Slashdot Mirror
The Laidoff Ninja
walmass writes "My first reaction on seeing the book was, 'Oh no, another book with "Ninja" in the title.' But in this case, the authors have established a case for that: they explained that the first ninjas were peasants who could not take the abuse from the samurai anymore and how they used everyday objects as weapons." Keep reading to see what walmass has to say.
The Laidoff Ninja
author
Craig Brown and Javed Ikbal
pages
278
publisher
CreateSpace
rating
9/10
reviewer
walmass
ISBN
1451558848
summary
Learn techniques that helped hundreds of people survive unexpected unemployment
The authors are co-founders of The Layoff Support Network, which seems to be a collective knowledge-sharing site for people looking for jobs, and the authors say that the book distills the knowledge from the website collected over the past 2 years. The authors also started off by stating that this is not just a book about finding a job; this is also a book about surviving until finding a job. I think The Laidoff Ninja (henceforth, "LON") fares well on these claims.
The pre-ramble is listed as section zero (0) — perhaps not surprising considering the two authors are techies: information security is their day job. Keep that in mind when we look at what they manage to extract out of LinkedIn.
One thing I liked about this book right out of the gate is what the authors (or their editor?) decided to call "Quick-shot" guides. Instead of traditional table of contents, they have provided a listing of topics they thought might be interesting to the following types of readers:
- Job seekers with work experience.
- Recent graduates with limited work experience.
- People who are feeling "cash strapped."
- People who are feeling overwhelmed and emotionally distraught.
Considering the last bullet, I was not really surprised to see a section titled "Ninja Psychiatry." The authors made it clear that they do not have any formal training in Psychiatry and are not licensed to practice psychology, psychiatry or any mental health related profession. They then proceeded to dispense advice on feelings of Loss, Depression, Anxiety, Financial Worries and how to deal with rejection after interviews. The section ends with an admonition to say no to drugs, and encouragement to say yes to humor.
There are lots of "Guerrilla this" or "Ninja that" related to layoffs and job hunting, but I don't think I have come across any other book that addresses the mental aspects of being unemployed.
The next section, "Survival" contains a chapter titled "Pull money out of your butt." Crude but effective, and while whole books have been written about making money on eBay, LON addresses this in a practical way.
Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.
There are some tips about maximizing your available financial resources by delaying payment on some utility bills. While legally OK, I question the morality of providing such advice to readers.
Part 4, "Getting a Job" is where the book begins to read like a traditional book, but there are some surprises and hidden gems there. The sections begin with a job-applications toolkit that recommends free email services, OpenOffice and other technological free-bees that would be required for a job-searcher. These are items that the typical Slashdot reader find amusingly basic, but would certainly be useful for seekers who have been out of the hunt for a while.
Part 5, "Finding opportunities" focuses heavily on LinkedIn. It contains a useful exercise where a job-seekers "needs and wants" are sorted in a "value sort" to determine what type of job would be suitable. But in the next breath, the authors suggest folding away the values-list and taking a job (any job) that will pay the bills. I fail to understand this contradictory advice, and wish they would make up their mind.
The LinkedIn content is useful, but only to a new user of LinkedIn. Experienced LinkedIn users may miss the nuggets buried among these basic facts.
Facebook, Twitter and Myspace are also covered. The well-known but often ignored warnings about being careful with what one posts on one's social networking profiles are posted here.
There is a scathing chapter on recruiters. While certain good qualities of recruiters are mentioned, it seems the authors generally believe that recruiters are uncaring commission-hounds that just want to place a candidate and don't care about individuals. The brutal honesty was refreshing, and I'd be curious whether a majority of Slashdot readers would agree or disagree with the authors.
If you consider that stress and anxiety for a jobless person comes from being, well, jobless, then Part 6, "Preparing for the battle" is the most important section in the book. It covers the basics like resumes, cover letters and elevator pitches, etc.
The next chapter is "Reconnaissance" and this is where the hacker background of the authors finally shows up. They show, with examples, how to find the name and email address of recruiters and HR people at practically any company. The theory being, if you can directly contact the HR people at a company, your resume will not be lost in the 1000 other resumes that people send in. There is just one problem with this theory being put into practice. The book assumes, and does not make abundantly clear, that without building up your network first to some reasonable degree this isn't easy to do. But after I have spent a few hours inviting people and joining groups as the book suggested, I was indeed able to pull up the names of some recruiters at Apple and Google. That accomplished, based on the techniques suggested in the LON, I was able to figure out their email addresses and email them. I hope spammers and marketing droids will not read this book and find out these techniques.
For example, I did not know that one could search Facebook by email and zero in on any individual. It is also a violation of my social norms to approach strangers on Facebook about jobs, but the authors provided guidance and specific examples on how to do that, and also when to step back and look for alternatives.
But some of the techniques, such as querying "whois" records to find out the email address format used by a particular company may not be for the average non-technical Joe, and also seem to skirt ethical boundaries without exactly stepping over the line.
This chapter alone is probably worth the price of the book
The book is a good value at 278 pages and the authors have not done any "white space tricks" to make it seem bigger. A laid-off person would probably appreciate the price/performance of this book.
Overall, "The Laidoff Ninja" is an extremely valuable resource on dealing with the mental stress and anguish that may come from being laid off. It presents creative and novel ways of finding jobs by leveraging social media. The book is a tool in itself that can help the reader survive and prepare for the battle that is a job-search, and do it in a highly effective way.
This book is an excellent value if you need help dealing with the stress of unemployment, or want an edge in reaching hiring managers or recruiters at potential employers. This book is not meant to teach you how to write your resume or cover letter. It will work for novice and experienced candidates alike, although the LinkedIn tricks would definitely favor a more technical reader. I highly recommend it.
