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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:Shift from offering products to exploiting user (Score 2) 153

Absolute agreement. Every since the Neanderthals on Wall Street started dictating policy to Fortune 500's (and small firms let it trickle down to them), we've been at a growing war with the 1%. Latest news says there are SIX people who have more wealth than the bottom 50% of population of the WORLD! Their interests are served first. And, yes, Marx predicted that. Now, it's our job to get vocal, get active, and take our Democracy back, including the fundamental Constitutional right to privacy that has been so eroded by lawyers (and politicians, who are mostly made up of the lawyer class) in the past decades. And, not just in the U S of A, but throughout the world. It's pitchforks time, folks, and time to bring the corrupt interests (Exxon, GE, Microsoft, and thousands of others, and their kin in other countries) to heel. We, the masses, need to hone our skills at defeating their self-serving game.

Read George Lakott's take: https://twitter.com/georgelako...
and https://georgelakoff.com/2011/...

Comment Re:Left and right (Score 1) 153

Glad you used AC to post, because you assertions are utterly false. Silicon Valley is a hot-bed of people on the left, and it's been that way since the 1960's. Who do you think actually INVENTED most of the basis for new technology. Sure most of it was based on a Brit (think of Alan Turing), but the capital was in San Francisco, and most of those capitalists are (and were) left-wing thinkers, interested in making money by delivering stupendous new products/services. It's only LATER that Wall Street, and their greed, on into the act, and they are decidedly Republican, virtually to a man (of course, no women allowed).

I've been LIVING this stuff since 1961 (started on a vacuum-tube based RCA 301!) and I've watched it. What I can't abide is your attributions that are informed by mere ignorance. And, no, I don't post anonymously, because I'm confident of my facts.

Comment Start by Stating Your Expectations with your Resum (Score 1) 435

Sure, in my earliest years, I was accumulating experience (I remember having the title "Junior Programmer"), but once I was valuable, I named my own price. My last decades were as a consultant, and I peaked out at $2,000/day, because I had letters of recommendation from major executives (with phone numbers, so prospective clients could call them; the never did, but that was often a convincer.

The 1%-ers win because there's always some jerk who will accept their offer, no matter how demeaning it is. Turn the tables: Spend all you time performing, and learning how to perform even better, and ask superiors (the highest-level you dare approach; preferably "CxO") for letters of recommendation that describe how much money the company made and continue to makes, because of your work. The best time to ask is right when the project is about to become that "all hands" push near the end...they NEED you then, and if you promise not to leave for some time, they'll give you the kind of recommendation you can use a year later, when the project's been long done.

Some tricks from a well-paid consultant, now happily retired.

Comment Re:Easy answer (Absolutely!) (Score 1) 489

The 1%, who control the budgets of corporations, have no interest in spending enough money to attract customers, no matter what their individual GUI/platform is. They firmly believe that "OSFA" (One Size Fits All). Yea, I'm looking at YOU, Wells Fargo. A GUI that is equally unsuited for all platforms.

Corporations are focused on THEIR margins. Most fail to answer one question correctly: "What is the first thing you must have to be a successful company?" They'll answer "Money" (or "Capital"), "Product" or "Service," or "cheap employees," etc. There is but one answer that is correct: CUSTOMERS. If you have no customers, everything else is irrelevant. But, if you're just an investor, you have no interest in customers, you have only your own wealth as the focal point of your interests. And, investors insist on larger dividends (or rises in stock value), which motivates corporations to cheapen everything, including "customer service" (now an oxymoron).

And there is the driver for unusable UIs: Focus on lowering expenses in IT development, without paying attention to what attracts more customers, but might cost more. So long as customers are an afterthought, the same UI mistakes will keep being made.

Comment Plutocrat Pricing (Score 1) 105

The Pixel has been a dog because it's wicked over-prices (and, you get to give them all your data, too!)
So, it seems to me, this announcement is about how they're going to perform a Solomnic cutting of the baby into two equally incomplete devices, and charge more money for each!

What could go wrong with That Idea???

Comment Self-serving, Much? (Score 1) 503

Microsoft has lost all credibility with me, and I'll give up on Windows 7 when I need some third-party software that won't run on Windows 7. I don't expect that to be very soon. Microsoft's greed knows no bounds: I buy my computer...and they want to have sole authority over how I am allowed to use it with their software. I buy my own products, but M$ deems it essential that I be a data source for their sale of information about me, collected without my permission from my computer. They have removed all customer rights from their "agreements," so they now hold all the rights, and I am left without legal protection from further offensive actions on their part.

I am retired now (after 55 years in the computer industry), and they treat me as a bottomless revenue source, without bothering to communicate with me...or, through their lack of competent support, my ability to communicate with them. (Fortunately, I've removed most of the spyware--aka telemetry "updates"--they've foisted of on me, and blocked known harvesting IP addresses from accessing my network.

We, as an industry, allowed Microsoft to become so arrogant and self-serving, by continuing to buy their progressively-more-invasive and bug-laden products, and rewriting all their "license" terms to eliminate any rights I may have had. It took me a full six months to finally resolve all the Windows Update bugs they distributed to their customers over the past two years.

If I am forced to change my operating system and security systems, because they build in "alternate routes" through my defenses, it will be to Linux or Android. At least, then, I'm not PAYING to be abused.

