Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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:that's what's supposed to happen (Score 2) 119

Your comment got rated funny, but that's exactly what happened to cotton and corn. Of course the machines started low tech, but now they've got GPS self driving harvesters that use computer vision systems to sort the product as it's picked.

Of course the machine will be heavily DRM w/o the right for farmers to repair (but that's another problem),

Out of one fire, into another. Gotta feel for those farmers. It's a tough line of work. Foreign price pressure constantly threatens offshoring, Global warming threatening their water supply. Agri-chemical companies creating sterile seeds and pesticide dependency...

Comment Re: Those intel mobile modems must be geting good (Score 1) 57

I agree in terms of Qualcomm turning the screws. That's ridiculous on their part. I was just saying that it's not like Apple has no other options in terms of looking for a chip manufacturer they can partner with. Although I am ignorant as to contractual obligations and admittedly didn't RTFA...

Well if you believe Qualcomm's position: you pay the same royalty rate *regardless* of who you buy your modem chip from.

*If you buy a modem chip from Qualcomm, in addition to paying qualcomm for the chip, you need to pay royalties on the total wholesale price of your handset.
*If instead you buy your modem chip from another vendor that does 3G/4G or CDMA (say intel), you need to pay Qualcomm the same royalties.

So basically Qualcomm wants royalties based on the total wholesale price of the handset even if they didn't sell you a single chip in that handset because they believe you cannot implement device that interfaces to a 3G/4G or CDMA cell-tower without licencing their wireless patents. Although nobody likes this situation, only Apple has decided not to pay (other than a few chinese companies that use the proprietary chinese TD-CDMA scheme and only sell handsets to the internal chinese market).

Comment Re: Those intel mobile modems must be geting good (Score 1) 57

Don't know if that assertion is accurate. I've played around with several different chipsets for home projects. Both CDMA and GSM varieties. None of these were stamped as Qualcomm. Sure they are a huge player, but...

What Apple is mainly objecting to is the Qualcomm royalty model for use of its patent portfolio. Qualcomm charges a royalty of approximately 3% to 5% based on the *entire wholesale price of the handset unit* (not just the price of the chip that Qualcomm may or maynot have made).

Comment Re: Fair terms ? (Score 1) 57

if must be hard to be so uneducated

It must be hard to have a typing disability... ;^P

Perhaps one should instead be thankful to be blissfully ignorant of what a Separation Memorandum of Understanding (aka a legal precursor to draft a separation settlement agreement which usually finalized in a divorce agreement). Sometimes life is less complicated when one is ignorant of such things...

Comment Re:Fire my company when I work after hours or week (Score 1) 386

>Non-exempt employees can be required to work some overtime,

No one can require you to work. Even in prison, where labor is paid under minimum wage (and that's a supreme court case waiting to happen), they cannot force you to work. The punishment is torture, in the case of prison.

Okay, Non-exempt employees can be required *as part of an implied contract of continued employment* to work some overtime...
Basically the law allows for not accepting overtime work requirements as a valid condition of dismissal. Of course nobody can *force* you to work, you can always quit and they can pretty much fire you for any reason (unless it is specifically protected by the law). In fact, I have quit a job before because my employer required overtime (and if I had not quit, I suspect I would have been fired). I know many folks who have done this do and I'm sure this has happened many times to many people over the course of history and apparently for the most part, it is perfectly legal.

Thanks for spreading bullshit!

Always happy to do that on the internet...

Wat. It's like you're giving legal advice on the Internet, complete with citing laws from the Dept of Labor, and then saying "IANAL and I know nothing of employment laws".

People who take legal advice from the internet pretty much get what they pay for, right? Is this your first time reading posts on the internet or "Wat"?

Comment Re:Company's Fault (Score 3, Interesting) 283

The most common reason they gave for their departures was workplace mistreatment.

If that reason is given more often by women and minorities then it is whites and men... perhaps companies ARE mistreating women and minorities which WOULD make it the company's fault.

It's possible that those groups just "perceive" mistreatment more often, or they could actually be being mistreated more.

Being the perennial centrist, on-the-fence person that I am- I don't know which is the real reason.

Admittedly, I have limited perspective on this, but I often I observe the *company* treatment is probably better for women and under-represented minorities, but the *co-worker* treatment is probably much worse for women and under-represented minorities. True that a part of the *co-worker* treatment is part of the company culture and that part might be the company's responsibility, but you can't make co-workers treat each other non-awkwardly in situations that aren't strictly business related, and that makes the co-worker treatment situation very difficult to fix within a human generation of time.

