I do think the race issue is worth discussing. As well as the gender issue.
But there's something more fundamental and less likely to stoke passions at play here:
DOING SCIENCE IS ABOUT MAKING MISTAKES. Her "punishment" should be to write a paper on what she was trying to do and why the results were not what she expected. Simple, end of story.
There should be no real punishment of any kind, much less the over the top expulsion and arrest.
The simple fact is that she should be encouraged to make mistakes, not punished for them. And the most basic problem we are dealing with is that our school systems don't understand this fact.
This was true about 10 years ago, but now we exist in a tech world in which there are way more jobs than people to do them. If all you are doing is low-level gofer programmer and you're 40, yes, you are in a dead end job. But if you have managed to amass technology experience that matches your age, you are extraordinarily valuable.
What a lovely little world you live in. It's one in which people who don't agree with you don't "want a good product".
I use an iPhone and continue to use it because it is a better product for my needs than the Android. I'm not being a doofus like you and claiming that the iPhone is a better phone for your needs.
It would seem that the only honest conclusion is that, of the survey population, more iPhone users than Android users believe that the iPhone best meets their needs and will continue to meet their needs.
Any time you sell your company, you know that you are giving control of the future of your IP over to someone else, including the ability to kill the product should the business need arise.
When he sold to Sun, he made his cash and gave up any rights to say what happened to the software. From that point on, it could have been purchased by the devil himself and Monty should still shut the fuck up.
He's wanting it both ways. He wants to have his cash and influence the direction of MySQL. The fact is, Oracle bought MySQL fairly. Monty needs to stop whining.
Being able to "make up 500 words of bullshit" is an important skill that's incredibly lacking out there. As an engineer, you need to know how to write.
Google gets sued and comes up with a settlement agreement to pay off those suing.
Little company X does the same thing and gets sued, but can't fight the suit and can't afford to pay off a settlement.
Because the grounds for suing are completely bogus, Google is essentially buying a monopoly with their settlement. They are now establishing that anyone who wants to do what they are doing will have to pay hush money to avoid a lawsuit.
The problem is this: Google has the ability to pay their way out of this nuisance lawsuit. Others do not. Thus Google ends up with a defacto monopoly.
From the author's perspective, however, there is no ability to pursue a bogus lawsuit to a conclusion more favorable than free money they shouldn't be getting in the first place.
Of course William Morris is against it. The settlement is bad for them and bad for our society. It's bad for authors, even. But the only thing worse for authors is opting out of the settlement.
You could do something significantly more professional like Aria or Zuora. There is no awareness on the customer side of being redirected to another site, and it beats maintaining your own PCI level 1 compliant infrastructure.
/. should not be a forum for perpetrating common ignorance, such as the comment,
"What's more, the number of Flash users is based on a questionable internet survey of just 4,600 people â" around 0.0005% of the suggested 956,000,000 total. Is it really possible that 99% penetration could have been reached?"
They really needed to survey just 1,000 people to get a statistically meaningful survey.
It does not pass the smell test because it leaves out a number of important devices we know to exist on the Internet (for example, the iPhone).
The problem is almost certainly sample bias. 1,000 data points is significantly relevant if your sample is truly random and not skewed towards a particular subgroup. Sample bias means that your mechanism for picking who you sampled would be more likely to pull data points from a specific subgroup. For example, a methodology that discouraged responses from people on mobile devices.
Slashdot Mirror
What the hell do you care if the NSA is looking at your source code?
I mean seriously. Do you have pictures of you doing blow embedded in your source code or something?
The Tesla battery design is a technological breakthrough.
Also, electric vehicles like the Tesla have lower maintenance costs due to a significant reduction in moving parts.
Then your network isn't secure to begin with. You just use your control as a pathetic crutch.
1000 people is a statistically significant sample size as long as there's no sample bias.
I do think the race issue is worth discussing. As well as the gender issue.
But there's something more fundamental and less likely to stoke passions at play here:
DOING SCIENCE IS ABOUT MAKING MISTAKES. Her "punishment" should be to write a paper on what she was trying to do and why the results were not what she expected. Simple, end of story.
There should be no real punishment of any kind, much less the over the top expulsion and arrest.
