Slashdot Mirror


Virtual Boss Keeps Workers On a Short Leash

Gr8Apes writes "Hitachi has created a 'perfect virtual boss.' The company is manufacturing and selling a device intended to increase efficiency in the workplace called the Hitachi Business Microscope (paywalled). 'The device looks like an employee ID badge that most companies issue. Workers are instructed to wear it in the office. Embedded inside each badge, according to Hitachi, are "infrared sensors, an accelerometer, a microphone sensor and a wireless communication device." Hitachi says that the badges record and transmit to management "who talks to whom, how often, where and how energetically." It tracks everything. If you get up to walk around the office a lot, the badge sends information to management about how often you do it, and where you go. If you stop to talk with people throughout the day, the badge transmits who you're talking to (by reading your co-workers' badges), and for how long. Do you contribute at meetings, or just sit there? Either way, the badge tells your bosses.'"

105 of 664 comments (clear)

  1. In otherwards by halfEvilTech · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It just takes micromanagement to an entirely new level. No thanks to these.

    1. Re:In otherwards by mhajicek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Get ready for your new Terrafoam domecile.

    2. Re:In otherwards by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 4, Funny

      It just takes micromanagement to an entirely new level.

      Considering the chip die sizes involved, it's probably better to call to call it nano-management.

    3. Re:In otherwards by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Wait, wait, I know this one! Ah, nothing like innovations in management to remind you that a dystopia is always possible. Anyone who hasn't read Manna, go do it! It is worth it.

      It's too bad so much iconic dystopic science fiction was written or cinematized in the 80s (Nineteen Eighty-Four and Bladerunner, to name but two film examples), since it means that all you need to trick people into thinking it's impossible is a bright and cheery computer interface.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    4. Re:In otherwards by Joce640k · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When I saw the words "Perfect Boss" I imagined something totally opposite to the rest of the description (which describes the boss from hell...)

      --
      No sig today...
    5. Re:In otherwards by buswolley · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For all the talk that libertarians give about freedom, they sure don't seem to care about worker freedoms in the workplace. Those freedoms are out the door when you step through it.

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    6. Re:In otherwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because, for those libertarians, the right to make a profit trumps anything as pesky as workers rights ... and if people weren't willing to work there they could work elsewhere and the 'invisible hand' would sort everything out.

      Those people are largely full of shit.

    7. Re:In otherwards by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For all the talk that libertarians give about freedom, they sure don't seem to care about worker freedoms in the workplace. Those freedoms are out the door when you step through it.

      Libertarians aren't about freedom (positive liberty), they are about (negative) liberty. What this means in practice is that if your oppressor isn't called "government", you're on your own.

      There's a certain consistency to their position, since guaranteeing my positive liberty to not wear a collar like this removes my employers liberty to demand it as a condition of employment. The problem is that libertarianism vastly overestimates the government's share of power in modern society, and consequently underestimates that held by the private sector, and thus sets its priorities wrong. And of course true believers refuse to acknowledge that any priorities beyond ideological purity even exist.

      A more cynical person might wonder if the movement isn't backed by the very oppressors who want to deflect would-be freedom fighters from themselves to windmills. But surely our corporate overlords wouldn't do something so dishonest.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    8. Re:In otherwards by penglust · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Another anonymous BS artist. In a modern society governments are created by the people (where have I heard that before) to ensure the common good. There is the freedom to do anything to your employees you want and then there is the freedom to not be treated like a slave. Where have most of the battles been fought in the last 150 years or so.

      That is until the the corrupt domineering religious right started forcing there values onto everybody else at the republican corporate ran prison system and then the extra greedy rich used them to extend their money power on congress.

      Our government today is mostly bought and sold just as you would have it. Fuck you with forced at gun point. How about some common decency.

    9. Re:In otherwards by Gort65 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It might be fine for Japanese culture... I don't know. But it sure as hell wouldn't fly here. As soon as I found out those were required I'd be out the door.