You can purchase The Laidoff Ninja from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews — to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
The pre-ramble is listed as section zero (0) — perhaps not surprising considering the two authors are techies: information security is their day job. Keep that in mind when we look at what they manage to extract out of LinkedIn.
One thing I liked about this book right out of the gate is what the authors (or their editor?) decided to call "Quick-shot" guides. Instead of traditional table of contents, they have provided a listing of topics they thought might be interesting to the following types of readers:
- Job seekers with work experience.
- Recent graduates with limited work experience.
- People who are feeling "cash strapped."
- People who are feeling overwhelmed and emotionally distraught.
Considering the last bullet, I was not really surprised to see a section titled "Ninja Psychiatry." The authors made it clear that they do not have any formal training in Psychiatry and are not licensed to practice psychology, psychiatry or any mental health related profession. They then proceeded to dispense advice on feelings of Loss, Depression, Anxiety, Financial Worries and how to deal with rejection after interviews. The section ends with an admonition to say no to drugs, and encouragement to say yes to humor.
There are lots of "Guerrilla this" or "Ninja that" related to layoffs and job hunting, but I don't think I have come across any other book that addresses the mental aspects of being unemployed.
The next section, "Survival" contains a chapter titled "Pull money out of your butt." Crude but effective, and while whole books have been written about making money on eBay, LON addresses this in a practical way.
Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.
There are some tips about maximizing your available financial resources by delaying payment on some utility bills. While legally OK, I question the morality of providing such advice to readers.
Part 4, "Getting a Job" is where the book begins to read like a traditional book, but there are some surprises and hidden gems there. The sections begin with a job-applications toolkit that recommends free email services, OpenOffice and other technological free-bees that would be required for a job-searcher. These are items that the typical Slashdot reader find amusingly basic, but would certainly be useful for seekers who have been out of the hunt for a while.
Part 5, "Finding opportunities" focuses heavily on LinkedIn. It contains a useful exercise where a job-seekers "needs and wants" are sorted in a "value sort" to determine what type of job would be suitable. But in the next breath, the authors suggest folding away the values-list and taking a job (any job) that will pay the bills. I fail to understand this contradictory advice, and wish they would make up their mind.
The LinkedIn content is useful, but only to a new user of LinkedIn. Experienced LinkedIn users may miss the nuggets buried among these basic facts.
Facebook, Twitter and Myspace are also covered. The well-known but often ignored warnings about being careful with what one posts on one's social networking profiles are posted here.
There is a scathing chapter on recruiters. While certain good qualities of recruiters are mentioned, it seems the authors generally believe that recruiters are uncaring commission-hounds that just want to place a candidate and don't care about individuals. The brutal honesty was refreshing, and I'd be curious whether a majority of Slashdot readers would agree or disagree with the authors.
If you consider that stress and anxiety for a jobless person comes from being, well, jobless, then Part 6, "Preparing for the battle" is the most important section in the book. It covers the basics like resumes, cover letters and elevator pitches, etc.
The next chapter is "Reconnaissance" and this is where the hacker background of the authors finally shows up. They show, with examples, how to find the name and email address of recruiters and HR people at practically any company. The theory being, if you can directly contact the HR people at a company, your resume will not be lost in the 1000 other resumes that people send in. There is just one problem with this theory being put into practice. The book assumes, and does not make abundantly clear, that without building up your network first to some reasonable degree this isn't easy to do. But after I have spent a few hours inviting people and joining groups as the book suggested, I was indeed able to pull up the names of some recruiters at Apple and Google. That accomplished, based on the techniques suggested in the LON, I was able to figure out their email addresses and email them. I hope spammers and marketing droids will not read this book and find out these techniques.
For example, I did not know that one could search Facebook by email and zero in on any individual. It is also a violation of my social norms to approach strangers on Facebook about jobs, but the authors provided guidance and specific examples on how to do that, and also when to step back and look for alternatives.
But some of the techniques, such as querying "whois" records to find out the email address format used by a particular company may not be for the average non-technical Joe, and also seem to skirt ethical boundaries without exactly stepping over the line.
This chapter alone is probably worth the price of the book
The book is a good value at 278 pages and the authors have not done any "white space tricks" to make it seem bigger. A laid-off person would probably appreciate the price/performance of this book.
Overall, "The Laidoff Ninja" is an extremely valuable resource on dealing with the mental stress and anguish that may come from being laid off. It presents creative and novel ways of finding jobs by leveraging social media. The book is a tool in itself that can help the reader survive and prepare for the battle that is a job-search, and do it in a highly effective way.
This book is an excellent value if you need help dealing with the stress of unemployment, or want an edge in reaching hiring managers or recruiters at potential employers. This book is not meant to teach you how to write your resume or cover letter. It will work for novice and experienced candidates alike, although the LinkedIn tricks would definitely favor a more technical reader. I highly recommend it.
You can purchase The Laidoff Ninja from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews — to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
I was going to try and write a funny post here about taking revenge against your coworkers, but the Onion did such a better job:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/disgruntled-ninja-silently-kills-12-coworkers,1575/
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Yup, I spent some time back in mid-to late 2001 laid off. Sending out hundreds of resumes and follow ups every day without any responses (other than canned messages, or companies that were interested, but weren't willing to hire me because they knew when the economy picked back up I'd be gone) gets really disheartening.
Luckily for me, I'd planned and prepared for being laid off, and honestly, got lucky that I got a job when I did. A lot of people on here state that you should have 6 months of "rainy day" money saved up for your living expenses. I agree with this 100%...if not for the money I'd set aside, I'd have been homeless most likely.
