Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



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

Comment the differing values of ages (Score 1) 106

fresh out of school:
+ willing to work some to much OT without extra pay
+ will settle for less pay and benefits
+ cheap to replace if necessary
+ unlikely to give a big fight if fired ("easy to fire")
+ little to no lost assets if fired or quits
+ more open to new ideas and changing tech
+ cheaper insurance costs

experienced / old-timers:
+ heavilty trained and experienced at their position. efficient. certified.
+ has learned "the big picture" in operations, understands subtle effects and can head off future problems
+ has valuable and possibly unique organizational knowledge (undocumented information and processes)
+ has formed working relationships with other employees, improved efficiency and communications
+ more reliable attendance
+ less likely to leave suddenly

But the big issue I have with this article is how they act so surprised that a company more frequently ends up replacing someone with another person that's younger. Um, people get old. If you keep replacing your workforce with people of the same or greater age, eventually you're going to be running on a staff of people all hanging around retirement age. You have to get new blood in continuously, it's required for a business to continue. I don't see validity in calling "age descrimination" on hiring. On selective firing, YES, definitely. But not on hiring. I don't agree with the "equal opportunity employer" thing, I believe that a company/owner should be able to decide who they hire. Once you've established the business relationship with them, then some rules need to kick in, to avoid "disposable/throwaway employee" resource issues.

A lot of companies seem to see their HR as a source of funding they can tap into when times get tough, "reducing staffing costs" by canning the seniors and hiring cheap replacements. This rarely works out well for them. They don't need government rules to bring the pain, they bring it to themselves. Radio Shack just got done committing "suicide by seniority-culling". They fired everyone that either was doing well or knew how to run the stores, and replaced them with cheap labor that was inexperienced, idiot, or both. (they did several other stupid things that are OT, but this was one of the "big three" that took them down) And down they went. It's a self-limiting problem. If HP wants to lobotomize their human resources, I say let them. We'll see them bought out under duress after they tank a few years from now by someplace like walmart.

Comment and so the tables turn (Score 3, Insightful) 111

the reason we don't have actual TV channels on the Apple TV is because the company tried to strong-arm networks -- and failed.

I'd always been under the impression it was the networks that tended to be the "bullies" that were doing the "strong-arming" around the block? I guess life's rough when you're used to being the 400lb gorilla when the 600lb gator enters the scene.

Reminds me of a very dated newspaper cartoon from a long time ago, picture godzilla (labeled "Microsoft") rampaging through a city. He gets surprised by a tap on the shoulder from a much larger godzilla, labelled "AOL". Yeah, that was a long time ago, but you get the idea.

Moral of the story: bullying is OK as long as you're the one DOING the bullying, but quicky becomes NOT cool when you're the one GETTING bullied. I find it very hard to be sympathetic to a bully who just got the tables turned on them. Cry me a river.

Comment Re:Fingerprint might not work (Score 1) 233

I have the same question, I know that if I don't unlock my phone with my finger for several days (usually over the weekend) or if it powers down due to exhausted battery. it will require my entering my passcode. Unless they have a way to trick the phone into thinking no time has passed, I don't see what good a fingerpint will do them? The secure enclave will have dumped the fingerprint-tied key by that point and will require the regular passcode.

Comment let nature take it's course (Score 1) 153

Sounds like the employee needs firing. They're not being blamed for the bad PR so much as for their screw-up. The boss is just throwing the "get it taken down or you're fired!" as a punishment for not doing his job. Damage control is the first step in the response, "stop the heavy bleeding". Which isn't the security, it's the bad PR. So that's his first job. If he succeeds at that, his second job will be to fix the problem.

If he can't kill the bad PR, he's out immediately, someone else will come in to fix the app and try to fix the PR.

Sorry dude, you were party to making a product that claimed to protect my security but did not. I can't sympathize with you. "I didn't do my job, caused you problems, and now I got caught, please help!" no. Maybe next time you'll take your job a little more seriously and not place thousands of customers needlessly at risk.

Comment Re:Shifting the burden (Score 4, Insightful) 23

the copyright holder is simply the only party with the information to do this and it's their property to begin with. So in no way and at no time will it or can it ever be appropriate to shift this burden onto some third party and every attempt to shift this burden onto someone else should be ridiculed for its thoughtlessness.