The simple fact is that she should be encouraged to make mistakes, not punished for them. And the most basic problem we are dealing with is that our school systems don't understand this fact.
His password is 7 lower case characters. It's a wonder his GMail account wasn't hacked ages ago.
This was true about 10 years ago, but now we exist in a tech world in which there are way more jobs than people to do them. If all you are doing is low-level gofer programmer and you're 40, yes, you are in a dead end job. But if you have managed to amass technology experience that matches your age, you are extraordinarily valuable.
Congratulations!
You just managed to get the stupidest Slashdot question of the year submitted in time for 2011 consideration!
There's always someone willing to pay more. Companies that pay gobs of money at the expense of other factors have high turnover.
Ethics are absolute. Laws are relative. There's no such thing as personal ethics.
I am guessing 100% of Android users are ignorant jackasses?
What a lovely little world you live in. It's one in which people who don't agree with you don't "want a good product".
I use an iPhone and continue to use it because it is a better product for my needs than the Android. I'm not being a doofus like you and claiming that the iPhone is a better phone for your needs.
It would seem that the only honest conclusion is that, of the survey population, more iPhone users than Android users believe that the iPhone best meets their needs and will continue to meet their needs.
Country A has a population of x.
Country B has a population of x*4.
Which country will have a larger pool of job applicants with an IQ above 140?
Any time you sell your company, you know that you are giving control of the future of your IP over to someone else, including the ability to kill the product should the business need arise.
Monty cashed in.
So what?
When he sold to Sun, he made his cash and gave up any rights to say what happened to the software. From that point on, it could have been purchased by the devil himself and Monty should still shut the fuck up.
He's wanting it both ways. He wants to have his cash and influence the direction of MySQL. The fact is, Oracle bought MySQL fairly. Monty needs to stop whining.
If he gave a shit about what happened to MySQL, he would not have sold it.
Instead, he made gobs of money and no longer has a say in what happens to the property except insofar as he is free to fork it.
Being able to "make up 500 words of bullshit" is an important skill that's incredibly lacking out there. As an engineer, you need to know how to write.
The "duct tape programmer" is just as dangerous as the "astronaut architect".
What distinguishes good architects from these fools is this:
A good architect is someone with the experience to know when to cut corners and when to enforce rigid discipline.
It has nothing to do with scanning books.
Google gets sued and comes up with a settlement agreement to pay off those suing.
Little company X does the same thing and gets sued, but can't fight the suit and can't afford to pay off a settlement.
Because the grounds for suing are completely bogus, Google is essentially buying a monopoly with their settlement. They are now establishing that anyone who wants to do what they are doing will have to pay hush money to avoid a lawsuit.
Big expensive hush money for fair use.
The settlement is for a bogus lawsuit.
The problem is this: Google has the ability to pay their way out of this nuisance lawsuit. Others do not. Thus Google ends up with a defacto monopoly.
From the author's perspective, however, there is no ability to pursue a bogus lawsuit to a conclusion more favorable than free money they shouldn't be getting in the first place.
Of course William Morris is against it. The settlement is bad for them and bad for our society. It's bad for authors, even. But the only thing worse for authors is opting out of the settlement.
You could do something significantly more professional like Aria or Zuora. There is no awareness on the customer side of being redirected to another site, and it beats maintaining your own PCI level 1 compliant infrastructure.
I'd rather have government run health care than any insurance company (who, by the way, lose laptops and forget to wipe hard drives).
/. should not be a forum for perpetrating common ignorance, such as the comment,
"What's more, the number of Flash users is based on a questionable internet survey of just 4,600 people â" around 0.0005% of the suggested 956,000,000 total. Is it really possible that 99% penetration could have been reached?"
They really needed to survey just 1,000 people to get a statistically meaningful survey.
It does not pass the smell test because it leaves out a number of important devices we know to exist on the Internet (for example, the iPhone).
The problem is almost certainly sample bias. 1,000 data points is significantly relevant if your sample is truly random and not skewed towards a particular subgroup. Sample bias means that your mechanism for picking who you sampled would be more likely to pull data points from a specific subgroup. For example, a methodology that discouraged responses from people on mobile devices.
Who wants to use a tool with crap IDE integration?
Find an employer that supports your objectives. Many do.
The catch is that you will get paid less. Flexibility has value.