That's a scary thought, how quickly you could conceivably go from productive member of society to homeless.
Sent from your iPad.
If you were going to post "Oh my god another review that's a 9/10... why don't they use a scale that doesn't give every single book a 7 or higher" boy have I got good news for you! I am in the process of writing a review of the 2009 Danielle Steele novel "Matters Of The Heart". I don't want to spoil the review (or the book) but I will say that I am prepared to give it a 4/10 for it's lack of detail and an unconvincing plot.
I thought it was the championship round of the Sex Olympics. I'd better search Wikipedia for more info ...
They were assassins who had to hide their weapons in plain sight, so they used farming implements and straight swords (Ninja-to) that could be hidden easily. They weren't the "Rebel Alliance" rising up against the evil Empire.
People almost never take the time to write a review of a book that sucks.
Sent from your iPad.
For international socialist revolution! Workers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your chains!
UNITE with the Campaign for a Free Internet because today, our future begins with tomorrow!
There are lots of "Guerrilla this" or "Ninja that" related to layoffs and job hunting, but I don't think I have come across any other book that addresses the mental aspects of being unemployed.
My book is going to be "The Zen Ninja Guerrilla's Tao of Job Hunting and Getting Rich Quick in Real Estate."
Then I realized that it was an overused use of terms. So, I changed the title to "The Ch'an Kung Fu Guerrilla's Tao Guide to Job Hunting and The Way of Getting Rich Quick."
No hyperbole for me!
RIP America
July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001
people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.
Um...no. Starvation drives people to the perfectly-rational extremes of stealing food (or stealing the means of obtaining food). Then, when they get caught, they get sent to jail, where they are provided with food, clothing, and shelter, all at the taxpayer's expense.
It is a symptom of severe economic decay when crime becomes a rational choice. However, that does not change the fact that a point can be reached when crime is, in fact, the most rational option.
Now if you bought an ebook or something off lulu, then maybe it might have a chance at scoring a 2...but a low score is going to be truly awful to the point where it wouldn't be worth finishing and reviewing let alone publishing
Bottles.
"Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person."
So, the author of the review implies that you should only commit crimes when you're *not* desperate for money? Then only rich people would, oh, right, Goldman Sach, Enron, the S&L debacle (33% of that was white collar crime)... I guess he's right. Get rich, *then* steal.
mark
A "laid off ninja" is called a ronin. But using that as a title would have given the wrong impression.
30 years ago, the chance for an individual Americans of experiencing a 50% reduction in income in any given year was a few percent. Now it's about 20%. The normal case today is that being laid off means a permanent reduction in income.
The people who post on LinkedIn all seem to be looking for work. Typical job descriptions: "Consultant; Marketing Strategist; Social Media Architect", "Community leader & sales pro looking for a sales/service operations, training or leadership role", "Strategic Consultant || Marketing || Advertising || Technology". And lawyers. Lots of lawyers.
Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.
Unfortunately, there are people that do become irrational when they lose their source of income. I have had several ex-coworkers call and ask for monetary assistance. There was one that pulled a knife on me when I told him I couldn't help as my wife had lost her job the previous week.
It's never easy to be laid off. It took me being laid off of several jobs to realize that the company isn't angry at you, it's just that the PHBs want to save their own asses by cutting staff. However, I've seen many otherwise rational people become irrational when they are told that they're being laid off. I've seen adults beg, cry, plead and throw temper tantrums to keep their jobs. It's at times like these to remind them to act like adults and it's not the end of the world.
If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
The problem I always had with these kinds of books is that they don't really address underlying problems, lack of jobs, but simply attempt to arbitrarily make it so the people who buy the book are advantaged, and people who don't are disadvantaged.
Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.
How about because inciting a person to commit a crime is a criminal offense? And the authors like to stay out of pound-the-arse prisons?
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
> But in the next breath, the authors suggest folding away the values-list and taking a job (any job) that will pay the bills.
You'd think that they'd relate this to the bootstrapping process: A fancy filesystem (desired job) that's well-thought out is nice and good, but when you've got no OS ($) loaded, you need to get that code loaded by any means possible first, such as reading in the first few blocks off the boot drive (taking any job you can get). Once you've got a good base of code loaded, you can approach the task of loading data the right way.
If every book that gets reviewed receives a 7 through 10, what is the point of having a 1-10 scale since you could just as easily express it via a 1-4 scale, or better yet a 0-3 scale and store it directly in a two bit integer.
As an engineer (of any sort, even the armchair type) you should feel compelled to seek out the simplest method that gets the job done. While this may be a situation where aesthetics is called for over simplicity, that shouldn't stand in the way of a joke.
Is that an ethical HR person especially for big companies would probably dump any direct approaches as they have processes for that. The only way this would work is say pitching a VC or Archangel that you already know trolling linkedin won’t work.
:-)
For example if I ever get my ass in gear to write up the business case I have in mind. Id be happy going up to people who I know and pitch them – even if it was a chance meeting at first Tuesday ages ago though I think id try the “ordinary millionaires” first before pitching to Rothschild
All of the Job recruiting firms I've worked for (Mww, Yhoo, ETFC) are sales driven, and we were trained to meet numbers or find another job. Every quarter, if your numbers aren't met your gone, no warnings, they tell you up front, if you don't sell enough job ads, or place enough folks your out, minimal severance if any. It's numbers numbers numbers, especially if unemployment is down, the stock is down. I quit working for each after a short while, no one else at these divisions or companies(monster) matters other than the sales folk. If something affects them in some negative (time) fashion, but yet increases security or fixes a long standing issue, there is a ton of cat fighting to push for roll-back of the "fix" so the sales folk don't miss their deadline. Nothing else matters, the myopia of these places is astounding.