      The problem is that there is always some desperate person willing to take your place, either out of apathy or economic necessity. Eventually, if enough of these people fill in the vacancies, then you'll find this sort of thing spreading to other workplaces, again chasing you out. It'll spread if it's allowed to. Still, there's always collective action to avoid this kind of thing. Pity that such defensive action is sort of frowned upon today, though.

    10. Re:In otherwards by sqrt(2) · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've mostly stopped typing out my own rebuttals and just started linking to the specific part of my .sig that addresses whatever particular libertarian fallacy someone is invoking. Rarely do I need to go offscript, and even more rarely is a competent rebuttal offered that doesn't distill down to a simple difference in values. Libertarians are, at heart, corporate fascists. They are simply working from a different value system--a horrifyingly barbarous one.

      You can consider the debate over when you get them to affirm their subscription to the unadulterated version of those beliefs. For example, I've cornered one before and forced them to admit that rampant poverty is preferable to even a small amount of taxation to alleviate it.

      I'll give them credit for their absolute devotion to ideological purity. That's real devotion.

      --
      If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
    11. Re:In otherwards by Psyborgue · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're missing the point. A business that did this would be at a disadvantage because of the dissatisfied employees (especially competent ones) who would go elsewhere. The usual counter argument is that if everybody does it, then there is no "freedom", but of course this ignores the fact that the one business that didn't do this would have a massive advantage. Happy workers are productive workers. So yes, the market sorts it out here too.

      Yeah, sure, there might be situations where entire low skilled sectors of work did this sort of thing (like with fast food drug testing), but at the same time, that simply provides an incentive to better one's self and maybe go back to college. Plenty of people do it. It's not always easy but if people work at it, it's almost always possible.

    12. Re: In otherwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And if every company just happens to coincidentally implement the same antiworker policies then you are perfectly free to starve and die! Another win for the free market!

    13. Re:In otherwards by sqrt(2) · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Happy workers are productive workers.

      I have a hard time believing someone can be so ignorant of history. Do you think slaves were happy? What about feudal serfs? Or pre-unionized steel workers? Or the children working in textile factories?

      Capital has never, and will never, care about the happiness of their workers unless those workers force them to care. We had to fight tooth and nail for the rights we have now; eight hour days, forty hour weeks, weekends, workplace safety, sick leave, maternity leave, minimum wage. These things make workers happy, and none of them were offered up voluntarily. They had to be bought with the blood and the lives of the working class from generations ago, and capital has been tirelessly waging a ceaseless campaign to take them back.

      --
      If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
    14. Re:In otherwards by master_kaos · · Score: 2

      Ok so maybe they should also have you wear a shock collar so when the device determines you are sleeping on the job, you get a few thousand volts put through your body.
      Oh and heaven forbid if it detects you stealing office supplies, it will chop off a toe! But hey freedom!

    15. Re:In otherwards by morgauxo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      " that simply provides an incentive to better one's self and maybe go back to college"

      The problem with this logic is that society needs a certain number of people to work in those low end jobs. Society does not however need 100% of it's individuals to hold college degrees. We already have factories looking for college degrees when they hire line workers. These are jobs where the workers are doing simple repetative tasks like turning screws, inspecting paint as parts go by on a line, etc... all day long. Why? Because they have so many potential workers to chose from and no better way to differentiate between them!

      How many years of college will we all need to escape the collar? How much money in student loans? The worse things get in these low-end jobs the more people try to get out of them the higher the bar gets but with no real advantage for society.

    16. Re:In otherwards by jader3rd · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're missing the point. A business that did this would be at a disadvantage because of the dissatisfied employees (especially competent ones) who would go elsewhere.

      My in-laws were shocked to learn that my employer doesn't ban digital frames in the office. The reason is because my father-in-laws employer (Boeing) does (or at least did at the time). Apparently some bean counter calculated that if every employee brought in a digital frame into the workplace it would cost the company X many dollars. So they banned them. I asked about employee moral, etc, and my father-in-law looked at me and said "Where else would they go?"

