Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Rewording (Score 1) 126

Happier people buy higher-end smartphones. It's obvious that this is complete BS because the aforementioned or article-mentioned points can be debunked AND proven. Is this is statistical push by Samsung to subconsciously quell those in fear and get their name back out there as a "Happy" product? I thought that "Happy Happy xyz" crap only worked in Japan.

Comment Re:easily made up in peripherals. (Score 1) 519

Speaking as an admin, the number of mac users that request elegant peripherals is not trivial. Magic mouse? if one guy on the floor got one, youre dropping $80 a piece to make sure all your mac users get one. wireless headphones? sure hes the only guy in the office with Beats by Dre but pad your budget because everyone will want them at $300. add up all the magic trackpads magic keyboards and magic fuzzy accessories the average user wants and it starts to rival what you paid to buy and image a Dell. and if things ever get too hairy for a dell, your restore process is entirely automated in windows or linux. restoring a mac is nothing short of corporate witchcraft.

and remember, your fanboi doesnt want a used magic tracpad...he wants a new one.

But but but... You don't have to waste money supporting them! Psh.

Comment Re:"Times Less" Makes No Sense (Score 1) 519

I don't know if it's just me, but I feel like I've seen this construction a lot more in recent weeks, and it really bugs me.

That's usually an indication that it's working in someone's favor. It gets more attention because people don't understand the fallacy of its logic; lack of understanding leads to more use/support of it to try to prove to others that they know what they don't.

I don't know why that condition exists. When I don't know something, I say, "I don't know."

Comment Re:Kind of a small startup for statistics (Score 1) 80

If they converted 1160 "qualified on 'paper'" applicants to (say) 205 next round of interview applicants and eliminated all of one ethnicity in that process then statistics are a fine way to show bias. 25 and 7 ultimate positions aren't enough to use statistics alone to make the case, particularly when 11 out of the 25 and one out of the 7 were asian. So, the number of cases where they claim bias did the decision making are 10 or fewer. I'm not saying that the department of labor is wrong. But, I am saying that it's idiotic to use only statistical mathematics to argue about 10 decisions. They need additional evidence of bias.

Agreed. Side-note and would love to hear your thoughts on this (this is a real question, not some BS or trick)...

Pre-question info - if you have 100 applicants; 40 asian; 30 white; 20 hispanic; 10 misc... They all have resumes that show that they meet the direct technical knowledge specifications for a position (e.g. Oracle Database Migration, Windows Server 2008+ administration, etc) but have an interesting little logic which is perfectly valid in there: "able to think outside the box".

All 100 are interviewed. It is confirmed and even on video that out of all of the applicants, when given a complex logic question that doesn't have a "book answer", 15 of the whites were creative and even cunning, 9 of the asians were, 5 hispanic were, and 1 misc. was... You interview another time and find that out of all of the ones that were capable, 5 old whites, 1 asian, no hispanics, and and nix the misc. were capable of completing a logical jump while weighing risk and sometimes even simplifying the issue to the point of realizing that it didn't require analysis/etc. Fact: the 5 old whites had experience, hands-on and not. The asian had only read in college text how stuff works (etc etc) and didn't get the concept of what was being analyzed.

Question - if you have a deadline and need people right now to solve a major problem that you company could go under if it didn't solve, you decide to hire the 5 whites and the asian, even though the asian was incapable of meeting the non-specific requirement of essentially "thinking abstract/outside the box" with actual demonstrable sessions... Do you feel it's fair for your company to get a complaint and investigation which shows you were not meeting the required numbers for "equality"?

I ask the question because I think it's the biggest load of horse shit in employment. In places I've worked, the residency of the surrounding area was primarily white. Another was a nice mix of all. Another was a mix of all but for IT positions, 90% were white applicants; the rest didn't even have the education nor were they interested. I've been denied a position I was a perfect match for (I had inside info) and a young African-Ameican was hired who didn't meet all of the qualifications and was basically asking others questions every day to figure out how to do their work because it was something they were completely unfamiliar with. They didn't ever "get it" and were terminated for "lack of work" just to avoid BS when, really, they were canned because they weren't getting work done without draining from the resources from the rest of the team.