Think of it as an edge case rather than a non-existent one. Poor reviews are rare, but exist.
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
---
Job Hunting Feed @ Feed Distiller
Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.
Unless of course, you're laid off form the banking industry, in which case, you can start a hedge fund. After all, if you're going to commit a crime, start with the legal ones.
There are some tips about maximizing your available financial resources by delaying payment on some utility bills. While legally OK, I question the morality of providing such advice to readers.
Good lord, aren't we all just a bit past that sort of sanctimonious BS? The banks and credit card companies would dig up sell our dead grandmothers for hamburger seasoning if it helped their quarterly numbers a bit. Do you think we really owe them *any* moral consideration?
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.
You're new here, aren't you?
If this sig is witty, it was probably borrowed from someone else's sig.
That was beautiful.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
I am prepared to give it a 4/10 for it's lack of detail and an unconvincing plot.
I am prepared to give your sentence a 4/10 for its lack of spelling.
If you were going to post "Oh my god another review that's a 9/10... why don't they use a scale that doesn't give every single book a 7 or higher" boy have I got good news for you! I am in the process of writing a review of the 2009 Danielle Steele novel "Matters Of The Heart". I don't want to spoil the review (or the book) but I will say that I am prepared to give it a 4/10 for it's lack of detail and an unconvincing plot.
Would you prefer a scale that goes to 11?
There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
You aren't saying the review distribution is a hockey stick graph, are you? *facepalm*
"Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person."
Like taking a job with Goldman Sachs?
Sure, recruiters want their commission. Yes, most of them probably couldn't give a flying proverbial if you're going to be happy in the position, as long as you stay long enough for the recruiter to get his/her full commission. (Some recruiters actually make the candidate sign a contract stating that they're responsible for paying back that commission if they leave the job too soon).
But... does that matter? If you don't have a contact inside the company you're targeting, a recruiter is your man on the inside. He is talking direct to HR there. You're not. So it doesn't matter, really, if he's the most loathsome human being the world has ever known - if it increases your chances of getting hired, who cares?
There is a scathing chapter on recruiters. While certain good qualities of recruiters are mentioned, it seems the authors generally believe that recruiters are uncaring commission-hounds that just want to place a candidate and don't care about individuals. The brutal honesty was refreshing, and I'd be curious whether a majority of Slashdot readers would agree or disagree with the authors.
I found recruiters to be entirely self-serving. Last year when I was looking for a job, the ones I dealt with seemed to have a strict "two and out" policy: they present you to two companies MAX, and if those interviews don't go well, it'll be months if you ever hear from them again - i.e. you got dropped, they stopped trying to market you. One recruiter totally shoehorned me into an interview for a job I had no background for. Another set an interview up and the phone screen didn't go well. In both cases, I didn't hear from those recruiters again.
Yet another tried to convince me to move for an opportunity (I balked due to various expenses that weren't covered, plus the loss on selling my home) and the next interview they lined up was a 2 month scripting contract at a game company, and after that... never heard from them again. The way they handled the first job (that required the move) was totally fishy - they wanted me to agree that I'd accept the job and move IF there was a job offer, while I pushed back I can't pre-accept what doesn't exist especially without even meeting or talking to the group first. They wouldn't even set the interview up so I had more info for the decision. I figure there must have been something weird about their finder's fee and what sequence of steps or how far along things were before payments were exchanged or refunds made, etc. I think they were afraid if the company and I contacted each other (i.e. I interviewed) without an agreement in place for the recruiter, the company would somehow be able to duck their fee.
"I would imagine that the publishers do a pretty good job of keeping books off the shelves that score on the low end of the scale."
I'm sure they do, but a 1-10 scale for books seems to rate books relative to other books since there is no well defined or accepted rubrik for what defines a good or bad book.
If all books reviewed are above average, then the review really doesn't say anything because general perception doesn't distinguish a 7 from an 8, or an 8 from a 9 or 10.
Now, it might be the case that a 7 isn't really all that different from a 10, but I'd think that someone who spends their time reading books in the 7-10 range would disagree, and want a scale that started at 7 (1) and went to 10 (4).
That 1-4 scale would represent the difference much better in a sea of 7 rated books.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
It is one thing to couch-surf when you are single. When you have a family (and even in your case, perhaps one medical emergency away from wiping out a year's savings) one becomes less sanguine about it.
Do a google image search for "ninja", and the image on the book is one of the first results. I've been using that image as an avatar for years.
Allow me to present the other side of the coin: I am not HR, never been HR - while I review resumes *after* HR has filtered them (to do the actual technical evaluation of "is this person bullshitting or do they actually know what they claim to") I do NOT do front-line filtering of resumes, nor is it appropriate to send me a resume. Yet, I have had several "recruiters" send me their marks - err, "clients" - resumes. And do you know what happens then? Both the recruiter AND the "client" get blacklisted by our HR department when I forward the message onward.
In short: if your "reconnaissance" isn't spot-on, you can hurt yourself more than you help.
www.eFax.com are spammers
Is it rational to put yourself and your own needs above the needs of others?
It is rational to put one's own need to eat above someone else's need to own a yacht. Yes.
When the society as a whole is failing to meet the needs of its individuals, then putting the needs of 'society' ahead of one's own is only actually meeting the needs of the elite few rich controllers at the top of society, to one's own detriment.
A society that cannot meet the needs of its individuals is unworthy of self-sacrifice, and should be dismantled.