Comment Re:PC is NOT dead and not even dying (Score 1) 501

The only thing that can kill the PC is a better product, with a more reliable operating system, and I see nothing on the horizon that prohibits that evolutional step.

And, if under Trump, computers are outlawed (it would be a typical move for he and his kind), then only outlaws will have computers.

Pundits get paid to make outrageous predictions, only to fade into obscurity when their ignorant nightmares prove inept and ill-advised. Instead, they should think beyond their own limitations and ask: "What will supercede the Personal Computer and be even more desirable?" Quantum computers, perhaps? More likely: Things we've not yet even yet imagined, as was the Intel 4004 (which, after all, was invented because Busicom Corp. wanted a "better calculator" engine).

Comment Kudos and Applause to you, Matthew Culver (Score 1) 531

So long as the minions that keep posting above abuse you for taking a stance (and, exhibit their essential ignorance of negotiating strategies), corporations will keep using current employees "at will," and then abuse them, "at will." You have taken a bold stance, and while I doubt you'll completely succeed, you may be the "Rosa Parks" of employee rights.

Salaries need to be negotiated, and if you possess unique skills that are of value to the employer, they should be compensated equitably. While I am retired, I can tell you that as a self-employed consultant for over three decades, my ultimate income was over $1,000/day (in 1990's) because of the VALUE I delivered. If the corporation wanted that value, they expected to pay for the price. But, the return they got was, for example, with one large chemical company, over $400 Million in the first year.

What US employees have to do is to show their employers (or clients) how much VALUE they create...when you do that, each client is happy to share their success with other potential clients looking for similar value. So long as you "occupy a chair" for a modest salary, you have no-doubt signed an "at will" employment clause that grants the employer all the rights in your relationship.

Matthew Culver: You are challenging that perverse relationship, and I applaud the attempt. As Inequality.org points out, "...the 1 percent has 35.6 percent of all private wealth, more than the bottom 95 percent combined." And sacking the people that actually CREATED that value, because labor costs can be reduced, producing more margin for the 1% to harvest, is one of the ways they do it. And, even it you don't win, you can be proud of initiating a movement of other employees engaging attorneys seeking out such cases with ever-evolving innovative arguments. And, if that process fails, we all may as well admit we've reintroduced slavery back into Western cultures.

Comment Re:Finally, that explains all the bugs... (Score 1) 137

Oh, and Microsoft is, no doubt, waiting for the first "change order" (which they will have built into the contract), so they'll get More money in the future for things they left out of this initial proposal. That means ratcheting up the total $$$ volume of the contract for things that will magically become "essential" once the contract starts.

I wonder how much Drumpf gets out of this deal...

Comment Finally, that explains all the bugs... (Score 1) 137

...in Windows 10 that remain to this day...and in 8.1 and 7.
They used to save money (e.g., by offloading product testing off (to the unfortunate group called "Insiders.") Now they're getting paid nearly One Billion Dollars because their product is so buggy and insecure.

What a great scam the plutocrats at the top of Microsoft have created. Now, they've "MADOFF" with our tax money by providing services to their incomplete product to the U.S. Government.

This is why we, mere citizens, stand to lose Medicare under Trump: To pay for these kinds of schemes, to take taxpayers $$$ and redistribute them to corporations who have created the very problems they'll be paid to solve.

Your tax money at work.

Comment We are not in territory... (Score 1) 184

...where Elon Musk does not know how much he doesn't know. Believe me, unless he's "boring" down 1 KM or so, he's going to have HUGE problems with existing infrastructure (not pipes, so much as pilings and things that hold up large buildings). And, there's no central compilation of those details that have been installed over the past 50 years!

Boring may be what he bends his pick on :-)

Comment Yeah, but look at the bugs M$ ADMITS to... (Score 1) 210

...notably excluding the one's they DON'T:
https://blogs.windows.com/wind...
Scroll down to "Known Issues."

Whatever happened to the concept of "testing" and "fixing" defects ("bugs") in code. Apparently, end-users are not as eager to be willing to be guinea pigs for untested code, not that they have to PAY for this kind of punishment.

Remember: If the product is claimed to be "Free," YOU are the product!

Comment Great, so long as you just "turn a crank." (Score 1) 250

But, for REAL system design and implementation, it's the professional interaction and collaboration that is the source of novel ideas, and the casual walker-by who intrudes with a few relevant facts that change the entire narrative. These have no comparable form in "discussion groups," because you have to make a specific effort to join a conversation, which eliminates the "casual listener" that sparks a radical rethink. That's why it's called "group think."

Many programmers like the solitude of doing their work alone, and when I'm writing code, I shut the door for just that reason. But the number of times in my career when I've overhead some dialog in the hallway (well, I do have go to the "can," once in a while) and injected a diametrically opposed viewpoint and made a difference in the outcome convinces me that there is a reason to work together in the same space.

Ultimately, we need both: Solitude, and Bullpen. Either extreme as a sole choice is a losing end game for careers and for ideas.

Slashdot Top Deals

"We are on the verge: Today our program proved Fermat's next-to-last theorem." -- Epigrams in Programming, ACM SIGPLAN Sept. 1982

Working...