    17. Re:In otherwards by operagost · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You can't legislate common decency. Otherwise, we'd have to ban 4chan and about half of the shows on "TruTV".

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    18. Re:In otherwards by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 2

      My good sir, don't sully the "good" name of 4chan by comparing it to that filth.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    19. Re:In otherwards by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yay for indentured servitude.

      Or alternatively,

      You load sixteen tons, what do you get
      Another day older and deeper in debt
      Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
      I owe my soul to the company store

    20. Re:In otherwards by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      I would say that anyone who believes in corporations isn't really a libertarian, as a corporation is just a government granting of special privileges. Those privileges are a major part of what gives corporations undue power of employees.

    21. Re:In otherwards by DigiShaman · · Score: 2

      You've obviously never had to deal with MBA holding managers that have an extreme hard-on for six sigma metrics.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    22. Re:In otherwards by SuperCharlie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The right-left argument is like leaving a note with "Look on the other side" written on both sides to keep the idiots busy while being gang-raped.

    23. Re:In otherwards by Khashishi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Libertarians hate the state, but their ideal society is one where a corporation can essentially have all of the power of the state, but without any representation. They will say, you are free to leave a corporation and do business with another. How is that different than, if you don't like the laws of a state, go to another state?

      This isn't hypothetical. Company towns in the past were owned by a corporation which provided essentially all government functions. Quite the libertarian paradise.

    24. Re:In otherwards by sqrt(2) · · Score: 2

      Do you think he did this out of the goodness of his anti-Semitic heart, or because he saw the writing on the wall and wanted to get out ahead of the labor movement? Things were heading in that direction anyway and he just preemptively implemented a policy which was rapidly approaching. Why was it approaching? The labor movement.

      He probably avoided a lot of smashed windows.

      --
      If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
    25. Re:In otherwards by next_ghost · · Score: 2

      "Negative liberties" refer to interference from others, including both private citizens and government.

      There's a slight problem here: Negative liberty is directly proportional to the size of your bank account. If you can't afford to defend your negative liberty on your own against interference from others, you lose it.

      Progressives try to "enhance" people's "positive liberty"-- which is a zero-sum game.

      Not by a long shot. If you don't have to spend so much time defending yourself from people who keep trying to make your life miserable for their own personal gain, you can actually go about using the more enjoyable aspects of your remaining liberty.

    26. Re:In otherwards by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2

      "I am ok with drug testing welfare recipients. Not because "Drugs are bad, m'kay?", but because the hell if someone living on welfare should be spending money on shit like that. If you can afford to keep yourself in an altered state of mind every day it just might be worth looking into whether or not you actually need that financial assistance again."

      The problem is not so much that drug testing -- if it actually did what it was intended to do -- is inherently a bad thing. The problems are twofold:

      The first is presumption of guilt. You are guilty until proven otherwise (by a drug test). Plain and simple, this is an un-American concept, and it should be taken out and shot dead with a cannon. It is simply not a concept accepted by those who truly believe in justice.

      The second problem is that drug tests are unreliable. And the seeming paradox is that the better they get, the worse they are. Worse, that is, in the sense that they demonize innocent people. But explaining why this is would take up far too much space here. Look up "base rate fallacy" on Wikipedia.

    27. Re:In otherwards by sqrt(2) · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe if we actually had a viable liberal party in the USA. It's not a two sided note, it's a Möbius strip

      --
      If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
    28. Re:In otherwards by udippel · · Score: 2

      I wasn't really convinced that 'libertarians' are equivalent to Adam Smith followers?
      I rather thought that people on Slashdot have a statistical higher chance to be libertarians than the mean of the population. And until now I don't think that Slashdot-ers have a similar high preference for inhumane working environs. rather on the contrary.
      To give an example only.
      I am not even convinced that this nannying will actually work. I don't even the bosses neither. What a lot of boring crap will they have to endure listening to!