If every book that gets reviewed receives a 7 through 10, what is the point of having a 1-10 scale since you could just as easily express it via a 1-4 scale, or better yet a 0-3 scale and store it directly in a two bit integer.
Oh, see, and I thought the point of your original post was that the observation that most every book reviewed gets a high score was silly, because generally terrible books aren't reviewed by a lot of people, because few people care or want to hear about those books; e.g. nobody on /. wants to hear about the latest Daniel Steele abomination. I thought that was your point. Guess not.
Okay. So the problem with adjusting the scale such that the book that receives a 7 in the 1-10 scale receives a 1 or 0 on the new scale is that everyone's expectation is that the lowest number on a scale means "awful", when that simply isn't the case for the book that receives a 7. The point of a review scale, while inherently subjective, is still to rate the book against all possible books, not simply those that have achieved popular recognition enough that many reviewers have written reviews. Basically, while 7 may be the lowest score books that are reviewed actually get, it is not the lowest score any hypothetical book could get, and that's the way it should be.
There are coarser-grained rating scales that make a lot of sense, because let's face it justifying a 7 vs an 8 vs 7.5 is pretty much impossible. I like Flickfilosopher.com's traffic light scale, Green for see it in theatres, Yellow for wait for rental, and Red for don't see it ever. But the equivalent of a '7' is probably a yellow light and changing that so it was red would mean denying the existence of some truly awful movies.
So yeah. 10 pt scale isn't perfect, but it's not an accident that most of the reviews we care about are for things on the higher end of the scale, and no that should not be changed.
The enemies of Democracy are
Neither is jackoff yet people use that word when you are around all the time.
Darwinism is dead, no wonder so many people are idiot creationists, the government paying for leeches is removing the mechanism for natural selection amongst the human population.
Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
Just about veryone in the US is one major medical problem away from bankruptcy. The super-rich and some high level government employees are the only exceptions. I just wish I know where the opponents of real (US) health care reform get their health care - I'd like to be so confident of having continuing health care after I'm unable to work due to ill-health.
Give him a break, mods! Troll this is not.
He's absolutely right. There's a big difference between the worst-case scenarios where you get seriously sick while laid off and more minor cases.
If there's one thing that the world has learned over this last recession is that we're not being prudent with our finances.
Don't live paycheck to paycheck. Make sure you have insurance. Save money for emergencies. Have food on your shelves to last at least a few months. Get rid of your debts: credit cards, car payments, student loans, etc. Get more education and training. This is called being a responsible adult.
I realize this may not be easy or possible in some cases -- insurance being impossible for some. I also don't want to downplay the challenges in achieving a secure financial situation: it can be very hard, especially for someone that's in up to their nose already.
But there's way too many people who buy luxuries on the credit card, pay the minimum balance, have no savings, don't try to get education, don't get insurance to save money, and buy new cars they can't afford ... and then are bit hard when one bad thing happens.
Financial security takes sacrifice, something that almost nobody is willing to do these days.
Probably more like a golf club than a hockey stick. Minimal at the low end with a bell curve at the high end.
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
Interestingly, this is basically how GPA schemes work. Grades start on a percentage scale from 0% to 100%, but then are reduced to a 0-4 scale*, where everything below 60% is lumped together as a 0.
Maybe the reason we see books rated 7 or higher is for the same reason you don't see resumes for people with a GPA lower than 2.0: at some point, that's not a career you should be in.
* Yes, other scales exist, but this is the one I have experience with.
It's rational to put the needs of society over the wants of its members, but asking people to put their own needs behind those of anything or one else will only select for those that refuse to do so.
Don't look at the money spent on homeless shelters. It's very, very easy to spend money to zero (or even negative) effect. Look only at whether they're effective or not. Can they guarantee the safety and security of those who use them? Can they guarantee that space will be available every night? Are they within walking distance of all amenities their inhabitants require? If the answer is 'no' to any of those questions, you cannot reasonably blame someone for doing what they need to do to survive.
"There is a scathing chapter on recruiters. While certain good qualities of recruiters are mentioned, it seems the authors generally believe that recruiters are uncaring commission-hounds that just want to place a candidate and don't care about individuals. The brutal honesty was refreshing, and I'd be curious whether a majority of Slashdot readers would agree or disagree with the authors."
In my experience I would call that quote a well deserved assessment. At the end of the day most recruiters don't care about their clients. They like to make money, and they are very similar to salesmen. They'll do and say anything to get you to take a job (sometimes well below your capabilities), keep you on the line urging you to stick it out, and then hang you out to dry as soon as the contract is up. Recruiters are a stepping stone. Use them, but understand that you are also being used, and make no bones about leaving an assignment early when another permanent position comes available. They don't make any guarantees, so don't give them any either.
I don't believe in karma, I just call it like I see it.
That's a pretty shallow and individualistic notion of adult and responsible. I rely on kind, cooperative strangers for my job. As do everyone. Even rich robber baron bastards. Maybe the world would be a little more just if people would cooperate with that type less. I rely on kind strangers to teach me language so I can be human and interact.
Stupidity is its own reward.
That will just lead to 3's or so.
The problem is, no one wants to do reviews on crappy books - it's tedious and rather dull work. And you have to justify your reasons for the poor grade, which is still more work. End result is bad books don't normally get reviewed (there are a few, but rare). They just get chucked in the trash and a one-star left on Amazon or somesuch. And then others see that and don't buy the book, so bad books simply don't make it up the review chain, unless it's by some die-hard fanatic or someone with too much time on their hands.
OTOH, a good book is one you want to tell others about, so you do, via submitted reviews and the like.
