Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Lawyers... (Score 1) 475

It's the fault of the people that engaged this lawyer that they paid so much. If they wanted a cheaper lawyer, a cheaper lawyer was almost certainly available.

It doesn't make sense when people blame lawyers - the job of a lawyer is to zealously defend the interests of their client. If lawyers made their own decisions about the merit of a client's case, there would be a two-level judicial system - which is insane. When a fat person sues McDonald's for being fat - blame the fat person, not the lawyer. If you think society is too litigious, blame society.

Also, there is no functioning legal system on this planet that doesn't require specialized professionals. Maybe you could develop one?

Comment Re:Yet...he agreed to it right? (Score 1) 1018

Also if your boss invents the algorithm, and you just implement, you're effectively fungible. So while you may be an excellent programmer, worth the pretty solid $150k pay, you could also be fungible with all other excellent programmers (of which there are many). In this case, your value-add is just programming, and you should be paid appropriately.

Comment Re:Bosses earn too much (Score 1) 1018

The majority of HFT is done by a series of smaller firms. These are generally not the JPMs or the Goldman Sachs of the world (though banks may having small hft operations). They are significantly smaller firms that roll over their entire portfolio many times a day. Renaissance Technologies, IMC, Getco, and others - those are the big players. For them, there is real financial risk. The principals have their own skin in the game. If they fail, they not only lose their own money, but their ability to conduct further fundraising is significantly impaired.

Comment Re:Bosses earn too much (Score 1) 1018

With the lone exceptions of Citadel and DE Shaw, it is not large financial companies that do HFT. It is small quant shops or proprietary trading firms. The managers of these firms do not have golden parachutes. Often at least some fraction of the investment comes from their own investments. So when the firm goes bust, they lose their money, their jobs, and their reputations. (this is all from last month's Institutional Investor profile of HFT - check it out, it's very interesting)

Comment Argument != Ruling (Score 1, Informative) 360

It really shouldn't be news that someone is making an argument in their case. Anyone can make an argument - that doesn't mean it's right. And the standards on due process for damages are pretty wishy-washy. So, while I'm not saying this wouldn't be good news if it were ultimately upheld, it's not really news that someone is bringing it up. 99% of all class actions are arguments made by plaintiffs' lawyers that are garbage, which never go anywhere.

Comment Not the best idea (Score 5, Insightful) 572

How could anyone really think this is a good idea? AT&T has effectively admitted that the data usage growth for smartphones is above the rate that their data network will be able to grow. Using more data intensive applications will only show them how correct they are ("Look how much data will be used in the future when more people are streaming data")

In addition, what if this actually interferes with an emergency call?

Sorry that this might not be anti-corporate enough, but Operation Chokehold really isn't a great idea.

Comment Re:That's just fiscally stupid. (Score 1) 437

Borrowing money is not a bad move. You have to look into the corporate finance of it. For one, if you can assume that a company makes money at least at the rate it borrows (MS is borrowing at what 5%? 6%?). Interest payments on debt are deductible, meaning MS is only paying (1-corporate tax rate)% after taxes, so by borrowing it gains the present value of tax savings on the money it's borrowed. This directly adds to the corporate valuation of the company. Meanwhile, sitting on cash, when the company has a weighted average cost of capital to meet, has negative valuation for the company.

Programming

Python 2.6 to Smooth the Way for 3.0, Coming Next Month 184

darthcamaro writes "Some programming languages just move on to major version numbers, leaving older legacy versions (and users) behind, but that's not the plan for Python. Python 2.6 has the key goal of trying to ensure compatibility between Python 2.x and Python 3.0, which is due out in a month's time. From the article: 'Once you have your code running on 2.6, you can start getting ready for 3.0 in a number of ways,' Guido Van Rossum said. 'In particular, you can turn on "Py3k warnings," which will warn you about obsolete usage patterns for which alternatives already exist in 2.6. You can then change your code to use the modern alternative, and this will make you more ready for 3.0.'"
Government

US House Adopts New Third-Party Web Site Rules 49

GovIT Geek writes to tell us that third-party websites will no longer be off limits for members of the US House, provided that they use it for "official purposes" and not personal, commercial, or campaign purposes. "The rules are seen by House Administration Chairman Robert Brady as a compromise between several proposals under consideration in recent months and are closely aligned with those circulated by the Senate Rules Committee last week. [...] 'These new guidelines are a step in the right direction for a Congress that has been behind the technological curve for too long,' Boehner said. 'By encouraging the use of emerging and established new media tools, Congress is sending the message that we want to speak to citizens, and receive feedback, in the most open and accessible manner possible.'"
Image

