Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Journal Journal: Shouldn't need to say "I didn't care much for Gawker but..."

The fact you have to bend over backwards to disassociate yourself with Gawker before pointing out that Thiel's assault on it was a dangerous attack on free speech is a dangerous sign that we've already drifted a fairly long distance towards fascism.

And, FWIW, if Thiel had bankrolled Elton John's (far more legitimate) lawsuits against The Sun newspaper in the 1980s, and bankrupted Rupert Murdoch as a result, there'd have been a public outcry in Britain.

Comment Re:Peter Thiel didn't bankrupt Gawker (Score 1) 132

Bankruptcy was an absurd punishment over a celebrity sex tape.

This was never about a sex tape. It was about Thiel being pissed about an expose of homophobia within silicon valley in which he was outed. The original article Gawker published about him was actually, ironically enough, relatively good journalism, about a matter of legitimate public interest, only partially spoiled by Gawker's carelessness.

You may want billionaires to dictate who can and who can't write the news. Me? I'd rather not live in a thielocracy.

Comment Re:How does that work? (Score 1) 98

That covers immunity required to execute the function of their office. This falls outside the scope of that immunity. Further this does not convey the ability to transfer that immunity to others except in the sense that some officials would have the authority to appoint people to positions which would carry immunity such as the President.

There is certainly nothing in the Constitution that would allow such, with the possible exception of a treaty. Without a grant of power and chain of authority from the Constitution U.S. codes and executive orders carry the legality of the funny pages.

Comment Re:This is why (Score 1) 225

"OTOH, the smaller the company, the less money you make as salary but the perks may be bigger (retirement, medical insurance, free parking, etc) and you have more freedom to involve yourself in more things (wear more hats). However, the work is harder and you need to know more."

I've done both and in my experience what you say is true. Small companies are where you learn what it's like to really know a technology and to rapidly absorb new technologies and really know them. If you drop someone who is used to enterprise into small company land and ask them to do something simple like build something from scratch they are usually lost. In enterprise land often the implementors, the architects, and the people who actually run and support a component are different people and even the different pieces like network, database, etc are all different people within those groups. It takes forever to actually change anything too with all the approval processes and overhead. Even the enterprise level products you use are specifically designed to thwart people who understand the underlying technology from just picking them up and figuring it them out in a few minutes while they install. Products are often intentionally obfuscated to encourage the sale of training/support and hide underlying technologies.

In a smaller company you maybe find out who can do the purchasing, tell them what to purchase, it shows up and you walk over to the rack and just do everything that is needed right then or maybe in the evening if it will disrupt something. Maybe you have a brainstorm session with a couple people and whiteboard up a plan while waiting for it to show up.

Really, I think everyone should spend a few years doing both. A small company rockstar who steps into enterprise will be overwhelmed with the scale and complexity not to mention the process. An enterprise only rockstar who steps into a small company will have too limited an exposure and won't know how to do things or rapidly figure things out. The best path is probably from small to mid to large enterprise, with a couple years in mid every decade. The person who has fought in all those trenches is going to be your MVP once he learns the environment every time.

Comment Re:Just no (Score 1) 142

Everything you've just said is why it'll blow up in their faces, and Facebook will start the uncomfortable process of announcing year on year losses of users.

They're essentially duplicating Twitter's mistakes, and not recognizing they were mistakes. Some years ago, Twitter decided to keep tweaking their service. @ replies were hidden. Trending Topics was no longer annotated. Then oodles of JS was added to their service, making it clumsy and unreliable.

Then came the real killers, images and previews. We went, overnight, from a service where everyone saw 15-20 tweets on their screens, enough to follow a conversation, to a situation where most can only see 3-5. Remember, we're talking about 140 characters of actual content per tweet here. The 3-5 was because lots of tweets would now include the headline of the article they're linking to (which would typically ALSO be in the tweet message itself), and because tweets would now frequently have images attached and have a honking great big preview there.

The people who liked Twitter suddenly found that the giant conversation part of it no longer existed. They started to bleed off. The people who used Twitter to follow celebrities continued to use it, but had no great incentive to stay.

More recently, we've seen bizarre attempts to implement message threading that were worse than the clumsy hacks we'd seen before, and even randomizing - sorry, algorithmically reorganizing the timelines.

And so Twitter started to suffer serious churn. Because it added features that nobody had asked for, nobody wants, and that harm the service for end users.

Who is asking for autoplaying videos? Who is asking for autoplaying SOUND attached to those videos? Who is asking for messages to be sorted into a semi-random order? Who asked for videos in the first place?

Nobody. People will leave Facebook. Not immediately. But give it two years, and you'll start to see the first signs their membership is over the peak, and beginning the descent to has-been website status.

Comment Re:This is why (Score 1) 225

True, there are ways, changing to a new position/title will also help but you still might make less than a new hire would in that same position because the company is all too aware of what they are already paying you. If the range for the new position is significantly higher than your current salary they know you'll be happy with the low end of that range no matter how qualified you are for the spot. A new company will make an offer based on how qualified they think you are.

Comment Re:How does that work? (Score 1) 98

"No it is an authority which is specifically given to various arms of law enforcement."

By who exactly? It still sounds like selective enforcement to me. A federal prosecutor signing off on the commission of a crime would be making themselves an accomplice subject to prosecution. Prosecutors can choose which crimes to prosecute based on the probability of successful prosecution but are not themselves immune to the law and have no authority which allows them to encourage or participate in crime. There is no such executive power, from the president on down.

Comment Re:This is why (Score 4, Insightful) 225

True but in tech there is no advancement in position anyway, the only way you get a pay increase you'll notice is to get hired at the current market rates by another company. Within 2-3 years you'll pay will have advanced only joke 1-3% amounts while new hires will make as much or more than you.

Comment Re:No Shit. (Score 1) 187

I live in Dallas pokestops are only found at stores, parks, and trails. You can walk around a residential neighborhood all day and hit 0. One pokestop isn't enough to keep you full on pokeballs though. Even doing the trail at the park, you'll hit 2 pokestops looping the trail but you won't get enough balls that way, you'd still burn through about 50 an hour.

Comment Re:eh (Score 1) 305

The article is about the kernel, not the distros, which vary wildly. (This is also why it's a shame GNU/Linux, as a term, didn't catch on, leaving aside Stallman's feelings. Everyone hears "Linux" and automatically assumes someone is talking about the entire operating system, when it's also the name of the kernel. See also Java, which has similar problems.)

Slashdot Top Deals

If in any problem you find yourself doing an immense amount of work, the answer can be obtained by simple inspection.

Working...