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


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:Typical of the Federal Government too (Score 1) 185

I work for a product design company. We work with (consult for) companies that want to bring a product to market but don't have the internal engineering expertise or capacity to do it themselves. There are a lot of companies like this. They employ some engineers to create specifications and make technical decisions, but not enough engineers to complete the project in a reasonable time.

I have trouble believing that a normal IT department is equipped to do a large-scale migration, especially when they need to continue supporting all their normal business operations.

In summary, if you want to be successful with a large software project--and large software projects aren't what your business does, you probably need outside help that does it routinely. Then the question becomes how you evaluate this outside help's qualifications, how you write your contract, how you set your milestones, and how you communicate your requirements. But that's an entirely different story.

Comment Re:US Agencies warning about other US Agencies? (Score 5, Informative) 292

You are exactly right. This column by Glenn Greenwald is timely, and a far better source than "InfoWorld". Here are some select quotes:

This massive new expenditure of money is not primarily devoted to defending against cyber-aggressors. The US itself is the world's leading cyber-aggressor. A major purpose of this expansion is to strengthen the US's ability to destroy other nations with cyber-attacks. Indeed, even the Post report notes that a major component of this new expansion is to "conduct offensive computer operations against foreign adversaries".

As Wired's Ryan Singel wrote: "[McConnell is] talking about changing the internet to make everything anyone does on the net traceable and geo-located so the National Security Agency can pinpoint users and their computers for retaliation."

Don't forget that McConnell is the chode who got the telecoms retroactively immunized for their participation in the illegal NSA domestic spying program.

Comment Re:Corporate Taxes == Political Favoritism (Score 1) 780

You are shifting the goal posts. Your argument was that corporate profit is double-taxed. I have refuted that and nothing in this reply addresses that point. Your only claim is entirely unsubstantiated, when you say that, "That money will eventually be spent." My first link illustrated that corporate cash-on-hand is rising faster now than historically, but it has still risen historically. It cannot rise if it is "eventually" spent, unless if you are comically measuring time in decades or lifetimes.

Comment Re:Corporate Taxes == Political Favoritism (Score 1) 780

Every dollar of profit is not taxed eventually. For the most part, corporations sit on their profits to increase cash-on-hand [1]. This increases flexibility for them, gives them better banking terms, and causes share price to increase. This increases the wealth of those who own the shares, but this increase in wealth is untaxed unless these shares were to be sold. Once you are a millionaire or billionaire, you don't need to sell shares--instead, you can take out loans against them [2].

Effectively, reducing corporate tax to 0% would be a 100% loss. Corporations do not spend more money on cap ex just because they have more cash on hand. Similarly, they do not increase salaries; U.S. wages have fallen by more than 50% since 1970 (in inflation-adjusted dollars) [3].

Here are my references, which are pretty half-assed since I just googled for stuff I'd already read and linked the first similar thing. But hey, it's already 50% more informative than the average post.
[1] http://blogs.reuters.com/david-cay-johnston/2012/07/16/idle-corporate-cash-piles-up/
[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/opinion/the-zuckerberg-tax.html?_r=0
[3] http://www.thestreet.com/story/11480568/1/us-standard-of-living-has-fallen-more-than-50-opinion.html

Comment WTF is Righthaven (Score 5, Informative) 169

If you are like me, you thought, "What the fuck is Righthaven?"

Righthaven LLC [is] the Las Vegas “technology company” that has been filing copyright infringement lawsuits in ... Nevada against numerous unsuspecting website owners (almost always without notice) for copyright infringement of news articles originally published in the Las Vegas Review Journal.

Via http://www.righthavenlawsuits.com/.

Slashdot Top Deals

In English, every word can be verbed. Would that it were so in our programming languages.