My name is Craig Brown and I am one of the book's authors. First, thank you all for discussing our book! I'd like to address some of the comments that were left about some of the things I have said (both in the book and on The Layoff Support Network". Crime: First, I clearly say don't do it. But don't think I haven't spoken with at least a dozen guys that had considered it. You can argue "right and wrong" all you want, but I would be willing to bet that the discussion would be completely different if you were truly desperate. Your level of desperation would depend on your situation. If you are a young single guy, your situation may only be effecting your own life. But if you have kids, the prospect of having your kids become homeless (or suffering in any way) is unbearable. Believe me, I know what I am talking about (see what I wrote on the site). What about healthcare? If you miss one Cobra payment, you lose it. For me, it was over $1,000 per month. What if you have a sick kid? My point is that if you are a rational person in a bad situation you may consider doing something that you normally would consider irrational. I know that we have helped people by allowing them to run through a scenario and realize it would not be beneficial to anyone in the long run.
The company that I work for receives hundreds -- if not thousands -- of resumes a day. It isn't even a particularly big company, as it has about 500 employees. Human resources doesn't even look at the resumes, as it would be impossible for two or three people to read through the flood of applications. The only thing they can do is throw them into a database and conduct electronic searches.
What I learned from this is:
* Always supply a resume in electronic format
* Always be considerate and supply multiple, common formats such as Microsoft Word and PDF
* Always include applicable keywords or buzzwords in your resume that they are likely to search on, such as specific products, methodologies or technologies
* Always continue to resend your resume every few months as they generally restrict searches to get candidates that are likely still searching for work
Never getting any job ever again? Assuming you're not talking about becoming seriously disabled, I hope you mean "starting over in a new career"
I'm trying that. And that's not working either. I've been to career councilors and had folks look at my resume - and I took all their feedback and did what I had to do.
I'm basically unemployable. It's been a few years and I'm tarnished goods - so yes, this able bodied person is never getting another job again because I can't. That's how bad it is. When you're 45 with years of IT experience, no one want's to touch you. I can't even get an interview.
I'm just going to have to figure out some sort of business - maybe roofing like that other guy said. Or go to China - Jim Rogers says it's the place to be - America isn't. Maybe they'll be interested in a middle aged guy with a masters degree.
The American dream is dead and the middle class is being destroyed and I'm the one of the first casualties.
RIP America
July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001
My name is Craig Brown and I am one of the book's authors. I admit outright that I am biased against recruiters. In my 25+ years of work in high tech, I have never been placed by a recruiter. I have met with hundreds of them and have heard countless stories about questionably ethical behavior by a recruiter. After writing the chapter, I read it over and it was pretty obvious that my experiences had not been positive. So, I turned to Javed (my co-author) to wrote a "counter point" to my "point". He couldn't do it. We have both had similar experiences with recruiters. I attended a job hunting Meetup last week. About half the attendees were recruiters. They all seemed nice and vehemently denied that they would ever do anything like the examples I cite in the book. Recruiters are just like us, they are trying to scratch out a living. The problem I have with recruiters is that we work with them when we are desperate and at our weakest point. We believe the things they say because we WANT to believe them. I don't fault recruiters for aggressively trying to succeed. I fault them for out-right lying. A recruiter told me that he brings people in even if they clearly are not a good match for the position they think they are applying. He said that it works out good for them because if another position comes along, he can suggest them for it. No, Thank You! You are not doing me any favors posing as my salvation and wasting my time.
I have had recruiters put me on jobs for 1 day even when they are just in my field just to work 1 day and be told that you are not picking it up fast or this job is not for you.
Some recruiters over stuff jobs then after 1 day they get rid of you and say there are to many people on the job!
'Oh no, another book with "Ninja" in the title.' But in this case, the authors have established a case for that: they explained that the first Ninjas were peasants who could not take the abuse from the Samurai anymore and how they used everyday objects as weapons.
If you seriously didn't know that's how the ninja came to be, you should probably drop your geek card off at the "expired" bin.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
So how did you ever become not unemployed again? Since you didn't take 'a cent' of government money (and apparently had no social support system) how did you shower? I for one don't want roving bands of angry, unemployed thugs walking the streets and breaking into homes to steal food/money for the day. It takes a level a maturity to save 10% of ones income for such an event. That maturity comes with parental training. And if the parents are 3rd generation povery, good luck.
Let them go get a hot meal at a local missing (government subsidized) or get into some transitional housing. Not everyone can play the 'noble hobo' role. Something as simple as diabetes means refusing government help after a reversal of fortune is a pretty quick death sentence.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
Recruiters fall under the 'any port in a storm' and 'beggars cant be choosers' clauses. They legitimately have some jobs available that you might not find otherwise, and you have plenty of free time to deal with their bs, so suck it up and deal with them. Any job advice book that suggests they aren't worth the hassle but myspace is sounds highly suspect to me.
Anon because I program for clients who like to use recruiters.
This is an article with ninjas in the title -- on Slashdot. Where are all the Real Ultimate Power jokes?
I recently rated a Dean Koontz book 1 out of 5 stars, and hated it so much I was driven to write my first product review ever on Amazon. People think anyone who gives a super low rating are just bitter people, so I broke it down as to why it sucked so bad.
It was worth finishing because the suckage came at the end, and it was worth reviewing for the same reason it's worth taking the time to post a "Danger - Quicksand" sign.