    29. Re:In otherwards by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2

      I've cornered one before and forced them to admit that rampant poverty is preferable to even a small amount of taxation to alleviate it.

      Just out of curiousity, how would you manage to have "rampant poverty" that "a small amount of taxation" could alleviate?

      An actual example would do, or even a reasonable hypothetical. With numbers, of course. It's easy to handwave situations when you don't have any numbers behind your assertions.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    30. Re:In otherwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's too many of these BS comments about libertarians, by people who are completely confused, to respond to all of them, so I'm responding to just this one. Libertarians are about *everyone's* freedom. That includes the freedom to make stupid rules about the place you work. It also includes the freedom to leave that job and seek another. And the freedom to start your own business with the rules you want, with minimal barrier to entry.

      * There is no "right to profit." It is a straw man. You have property rights, so if you own a property, you can decide how that property is used. You can sell it, give it to someone to improve in exchange for something else (like money), decide that it may only be held by people wearing pink gloves, or whatever. I suspect you're confusing property rights with something you've imagined.

      * Someone else said that Libertarians aren't interested in anything but the government. Not true. To a libertarian, rights are sacrosanct. It doesn't matter who tramples those rights, it's considered wrong. The government just happens to be a major constituent responsible for infringing on individuals' rights, and so is a very common target for the discussion. And the government is in a special position where it has legal, if not moral, authority to infringe upon individuals' rights.

      * Someone else talks about a person that they got to admit to something they don't like, and this someone happened to be a libertarian. Well, boo hoo, but one person does not make for data.

      * Someone else confuses the transitive property. A is B, therefore B is A. This is not always true. The specific confusion is around a quote of "happy workers are productive workers" and the quoter talks about "were slaves happy?" Just because happy workers are productive workers does not mean all productive workers are happy workers. I doubt that anyone except the small minded and liars would make that claim.

      Now, speaking as a libertarian myself, I find this technology to be stupid, damaging to morale, and damaging to trust in the company that chooses to use it. I will not work for such a company under any circumstances that I can forsee. However, should a company choose to use this technology, I will not use force (of law) to stop them. They can have all the consequences that they deserve for what I see as a bad decision. They can deal with the low performance of a demoralized employee base. They can deal with high turnover to companies that trust their employees. They can deal with low institutional knowledge, for information lost due to turnover. They can deal with unhappy customers, due to all of the above. They can deal with lost profits due to unhappy customers. And with damage to their stock prices. And the owners can risk loss of their business, should it come to that.

      I also will not stop the employees from working there. The employees who choose to work there may decide that the costs of holding the job are less than the value that the job provides. That is their choice to make.

      I will not stop people from speaking out against the company. In fact, I may join them in their outcry.

      Here, you see a true libertarian's position, not all the made-up bull that you keep imagining.

    31. Re: In otherwards by Rakarra · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Businesses who adopt "antiworker policies" will lose them to companies with better policies. (Until the government starts demanding all kinds of regulations that drive out competitive behavior...)

      Not that I'm a big fan of what unions turned into, but they arose precisely because the above is not what happened. Workers had no mobility at all, between jobs, between companies, they had no input on company rules, and that was the standard across industries. Feudalism is feudalism whether it's the lord that holds the reigns or the company.

      So indeed, I thank God for the unions back in those days -- they defused the situation, made conditions better, and the collapse that Karl Marx anticipated did not happen in the US as it did in Russia and other countries.

    32. Re:In otherwards by LifesABeach · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have found that most Libertarians logic fails when laws are applied without conditions, and amendments.

    33. Re:In otherwards by penglust · · Score: 2

      Like I said, the government is bought and sold. The extremeness of the guilt is great on both sides but it does seem like the republicans are worse than the democrats. God I would like to see a president like Johnson again who had no problem ripping a new one. Obama is wimp on training wheels.

      And, oh yes, again another anonymous poster. You are either a shill or an idiot.