I feel that many folks still want companies to function as some sort of in loco parentis as if working a jobs was some sort of extended university stint. That seems like a bit old fashion to me, but I suspect a large number of people feel that since workers are somehow *dependents* of a company, the company owes some responsibility or duty to the employees. Sadly, as in real life not all entities are wired to be parents, even those that actually have children.

On the other hand workplace norms on overwork demands in the tech business (like many other male dominated industries) are probably not very compelling for some populations and that would be also very difficult to fix within a human generation of time as well. We are long past the "puritan" work ethics that launched our industrial age...

Comment Re:You can't generalize. (Score 1) 386

Anyone who works on unauthorized personal projects should certainly expect to be subject to firing. But as a supervisor I would make the decision to fire based on what is best for my employer. That depends on a lot of things.

I don't believe in automatic zero tolerance responses. The question for me is whether the company better off booting this guy or disciplining him. Note this intrinsically unfair. Alice is a whiz who gets all of her work done on time and to top quality standards. Bob is a mediocre performer who is easily replaced. So Alice gets a strong talking to and Bob gets the heave-ho, which is unfair to Bob because Alice did exactly the same thing.

But there's a kind of meta-fairness to it. Stray off the straight and narrow and you subject yourself to arbitrary, self-interested reactions.

Now as to Alice, I would (a) remind her that anything she creates on company time belongs to the company (even if we're doing open source -- we get to choose whether the thing is distributed) and (b) that any revenue she derives from it rightly belongs to the company. But again there's no general rule other than maximize the interests of the company. I'll probably insist she shut down the project immediately and turn everything over to the company, but not necessarily. I might choose to turn a blind eye. Or maybe even turn a blind eye until Alice delivers on her big project, then fire her and sue her for the side project revenues if I thought we didn't need her any longer. If loyalty is a two-way street, so is betrayal.

Sure, you may rationalize working on a side project as somehow justified by the fact your employer doesn't pay you what you're really worth, but the grown-up response to that is to find a better job; if you can't, by definition in a market economy you are getting paid at least what you're worth. If you decide to proceed by duplicity, you can't expect kindness or understanding unless you can compel it.

So let me get this straight. In this scenario your are Eve?

Comment Re:Fire my company when I work after hours or week (Score 1) 386

By that logic I should fire my company for making me work after hours and weekends on their projects.

That's called quitting... You are free to do that do that if you want to...

If you're an hourly employee, its different. If you are a salaried employee you are paid to do a set of tasks and projects. If you complete those that's really what matters. If I need to work on side project for 20 minutes at 1PM and then need to work on a work project at 2AM it all works out in the end.

Not according to current labor laws. Non-exempt employees can be required to work some overtime, it is just that non-exempt employees have to be paid for it (unlike exempt employee that must be on a salary). Similarly both exempt and non-exempt employees are allowed to refuse to work more than 72 hours a week or when statutory safety time limitations are reached. About the only "real" difference is are the required extra pay for overtime for non-exempt employees and the minimum salary and job duties required to be classified as exempt.

Now how your employer feels about your ability to continue collect a paycheck from them in the future, that is another issue entirely. The most of employment law that doesn't have to do with discrimination mostly just proscribes compensation for work already performed, not the future employment continuation...

Often working on two jobs (esp on salary) can create an implied conflict of interest which in most cases can be considered a "just-cause" reason for termination which would preclude unemployment benefits, although an objection for a specific situation might mitigate that. Either way an employer could fire you (in most at-will employment states). That is why it is always best to get a mutual understanding of the job with your employer up front rather than rely on anecdotal ideas about "salaried" and "hourly" employees.

Comment Re:Save 30%, retire early (Score 1) 544

I recognize that it's silly, however I didn't create the conditions for this silliness - alimony and child support laws did. Before you get up in arms over 'not supporting your kids' bear in mind that by law support only needs to get paid to the woman. What she does with it is largely, or entirely in you're in CA, not their worry. So in essence kids often don't get the support anyway. I estimate on a good day my kids might see $.25 on the dollar.

If you are concerned about your kids not getting support, why not seek full custody? I understand this isn't always feasible (and doesn't totally eliminate alimony), but you gotta do what you gotta do for your kids, right?

OTOH, I realize the not every couple is cut-out for marriage, and probably someday the US will be more like some European countries where getting married is becoming less common (even with kids), but I for one will be sad when that day comes... I know a few couples that did it that way (mostly for marriage tax penalty reasons), but it seems to me that it really puts a big barrier in their relationship to continually have to sign contracts/agreements/documents to remind them of their status and shared responsibilities (kids, mortgage, insurance, etc) year after year. Maybe I'm a hopeless romantic that's gonna get screwed some day, but at least for now, I can enjoy the fiction of assuming most of my fellow men/women would share a general sense of equity and reasonableness. It's a world view that I'd hate to lose. I'd rather just get a prenup/postnup than be reminded year after year...