I don't know if I'm missing something that's key and obvious or if I'm just a casualty of reality. I fail to understand why a company must risk / essentially waste money to meet racial requirements when the applicants that are hired to meet said requirements DO NOT. Don't even come close. At the same time, a perfectly qualified person who is looking for work after moving back to their "home" city after spending years in other cities seeing that it wasn't 'for them' is denied a job they are perfectly qualified for and the interviewers loved. To get hit with that shit and be expected to feel there is "equality" is complete, said above, horse shit. I get sick to my stomach thinking about it because the position was a dream job, not just a perfect job I was qualified for.

Comment Re:guilty! (Score 1) 80

Or maybe they, *gasp*, hire based on qualifications and merit rather than some racist guideline the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has laid out.

Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome.

You are NOT allowed to do that. EVER. BAD, Anonymous commenter. BAD! *rolls up newspaper*

Comment Re:the source (Score 1) 37

say(rnd() % 1 ? "hope" : "change)

This is very educational! The whole time I thought they were doing web searches about the most popular or dangerous topics of the day, ranking them, having humans sift through them and pick duplicates, use the duplicates to verify that they are not biased, and using AI to learn from previous interactions what the key words are after content is delivered; this allowed them to find what words to respond to with "hope" and/or "change" prefixed, suffixed, or inserted before and or after "to" and "and". This code has embarrassed my analytical skills severely. I can't believe it was that simple all along. now that I see it, it's SO OBVIOUS. /humor :)

Comment Re:Numbers (Score 1) 53

China's GDP is about 2/3rds that of the U.S. So yes it is a bit surprising that iOS app store revenue is greater for China than for the U.S. My guess would be the later introduction of the iPhone and iPad into China means people there are still in the "stocking up on apps they want" stage, while Americans left that phase 4-5 years ago.

I've been educated. Thanks. Embarrassing.

Comment Re:Numbers (Score 1) 53

You're examining a derived figure for a restricted activity and comparing it as an indicator of economic welfare. Smart phones are luxury items with restricted distribution based on service. That is before the element of the restricted app market itself. The best app is for geolocated weather forecasts that farmers can use.

I bow. You have a good point there.

Oh, and no pun intended. :)

Comment Re:yes, and? (Score 1) 122

Everyone has their price.

Let's play a game. Would you eat a dog turd for 20 bucks? If you're like most people, you just had a "are you fucking kidding me? That'd be disgusting!" moment. You saw the amount I threw out there, but it was so low that you didn't give it a second thought.

Now, what if I asked you if you'd eat a dog turd for 20,000? Bet you're considering it. 200,000? Even more so. 2,000,000...20,000,000... well, you get the idea.

Let's bring this back around to the samsung situation; they hoped to control the dialog, and in order to do that they need to control the news reports. If they could have gotten this guy on the payroll, it would have lessened the PR damage. They were already on the hook for the recall, they had to have known it, but perhaps they were looking to salvage the brand name.

The only fault I have with this behavior is that they misread the situation and lowballed the guy. Some dumbass manager probably pulled the "penny wise pound foolish" card.

Agreed. You have a good point.

Side note... after you said "pound foolish", my brain jumped to creating some twitter thingie or something.. hash tag? As you can see, the end result is that I don't use Twitter. LOL.

Comment Re:non-news is non-news (Score 1) 159

Good point? on what basis? There is hardly any evidence to support his conjecture.

There is pretty good evidence to support it from their point and mine; you just have to desire to accept it or discard it:

Personal observation. I know (and don't know but observe) 100, 150, something like that people and their habits. My observations match up with the "point" that the parent comment made about "low end customers", expanding to "target buyer" in my logical jump, based on my observational data.

Slashdot Top Deals

... when fits of creativity run strong, more than one programmer or writer has been known to abandon the desktop for the more spacious floor. -- Fred Brooks