    34. Re:In otherwards by bugs2squash · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Since when did anyone have property rights that trumped being powerful enough to seize the property ? You may think you own your land, who sold it to you ? who sold it to them ? You don't have to go back too far before the equitable trade stops.

      --
      Nullius in verba
    35. Re:In otherwards by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 2

      You seem to think that workers are free to change jobs, as though each employer has an infinite supply.
      Jobs are limited. The one business would have a massive advantage in hiring, but wouldn't need to (or be able to) hire everyone else. Jobs aren't like commodity goods, where you can simply change to a different supplier if you're not satisfied with the current one. Also, there's significant risk and expense in switching jobs.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    36. Re:In otherwards by buswolley · · Score: 2

      Well isn't that the very issue I am talking about? Libertarians pick and choose which liberties they support and do not support. That they often oppose worker liberty in subordination to owner liberty is telling.

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    37. Re: In otherwards by geoskd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Businesses who adopt "antiworker policies" will lose them to companies with better policies.

      That is simply not true. That would only be an accurate model of the real world if there was 0% unemployment. Here in the real world, your options are 1) Continue working for the abusive company that insist on 60+ hour work weeks from its "salaried" employees. 2) unemployment.

      I work for one of those hideously abusive companies. They didn't used ot be this way, but starting about 4 years ago (start of the great recession), they discovered that their employees would put up with all kinds of crap, and boy do they dish it out. My co-workers and I were effectively ordered to work 7 days straight, 12 hours per day for the last 2 months. The state I live in has weak labor laws, and the company believes it can do as it pleases. My fellow co-workers and I have been looking for other jobs for a few years now, but the market sucks. (BTW, all of us have at least a bachelors degree, mine is in engineering). There are thousands of jobs around here that pay minimum wage, but almost nothing paying any more than that. In the mean time, I have had my benefits effectively eliminated, all 401k matching eliminated, all pension contributions halted. I have effectively taken a 20% pay cut over the last 4 years. It wont take too much more before McDonalds will be competitive... In spite of all that, there are people lined up down the street for this job because minimum wage really is the only other thing available, and 10% unemployment guarantees that the employers can do any damn thing they want.

      Were it not for those pesky labor laws, I would have been unable to stop the mandatory unpaid overtime. I essentially refused to stay, and started going home after 10 hours, and refused to even show up on the 6th or 7th days. I have made it plain that there are limits, and almost dared them to make an issue out of it so that we can take the whole thing to court. The labor market is no longer a meeting of equals at the negotiating table. The corporations have all the power, and the only thing standing between the peoples of the world and slavery is the rule of law and regulation.

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
  2. They should call it an anti-retention device by TWiTfan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Guaranteed to get rid of off your employees who have other options!

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    1. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by DoomHamster · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is why it is important for the plotucracy to engineer a global economy where capitol can freely traverse national borders but the workforce cannot.

    2. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by DoomHamster · · Score: 2

      Grrr...I KNEW someone was going to catch that...why can't we edit our posts here?

    3. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Guaranteed to get rid of off your employees who have other options!

      You are assuming that the employees would know about the sensors in their badges. Why would the managers tell them?

    4. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by meta-monkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      Beta!

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    5. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by fatgraham · · Score: 4, Funny

      But unfortunately, the budget has been spent on some new management tools.

    6. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by lagomorpha2 · · Score: 2

      On the plus side, salaries will be going up. (Because they'd have to pay people a whole lot more to put up with that).

      Not if all the companies in your field adopt it at the same time. Then you have nowhere to go to to escape it and they don't have to increase salaries.

    7. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by jeffmeden · · Score: 4, Funny

      Grrr...I KNEW someone was going to catch that...why can't we edit our posts here?

      The plotucracy doesn't want you to have that feature.

      Sincerely,

      Your coroprate overlords

    8. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by cusco · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why would you assume that managers are bright enough not to tell them? :)

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    9. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

      It's adorable that you think that.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    10. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by ArbitraryName · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sounds like a great time to start up a competing company. You can hire off the cream of the crop talent without having to pay above market average.