Slashdot's Disagree Mail 206

Being in a relationship is not easy, more than half of all first marriages fail in this country. That statistic doesn't improve if you spend most of your time reading your favorite website and not tending to the needs of your family. Instead of asking me to help fix your relationship maybe you should try playing with your kids, talking to your wife, and not staring at a computer screen all day. You should realize that the help link doesn't provide help with your life. It's mostly for getting passwords and stuff. Below you'll find a collection of people that should have reached out to Dr. Phil and not Dr. Sam.
The Media

Sound Bites of the 1908 Presidential Candidates 410

roncosmos writes "Science News has up a feature on the first use of sound recording in a presidential campaign. In 1908, for the first time, presidential candidates recorded their voices on wax cylinders. Their voices could be brought into the home for 35 cents, equivalent to about $8 now. In that pre-radio era, this was the only way, short of hearing a speech at a whistle stop, that you could hear the candidates. The story includes audio recordings from the 1908 candidates, William Jennings Bryan and William Howard Taft. Bryan's speech, on bank failures, seems sadly prescient now. Taft's, on the progress of the Negro, sounds condescending to modern ears but was progressive at the time. There are great images from the campaign; lots of fun."

Comment Re:Scrabble cannot be copyrighted. (Score 2, Informative) 216

Intellectual property laws are not uniform around the world. That was one of the "I feel that the law is this way" arguments. You might wonder "where does this guy get off saying all this?" I'm a lawyer.

It's not patent law, as you claim. A patent would have expired years ago. Also, Scrabble was denied a patent by the PTO. I don't know what copyrights are claimed, but there are several claims that could be raised, including the look of the board as an artistic expression. The Scrabulous board uses the same colors and pieces as Scrabble. Clearly there are a number of trademark issues. It's not clear why you brushed those claims aside, maybe you don't know the law and you just felt that it was a certain way? Is Scrabulous too similar to Scrabble? Maybe. Is the use of the word Scrab in conjunction with a crossword game a trademark violation - probably.

Mattel and Hasbro's position, obviously, is that there is a violation of their intellectual property in one form or another. They will raise both copyright and trademark claims. But you're sorely mistaken if you think their primary goal is to disgorge the makers of Scrabulous of the ~$300,000 per year that they make off the game. They sell 1 to 2 million Scrabble boards per year. They want it taken offline, and they don't need to sue in India for that. Different circuits in the US have different bodies of law. Mattel and Hasbro will have their pick of the one with precedent most supportive of their claims. The Scrabulous makers will likely not have many grounds for removal.

Your rebuttal, however, really proved my original point. Every claim you made was wrong - and that didn't stop you from saying it as though you had some authority.

IE The Great Microsoft Blunder? 643

JordanL writes "Hot on the heels of the beta rollouts of IE 7, comes an editorial from John Dvorak declaring IE the biggest mistake Microsoft has ever made. From the article: 'All the work that has to go into keeping the browser afloat is time that could have been better spent on making Vista work as first advertised [...] If you were to put together a comprehensive profit-and-loss statement for IE, there would be a zero in the profits column and billions in the losses column--billions.'"

Comment the JE circlejerk is dying (Score -1) 3

It is official; Netcraft confirms: the JE circlejerk is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered JE circlejerk community when IDC confirmed that the JE circlejerk market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all bloggers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that the JE circlejerk has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. The JE circlejerk is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict the JE circlejerk's future. The hand writing is on the wall: the JE circlejerk faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for the JE circlejerk because the JE circlejerk is dying. Things are looking very bad for the JE circlejerk. As many of us are already aware, the JE circlejerk continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

The FortKnox circlejerk is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core participants. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FortKnox circlejerk participants Em Emalb and gmhowell only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: the JE circlejerk is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

JE circlejerk leader FortKnox states that there are 70 members of his JE circlejerk. How many members of the Real World Stuff JE circlejerk are there? Let's see. The number of FortKnox JE circlejerk versus Real World Stuff JE circlejerk posts is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 70/5 = 14 Real World Stuff JE circlejerk users. chez69 circlejerk posts are about half of the volume of Blackneto circlejerk posts. Therefore there are about 7 members of the Blackneto circlejerk. A recent article put FortKnox at about 80 percent of the JE circlejerk market. Therefore there are (70+14+7)*4 = 364 JE circlejerk members. This is consistent with the number of JE circlejerk posts.

All major surveys show that the JE circlejerk has steadily declined in market share. The JE circlejerk is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If JE circlejerk is to survive at all it will be among bored bloggers. The JE circlejerk continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, the JE circlejerk is dead.

Fact: the JE circlejerk is dying

Slashdot Top Deals

"Just the facts, Ma'am" -- Joe Friday

Working...