work hours were a no-no. One of the biggest problems when there were personnel conflicts? Other women.

In the end, even though I missed a number of promotions, I was paid a lot more than the others. And there were a few complaints over the years. Quickly taken care of by the boss who asked if they wanted to do what I did. No takers. The actual report makes pretty interesting reading. The stats are all over the place. Women report experiencing or seeing more mistreatment, but reported experiencing stereotyping at roughly the same rate as men (23% vs 24% for minority men vs women, 14% vs 12 % for white/asian men vs women). The rate of unwanted sexual attention is drastically higher in the tech industry than other industries (10% vs 6%), but the rate of unwanted sexual attention reported by women is only slightly higher than by men (10% vs 8%). For bullying and harassment, white/asian women reported a lower incident rate than white/asian men (15% vs 16%). But minority women reported a substantially higher rate than minority men (13% vs 9%). You'll also notice minorities reported a lower harassment rate than whites/asians. I highly recommend reading the actual report if you're curious about this stuff. It doesn't really fit into any of the stereotypes (hah) about male/female or white/asian vs minorities.

Comment Re:Literally in the Summary (Score 1) 249

You get paid according to the agreement you had with your employer. If you don't like the terms of your employment then you need to renegotiate-- you have no right to complain about what you agreed to.

And we learn that showing up as late as possible, and doing as little as possible is the hot ticket. Jesus was such a commie.

Comment Re:Literally in the Summary (Score 1) 249

In the USA they are required to keep you job (or one just like it) open. There is an expectation that the parent will return.

Contractors see these, short term, might turn perm, roles all the time.

If you believe this doesn't affect the job prospects of childbearing age women, I've got a bridge to sell you. But it _should_ affect their job prospects, just like any other real factor. The law be damned.

Yup.We had a woman who had three children over a roughly 8 year period. Took off over a year each. We were required to give her he job back.

That meant that three other women who were working as replacement lost their jobs.

And it is important, now that we talk about equal pay for equal work. I was quite dependable, and would come in early and work late, work nights and weekends, and travel. If another person of the same job description but only works 6 years out of ten, won't work more than 40 hours a week, and won't work any other times than 8 to 5, and refuses to travel, due the same compensation I am?

This is not a trivial question. Saying yes brings up a whole other set of problems, Continuity of work and needed expenditures for more employees by the employer means something. If people who do less overall work than I do, I'm outa there, because I know what I'm worth.

Comment Re:Idiocy (Score 1) 136

Energy losses by distance will be much smaller with a focused beam (depending on the efficiency of the technology, closing on 100%).

Beaming increases the effected radiated power. It doesn't change what happens to the signal after it leaves the antenna. It obeys all the laws of physics pertaining to electromagnetic radiation.

I for one, would rather plug in my phone rather than submit myself to radiotherapy at wireless router frequencies. And where I carry my phone is perilously close to the family jewels.

Which brings up another interesting point. These devices will somehow put out high levels of power and not interfere with nearby services?

One of the problems with the computing world today is that the people who understand RF are not even in the picture, while the digital people get some strange ideas about RF. That's how we got some certifiably insane ideas like BPL or Broadband over Power Line, which had so many terrible flaws that it was simply never going to work, and the RF savvy people pointed out every flaw, but the Digital people pooh-pooed it. It even got deployed in a few locations before failing miserably along many concurrent failure modes.

tl;dr version - this ain't gonna work unless we dose everyone in the room with really unhealthy levels of electromagnetic radiation.

Comment Re:60Ghz (Score 1) 136

These "lots" of energy you are talking about are not nearly enough for a modern smartphone.

Even if you would make use of the electromagnetic radiation coming from a nuclear fusion reactor, and position your phone optimally, a harvesting panel the size of a smartphone would barely be able to gain 1W.

These ridiculous smartphone charging schemes keep coming up, and they get no less ridiculous as we go on.

Unless you are in the near field, the amount of energy you could harvest is just about none, and if you are in the near field you don't want living things in it, it you are sending out enough energy to charge phones.

It's a really bad answer to a nonexistent problem.

Comment Re:Rockies (Score 1) 477

Just because somebody can do something doesn't mean that if there is a more efficient way to do it, you wouldn't prefer to do it that way. If a shorter route crossing the Rockies had actually been a more efficient way to transport oil than a longer pipeline not crossing the mountains, you would expect that other companies would have emulated this pipeline. But they didn't.

There is a huge amount of opposition in Canada, so more likely they are taking the path of less resistance. In addition, the poor quality crude is hard enough to pump already. Plus, the plan is to mix it with some higher quality crude to make it less asphalt road topping in nature, which they need from the USA (I'm not certain where that mixing is occurring) But that really shouldn't be the USA's problem.

It's a political triumph of the will litmus test.

Comment Re:Keystone pipe is mainly for shipping oil to Chi (Score 1) 477

I appreciate your condescending, smug response. I liked it so much I poked around and found that Kinder Morgan built a pipeline across the Canadian rockies in the 50s and expanded it in 2004. It can transport 300k barrels a day and there are proposals to triple it. For comparison, Keystone is ~500k barrels/day.

I suspect that Canada is wishing to send their bottom of the barrel quality oil though the new majick pipeline shortcut so we can deal with the damage. The tar sands have to be heated then mixed with some actual high quality crude, and pumped at high pressure just to get it through the pipelines. That's an interesting recipe.

Regardless, there is a lot of opposition to them building a new pipeline in their own country. I'm pretty certain they can't use the old ones because they would blow out.

Slashdot Top Deals

The IBM purchase of ROLM gives new meaning to the term "twisted pair". -- Howard Anderson, "Yankee Group"