    11. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by buswolley · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Bingo.

      How about this. Management has to wear these and the data gets broadcast to the workers in summary emails

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    12. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by Hatta · · Score: 3, Funny

      You misspelled coprolite.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    13. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by sqrt(2) · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not if this technology actually delivers and makes the workforce more efficient--even if it's through dehumanizing total control. Your hippy dippy startup won't be able to compete.

      So while you're giving extravagant perks to your employees such as unmetered bathroom breaks and letting them skip their quarterly non-work related conversation log review, your competitors are brutalizing their employees and reaping the rewards associated with turning human beings into pliable, docile, terrified, machines.

      The worst thing about fascism is that it can actually deliver; as long as you don't get side tracked by useless and expensive crusades of ethnic cleansing or territorial expansion.

      --
      If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
    14. Re:They should call it an anti-retention device by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 2

      Efficiency is not the sole determiner of market success by any means.

      Yes, but it is the sole metric of modern economics, meaning that any activity taken using this system as a driving model will eventually have a goal of increasing that metric. As such, you will devolve to a cog, and an efficient one at that, or your relative usefulness to the economic system will be over and your employment prospects will plummet precipitously.

      The use of economics (and thus, efficiency) as the main (and almost sole) underpinning of what is "right" is the cause of most of our misery. Efficiency is important. So is kindness and happiness. However, with only a few minor exceptions, it is efficiency that we (and modern businesses and governments) covet. Because even if you can't always find a way to create creative and innovative products that make peoples' lives better - you can almost always screw another 2% out of your employees with less risk and effort.

      Minimizing risk and effort? Yeah - that's the efficiency metric in action. Have fun with it...

      --
      That is all.
  3. Virtual slave by mtrachtenberg · · Score: 5, Funny

    In related news, I am pleased to announce my new "virtual slave" hardware, which intercepts communication from the "Virtual Boss" device to PHBServer and provides an excellent replacement stream of communication indicating you always participate in meetings, visit precisely three fellow employees for ten minutes each day, and never go to the bathroom. ("Virtual Slave eXtreme" will be available soon, with many customization options.)

  4. I think I have to say... by cayenne8 · · Score: 2
    ...Fuck THAT!!

    Or...Take this job and shove it.

    Way too intrusive....treat people like adults, and only punish those that cannot act like an adult, but don't punish and track everyone else that is getting their job done.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  5. Let me be the first to say... by Adeptus_Luminati · · Score: 3, Funny

    .... I quit. I for one, do not welcome our Orwellian overlords.

    --
    No trees were killed in the making of this post; however, many trillions of electrons were horribly inconvenienced.
    1. Re:Let me be the first to say... by meta-monkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You say Orwellian, but it's also what everybody on Star Trek lives with. The computer keeps track of every person on the ship, their location, and their vital signs, and never seems to require command-level authorization to dispense information. Any kid can query the computer and it'll respond "Counselor Troi is in Commander Worf's quarters. Her heart rate is accelerated and her pulmonary system is taxed." And we think of Star Trek as a utopian ideal.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  6. Misunderstood? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Japanese companies have tried stuff like this before, but not so that bosses can harass their employees. They genuinely want to know how to make the business better by finding out how people actually work... You know, like a good boss should.

    Obviously the potential for abuse is massive, but I think the article author is projecting their own thinking on to this idea. Aside from anything else abusing it would probably be illegal under Japanese law, as it would be in most European countries.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Misunderstood? by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If I had any reason to believe that the device was for improvement of workflow and elimination of redundancy, I'd gladly wear it. The problem is that the way employees are treated today, there is exactly zero reason to believe that was the idea behind it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Misunderstood? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know what world you live in where Japan has a healthy work culture. Abuse of psychology for net harm of workers is considered normal.

    3. Re:Misunderstood? by Gramie2 · · Score: 2

      Agreed I was working for Japanese companies (in Japan) for seven years, and it was soul-destroying.