Public use of any portable music system is a virtually guaranteed indicator of sociopathic tendencies. -- Zoso
Originally the people that became "the Ninja" were peasants. Peasants were not allowed to own swords or other weapons. Their weapons were not developed so that they can be in "plain sight", it was because they had no other choice. For example: The rice harvesting tool became nunchucks. The incentive to develop weapons was pretty high as the Samurai were allowed to practice on the peasants by riding horses and loping off the peasant's heads. Since they were small in number, Ninja got pretty good at being stealthy and taking out Samurai. Warlords figured out that in order to kill a rival warlord, they could send in their Samurais (and wipe out the entire village) or hire the Ninja to do it with the least casualties (which made you much more popular in the village you were taking over). Ninja women were particularly well suited for seducing their way into a camp and killing the desired individual. I did not use the word "Ninja" because it is a "pop culture" word. When I was younger I was into Martial Arts and actually got to study Ninjutsu with a real one (not a guy that thought he would drum up business for his Karate school by sticking "Ninja" on a sign). He was a guy with a lineage back to the remaining Ninja family in Japan. Anyway, that is how I came up with the name (and where else but slashdot would the name be debated :-) In summary, the Ninja were just really good at figuring stuff out.
I love this response and you are not far off from the truth. I live by two guiding principles (The Prime Directive, for you slashdoters). 1. Don't hurt anybody 2. Don't do anything that would result in me being someone's wife in prison. Hurting someone includes your family as well. Thus, doing something that will land you in prison will hurt your family and be against #1 (and lead to #2) ... and saying "I can't possibly get caught" doesn't cut it. You will get caught no matter how smart you are.
Most members of society have their own moral, ethical or religious reasons for "walking the straight and narrow". When those fail, consider the Prime Directive. So, no. I really think crime is a bad idea.
In all seriousness, you can usually tell when a bad review is someone who is just angry or someone who actually has a good reason (not to say I have not been burned when buying electronics and just assuming the bad reviews were from idiots who couldn't operate it right--they turned out to be correct).
Bottles.
For $2,000 I'll build you one that goes to twelve.
Obligatory xkcd
http://xkcd.com/670/
I have also worked with many recruiters. The way I look at it is similar to what you say. They are out for themselves. Fair enough. If I'm talking to them I'm out for myself too. Using recruiters is similar to using Google. Well, maybe Bing. You are looking for something and they are offering. They won't always offer exactly what you want so you will need to screen for yourself and don't be afraid to say "No, that job is a poor fit." You don't always use the first link the search engines give you do you ?
Good recruiters will try to make good matches. This makes them look good to the companies they work for and their paying clients (the companies they place at) plus the people they place will tell others about it and their resource pool will grow. Chances are poor recruiters won't be in the business for long and you don't need to deal with them anyway. Why waste your time. They're a commodity like search engines.
On the other hand they're humans too and keeping a good relationship with the good ones can pay off nicely when they can confidently go to a company and say "I know this guy and I really think he'd fit in well here". That's an inside recommendation right there.
The trouble with the rat race is that even if you win, you're still a rat." Lily Tomlin
"""
to determine what type of job would be suitable. But in the next breath, the authors suggest folding away the values-list and taking a job (any job) that will pay the bills. I fail to understand this contradictory advice, and wish they would make up their mind.
"""
This is not contradictory advise. Rather it is telling people to swallow there pride and get a temporary job to pay the bills while continuing to look for one more suitable. This is very practical advise given the most people won't survive a couple months without any income and it takes time to even find one of these jobs. How else would one survive while finding a job if they end up on the street because they can't pay there mortgage/rent?
Don't suppose you even got to the last sentence of my post... Let me reiterate: "While this may be a situation where aesthetics is called for over simplicity, that shouldn't stand in the way of a joke." You may now begin regretting the 10 minutes you wasted writing that novella.
In pretty much every government in the world works that way.
What do you think services are for? roads, educations, and so on, These are ALL about putting the group ahead of the individual.
In fact, with out it War would be highly unlikely to occur. You are putting your life on the line(not good for you) for society as a whole.
He is not talking about a communist structure, so stop and think.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Maybe everything below 7 is worth writing about?
I get half way through a book that's a 4, I put it down, curse the Author, and move on. I certainly wouldn't spend time writing an article about it.
The only exception may be 'loved classics' that aren't anything close to what people think they are. Like Shakespeare.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
You really don't understand technical merits for scoring, do you?
1-10 means you have a 1-5 scale for technical merits. IN a world where most published books are edited, you not likely to loose points for technical grammatic reasons.
An Engineer looks for the most accurate way top represent something, then tries to reduce. They do not reduce for the sake of reduction. Well crappy arm chair Engineers will, not real engineers.
IF you want to establish strict guideline where the 'price of admission' is a set of rules, then you might be able to reduce to a smaller scale.With out that, you need a wide scale.
oh, and a Great engineer recognizes how people will use what he is creating.
In short:
You're wrong.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
here is a humorous, and accurate, look at Ninja. Plus it's got a picture of a hot ninja:
http://www.cracked.com/funny-3045-ninja-are-lie/
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
One of the Authors? well then can you answer me this:
Do you know the the Ninja never really existed?
The book clearly tries to 'define' them even though they where made up specifically for stories.
How can I believe what some one writes when they clearly haven't taken the minimal time to find out if the example they use actually existed?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
WoW! How did you make THAT leap?!
From couch surfing to that random troll!
And how is it that you think creationist rely any more on the gov't than atheists?
If you are down and out ... financially BROKE has no religion chief!
I've been an IT consultant for 20 years. I've found nearly all of my jobs in the last 15 years through recruiters. I don't like recruiters. Unfortunately, I'm required to use them.
The problem I have with recruiters is that we work with them when we are desperate and at our weakest point. We believe the things they say because we WANT to believe them.