This sounds a lot like the argument a lot of irresponsible parents make, trying to get laws passed to make society take over more of the parent's responsibility for educating, raising, and protecting their child. "It was your responsibility to begin with, you're in the best position to DO it, and you're the obvious choice. Why are you fighting this?" (makes up all sorts of wild excuses) Boils down to: You want me to do it for you because you don't want the burden of doing it yourself, and you're looking for someone else to force the responsibility onto. (ie lazy)

Comment Re:That's just too damn bad. (Score 1) 767

We've had that occur in a few places in town last year. They were rebuilding some intersections, and created a significant hump in one way. If the light was green and you didn't slow down, there was a good chance stuff in yout front seat would wind up in your back seat, or vice-versa. And you'd hit your head on the roof. And fully exercise every part of your suspension and shocks. And maybe bottom out or break a strut. It wasn't so much just a spee bunp type up-down, it was a downUUUUPDOWNup that could empty your shirt pocket, sort of like a whip cracking the car.

After about a month, and I presume several suits filed due to vehicle damage, someone came out with a weird big grinder and actually ground down the hump several inches. It's still there, but is considerably shorter. You still want to slow down when you get to it, but it's not an "oops I forgot about that! and slam hard on your brakes" kind of event anymore. (I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few rear-enders at that light due to that rather than due to an inattentive driver behind a car stopped at the red)

Drivers have enough to keep an eye on when using an intersection, you really don't want to move their focus away from pedestrians and traffic. This gives them tunnel vision with respect only to their own personal vehicle's safety.

Comment found with calcite (Score 1) 2

Pyrite and galena are commonly found with calcite and quartz. Good bet those are smoothed pebbles of one or the other. Get on ebay and search for "pyrite quartz" or "pyrite calcite" for examples of how common that combination is. Some are quite stunning. Pyrite has a number of variations on it, such as calchopyrite etc.

It's probably not a pure element, that may account for your problem finding a resistivity match.

Comment hudreds? (Score 1) 51

not trying to be too petty here, but really, does a problem affecting "hundreds" of web sites in the world really matter that much? That's like a percent of a percent isn't it?

And how does anyone (other than the malware author author) know that nobody has paid them yet?

Final note... "will never work".... they wouldn't be doing it if it wasn't making them any money. (not for long anyway, and not more than once) We wouldn't see 99% of the hackery on the internet that we do today (spam, ransomware, phishing, advertisement, scareware, viruses/worms) if they handn't found a way to cash in on their efforts.

Comment Re:Bomb or missile (Score 1) 410

not sure how I got that math off but I was in a hurry. I took another look at it and realized the solution was much easier and didn't even require COS. The point where you have line of sight to (tangent with surface of the earth) and from that point to the center of the earth form two lines of a right triangle, with the third being the hypotenuse, which is the distance of the airplane from the center of the earth. (earth radius + airplane height)

WIth the radius of the earth being 3959 miles, and 37,000 ft (at 5280 ft/mile) is 7.007 (lets call it 7) miles, the hypotenuse is 3966. sqrt(3966^2-3959^2) = 236 miles for airplane-to-tangent with earth. (LoS) I guess I was way off with 22!

Note: you can't just measure miles at the surface, as that's not flat, and is a (slightly) lower radius of circule than the elevation of the airplane anyway. My method is looking for straightline distance, since we're talking radio waves, from an airplane at 37k feet, to the earth's surface, along a line from the plane, tangent to the eartth.

As you start getting closer to the tangent point of the line, the distance starts getting very sensitive to height, and the angle of a tangent to a circle of course starts getting very small, so even ocean waves probably eat into it a substantial amount, and certainly to mountains in the mid to far-field.

Comment Re:Bomb or missile (Score 1) 410

I genuinely have no clue as to how far they could track a plane on actual radar. They usually go with transponders that upload the plane's info to satellite regularly, and that works anywhere. But radar relies on how close a plane is to a radar facility and how high it's flying. (radar requires at least line-of-sight) You can lose transponder by an electrical fault, the pilot switching it OFF (by pulling a breaker, which IMHO they ought not to have access to) or by some catastrophic event leading to aircraft damage or destruction. Radar on the other hand usually can track debris to a degree after a plane is hit, and would be able to see it stop moving forward, breaking up, and falling. (think about just those engines, they've got a LOT more radar cross-section than a cesna)

So getting out the geometry, I was quite surprised to discover that 37,000 feet gives you a distance of line of sight to almost exactly one degree of the earth. And again marveling at the coincidences of math, that calculates to almost exactly 22 miles. Despite 37,000 feet being way high, it's very small compared to the radius of the earth, which is why it ends up being such a short distance. And this is of course under ideal circumstances of terrain and ground clutter.

To be hones, that's a lot less than I was expecting, and goes a long way to explaining why we don't have radar coverage over the ocean. You could theoretically plant a lot of radar stations on the ground, especially around airports and along high traffic routes, but really the transponders are the best bet in most cases, and the only option over water far off the coast. (I actually remember hearing operators quoting radar coverage out to only 22 miles off the coast during several crash investigations... and now I know why!)

Slashdot Top Deals

Technological progress has merely provided us with more efficient means for going backwards. -- Aldous Huxley

Working...