    4. Re:Misunderstood? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Japanese companies are very different to western ones. They consider employees to be assets, and really do consider themselves a family. They are often undervalued because western investors consider high wages to be a weakness and a burden. Japan has the highest number of 80+ year old companies anywhere though, so clearly it works for them.

      Of course not all are that good, TEPCO for example, but Hitachi has a good reputation.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:Misunderstood? by Princeofcups · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know what world you live in where Japan has a healthy work culture. Abuse of psychology for net harm of workers is considered normal.

      Several points:
      1 - These studies usually look at general office workers, like public service or marketing departments, where there is no real way to gauge competence. So people think they need to put on the APPEARANCE of working 12 hour days to advance.
      2 - These workers also SLEEP at their desks. That's right. It's not about actually doing productive work. Many young Japanese workers stay up all night, catch a few winks on the train, and a nap or two at work.
      3 - People often take 2 hour lunch breaks to do shopping or whatever. It's all about arriving before the boss, and leaving after him.
      4 - Respectable tech jobs are no better or worse than they are in the US. People generally work overtime when needed, but at enjoyable work.

      This is the same as the statistics that said that Japanese live ridiculously long. It turns out that the general practice is to lie about age of death to get more government money. There's what people tell you, and reality, and they can be very different.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
  7. Inevitable outcome by korbulon · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Employees appeared to slowly converge on the toilets throughout the morning, where they remained for a few minutes before departing the building and eventually arriving to the nearest large body of water, where they remained for the rest of the day."

  8. patent time! by swschrad · · Score: 2

    Hitachi has invented the RoboToady. now, the only reason to keep brownnoses around is to fill out the foursome at golf.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  9. Badge Meets Clippy? by handy_vandal · · Score: 3, Funny

    "It looks like you're trying to Fire A Subordinate. Would you like me to call Security?"

    --
    -kgj
  10. Manna by tlhIngan · · Score: 5, Informative

    It seems like more people should take a read of Marshall Brain's Manna, a book about this very thing. (Online version).

    It goes into what could happen (and given current economics, the rest of us are housed in tiny apartments to keep the away from the owners). And yet, it also details an alternative view where automation is NOT shunned, but instead used to fulfill what people originally dreamed them to do - do all the chores while the humans relax, or speculate, or invent, or do other things.

    Quite an informative read if you have a couple of hours.

    1. Re:Manna by meta-monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I read Manna a few years back, and I think about it often as I ponder our increasingly automated world. Google's self-driving vehicles are going to destroy so many jobs. At first, sure, they'll be required to have a person sit in them in case anything goes wrong, but once the technology proves itself, they'll get rid of that requirement. And don't think they won't...those with the gold will get rid of that rule because it cuts into their profits.

      Eventually, no more truck drivers. No more UPS guys. No more mail carriers. No more taxi cab drivers. No more pizza delivery boys.

      I don't know how many millions of jobs that would wipe out, but what will those people do?

      And the thing is, it could go either way, just like Manna. But in the US, we know exactly which way it would go. And that's scary, because when people get hungry because they have no jobs, they don't stay hungry. They tend to get out the pitchforks and torches.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    2. Re:Manna by meta-monkey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was thinking old school, like the French Revolution.

      I agree, I certainly don't approve of inefficiency for the sake of menial jobs. I'm not suggesting we throw our shoes into the Google car's engine.

      I would love to see those people re-educated as artists, craftsman, teachers, whatever. And that's basically what the second half of Manna is about. My point is that we're far more likely to wind up with the first half of Manna. The very wealthy own the robots, unemploy the poor, and the poor are corralled into cheap public housing to sit and wait to die. In America, today, what'll happen when the robots take the driving jobs, and the Siris and Deep Blues take the call center jobs is the poor will be left to rot with their food stamps and unemployment benefits cut, and they'll be told it's their fault for being poor because they're too lazy. That is a dystopia to which I am not looking forward.