Comment Re:My BS detector is going off like crazy (Score 1) 271

Gee, without a stent I would be dead since your coronary collapses and without it your heart dies.
So I guess I and other stent recipients are alive for some other reason such as __ fill in the blank.


Unfortunately, a stent is often kind of a stopgap which can be used in some situations to attempt to avoid bypass surgery. Your cardiologist should have told you that stents are primarily inserted to provide symptomatic relief from angina and chest pain related to coronary artery disease and blocked arteries. Medical studies like this one have not shown that they actual reduce the rate of Myocardial Infarction (aka heart attacks).

Also, long term studies of stents show that 35-40% suffer restenosis (a bit better with a drug-eluting stent). The jury is out if a stent will actually save your life in the future or not relative to this risk.

Comment Re:Michael Phelps diet (Score 1) 271

It really doesnt matter what you eat. All diet fads are bullshit.

The important thing is burning off what you consume. Farmer John could eat lots of fat and meat then work the fields for 12 hours, and be thin and healthy. But if Desk Jockey Julie does that she'll weigh 400 pounds and be sick.Common sense.

Swimmer Michael Phelps ate 12,000 calories a day, consisting of fried-egg sandwiches, cheese, lettuce, tomatoes, fried onions, mayonnaise, coffee, omelets, grits, french toast, powdered sugar, pancakes, pasta, ham, 2,000 calories worth of energy drinks, and pizza.

I'm no doctor, but he seems pretty healthy.

Maybe Michael Phelps' isn't the best example here.

As to the extreme nature of his diet, he's a known pot head and has been diagnosed with ADHD so who knows what part of the calorie consumption is cause and effect (some drugs that are used to treat ADHD are basically stimulants)... As to "health", he also is a recovering alcoholic and likely suffers from Marfan Syndrome...

Of course he does burn a lot of calories, but most people aren't training for the olympics (nor does Mr. Phelps eat that much anymore since '08 and now that he is older, and he never at that much unless he was actively training). Given all that, I don't think he's anywhere near the center of any bell curve that is relevant to other people's metabolism...

Besides, the relationship between weight and calories is complex. What specific foods you eat and the schedule that you consume food can greatly effect this relationship (as with the standard obvious stuff like metabolic rate)...

Comment lack of socialization: evolutionary disadvange (Score 1) 108

In the long term, I don't think we need to worry too much about the human population losing the "urge" to socialize. I suspect such negative trait aspects to be bred out of the population gene pool in a few generations...

It may be a few lonely generations for a few folks though, but I'm sure computers will take care of that well enough to bridge the gap...

Comment Re:Save 30%, retire early (Score 2) 544

Plus the most important one - never get divorced as that is the most common setback people will face. My advice to my kids is to only marry someone who makes as much or more than you.

If we apply these rules across the board, basically internet match services will only need 2 criteria: sexual orientation, and monthly salary. They would then only need match those that had equal salary (within some tolerance) and compatible sexual orientation.

I had a similar discussion with a relative of mine the other day that insisted that her kids would need to "marry-up" or she would disown them. My response was how could that possibly work? Why wouldn't your future in-laws cut-off their kids for "marrying-down"? She was not happy with that response.

Comment Re:Be ready to pay more for internet (Score 1) 201

Yeah everyone's Netflix, Amazon, Apple and/or other internet costs are going to go up. Because ISP's are going to force them to pay more for the same bandwidth.

But this will somehow increase competition, because a lot more internet providers are about to come into your area. Because somehow this was holding them back...

I'm advocate of some types of net neutrality, but that's not the problem here.

  IF ISPs force Netflix/Amazon/Apple to pay more for internet, it would likely enable more competition as other companies might be in a better position to charge enough to survive (now the price of Netfix/Amazon is so low as to make low-cost disruption uneconomical).

However, this is not a likely outcome of deregulation. It is more likely is that Netflix/Amazon will use their market position to purchase monopolies on capacity from ISPs making the capacity unavailable to potential competitors. For example, zero-rating Netflix/Amazon would make it very compelling to use Netflix/Amazon vs some competing service that would count against your monthly data cap. This is the problem that needs some form of net neutrality to solve. But simply making them title II common carriers isn't the answer either...

Slashdot Top Deals

Every young man should have a hobby: learning how to handle money is the best one. -- Jack Hurley