This is exactly right. And they know it. And they use it to manipulate you. When a recruiter calls you, the instant you pick up the phone, they're negotiating with you. Look at what questions they ask: When is your contract ending? They don't care about getting you something in time. They're trying to figure out how desperate you are. Are you working now? Same thing. What was the rate/salary at your last job? They ask this so they can argue that you're getting a good raise, even when it's less than you asked for.
If a recruiter asks when your job is ending, it's not. It's open-ended. You don't have to find a new job, you're just looking around. If they ask what you're making now, either refuse to tell them or lie to them. If you don't have a job now and you can't hide it, then you're on vacation. Don't tell them anything that they can use against you during the money negotiation.
I don't fault recruiters for aggressively trying to succeed. I fault them for out-right lying.
I don't fault lions for trying to eat, I just fault them for killing other animals.
A recruiter told me that he brings people in even if they clearly are not a good match for the position they think they are applying. He said that it works out good for them because if another position comes along, he can suggest them for it. No, Thank You! You are not doing me any favors posing as my salvation and wasting my time.
It is absolutely your responsibility to determine whether the position they're submitting you to is a good match for your skills and experience. Recruiters are clueless. You're lucky if they've simply heard of the buzzword, and bonus points for being able to tell an operating system apart from a programming language. It's that bad.
Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
You will pay into it but won't claim any?
Don't you think you are at least entitled to get yours back?
Sheesh! I paid in it long enough. After I claimed my share, I am sure I have paid plenty more into it.
Using THAT logic, go grab a bum off the street and pay for his motel room for a night while you sleep in the car. Same thing.
I've heard the subsidized housing horror tales and seen it too. There is no respect for something they don't own.
We had some housing that was all "Older folks" - was kept in great shape and was a nice place. They switched it the deterioration was immediate.
You just need a cooler wife and kids. Deep six them and head down to the frat party across the block and pick some up there.
Seriously.
It will get you out of the house, who knows who you will meet.
Won't make you feel any better though.
Any cash flow is better then none.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
When you are desperate any crime you commit will have a higher then average chance of being detected.
Plan ahead, if you see desperate times coming then go ahead and go criminal before you are actually desperate.
It's just like the old expression 'violence is the last refuge of the incompetent'.
IIRC it was Heinlein who first observed that (para):
For myself. My life's ambition is to invent a new crime. It will be illegal after I do it the first time.
Non-original crimes. Every day. We all do. Cue Rand bot.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Hi Craig, I'm one of the recruiters who was at that event last Wednesday (Boston IT Job Seekers Meetup). As someone who has been unemployed several times myself, I can definitely relate to what you're saying and where you're coming from in your book (even if I don't agree with you entirely). Looking for a job sucks, and it's frustrating as hell--no doubt about that. Yet the life of a recruiter is no bed of roses either. It can be frustrating and thankless for us too. While it's true that we're "middle men" the bottom line is that we're just as exposed to the fickleness and vagaries of hiring companies and the economy as our candidates are. As contingency recruiters, we also only get paid when and if the client hires the person we've presented, so there is a lot of pressure to find and present only the best-of-the-best. That can make the process seem especially difficult and cruel (kind of like playing "lotto"), but I can tell you that I'm not out there trying to screw anyone--I'm human too--but the hiring process is just a reality of how this industry works. Of course, if a client isn't in a hurry or not too picky, they don't need us; they can just put up a posting on Craigslist and see what comes their way (and by that, I don't mean to discourage anyone from applying to Craigslist--in fact, I recommend it), but even in that case there's still only one job available, and so only one person is going to get the job! Everyone else will feel frustrated and ripped off, but it is what it is. Whether as a recruiter or a hiring manager, finding "perfect" candidates isn't easy. Especially when what constitutes "perfect" for one job, isn't necessarily the ideal for another job. So what we're left with is trying to talk to and meet with as many potentially qualified people as we can find, in the hopes of having that perfect candidate at our finger-tips when the ideal job DOES come along. It's a lot of work. And unfortunately, in a down economy, it's exacerbated by clients who sometimes have unreasonable expectations about what is out there. We've all seen those "laundry list" requirement lists on job orders. Sometimes, even WE have to laugh at those ourselves! If we have a good relationship with a client, we can reason with them and readjust their expectations, but not always, which means we're left trying to find candidates that may not even exist! Finally, there are the issues of timing and competition. We're often not the only agency working on a particular job order, which means that "speed-to-market" makes all the difference--not to mention the myriad unknowns and intervening factors beyond our control... So all of THAT my friend, is what I was talking about when I explained that I bring in people who may not always be an exact match for the particular job they're applying for. It's certainly not about trying to mislead people or waste their time. Far from it. But the sad and simple truth is that by the time I talk to anyone about a job, there's a distinct possibility the job I'm talking to them about may already have been filled--I have no way of knowing that; but if I let it stop me, I wouldn't talk to anyone, would I? ;-> However, having once met with a candidate, that person becomes a known quantity to me and is thus ready to go for the NEXT opportunity--meaning that I can have them presented to a potential client a lot sooner (ideally before the job gets filled) than someone that I haven't talked to yet.... That's just how it works. Obviously, as a candidate, that's not really encouraging, and perhaps shows you what a crap-shoot it is, and that working with an agency shouldn't be the only avenue in your job search... I have a lot more I could say on the topic, but basically, I just wanted to shed some light from the "other side." Recruiters are people too and not trying to screw anyone. Am I saying there aren't any sleazy people in this industry? No--as just like in every other industry and profession, there are always going to be people who try and take short-cuts or lack the pr
You didn't need that time or that money; they were surplus.
If you were skipping meals to pay your share of the NHS, you'd have a point, but you aren't.