      And it's sad, because in America TODAY we could basically guarantee everybody three squares, a small apartment and healthcare for less than what we spend on a war. Those people would then be free to better themselves without worrying about starving. But that will never happen, because the government is bought and paid for by the wealthy, and the wealthy want an underclass of wage slaves scrambling over each other for menial jobs.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  11. my company doesn't need this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    We don't need this because we trust our employees to be adults who get their work done. That's why we give them the breathing room they need and only burden them with daily standups and mandatory pair programming in our open bull-pen office. With this type of dynamic, collaborative work environment we are able to attract top talent.

  12. Re:Too much data to be useful by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2

    I can't see these being useful. You get a lot of data from a lot of employees and eventually it's just going to be too much data to be effectively useful, hampering creativity and the ability to solve problems. Then there's the other problem, let's say this works perfectly and only perfect employees are kept, who pays for the employees who can no longer get jobs because they aren't willing to be automatons?

    "Perfect Employees" Of course this this definition of perfect is a bit swayed towards people that show up, sit at their desks, do not converse with their coworkers, and spend the minimum amount of time in the restroom or on lunch break.

    No mention of if the people are actually getting any work accomplished. Talk about inappropriate selection pressure. At best it finds people that are good at subverting the process.

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  13. Re:Why? by jythie · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They are trying to solve the problem of wanting to fire individuals but needing cause, and an application like this is pretty much an automatic paper trail generator that can be mined to fit pretty much any firing.

  14. Re:Too much data to be useful by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    It's just a very good tool to get rid of people you can't get rid of easily any other way. I don't know about your country, but here, if you have been with a company for a long while, it gets increasingly difficult (or expensive) to get rid of you. Being able to "prove" that you're slacking makes it so much easier.

    You needn't put everyone under surveillance. You just have to make everyone think that they are.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  15. This should be fun... by shemyazaz · · Score: 2

    I work for one of the American Hitachi divisions. God help me if they decide to force them on us.

  16. Re:Mean While, In the US... by captjc · · Score: 2

    It will be hailed as the greatest invention since the Blackberry. All those useless drones who aren't working every second of their 40 hours and take more than their "fair" share of the free coffee will finally pay! I can even be used to make sure people get truly "fair" pay, "You were here for 50 hours this week but you only really 'worked' for 39 of them...no overtime for you!"

    I can see this not only becoming standard in most workplaces and probably even made mandatory in a few states (with appropriate exceptions for executive level management).

    --
    Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
  17. Cue people starting to "work" at working by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Interesting

    No, I don't mean "doing their job". I mean they will start to game the system. People who want to slack off have been very inventive and creative when it comes to slacking, so this will be no different. They will come up with ways to tweak that. Don't want to go to a boring meeting? Let a coworker take your badge along. He'll do it for you next time and everyone's happy.

    Of course this does not increase productivity, but rather decrease it for the necessary overhead involved to game the system. But hey, I didn't come up with the idea, management gets what management wants, and if they want me to spend time fucking with their spying system rather than work so my "characteristic figures" look the way they should, I give them what they want.

    For reference, see the success of the "how many keystrokes did the programmer make today" for measuring the productivity of programmers creating code. It's not that much different from this junk.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  18. Needs more automation by meta-monkey · · Score: 3, Funny

    It needs a speaker, too.

    "Attention worker #47293, you have exceeded your pooping allotment for the day. Exit the stall and proceed back to your desk. Thank you for your compliance."

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  19. At least there is no cameras by Subgenius · · Score: 4, Interesting

    True story: My CEO (US company, California) tasked me to install 3 motion-detection CCTV cameras at all of our remote staff locations (3 part timers, in their homes, in eastern Europe), and then review the footage daily to determine if they 'were at their posts' during working hours (and did not take 'too many' breaks during the day). Of course, the reason for this was to 'make sure we are getting what we paid for.' I'm glad this device was not around last year (or will be very expensive THIS year).

    No, I did not install the cameras, I just let the issue die. (still have a job, too).

    --
    Toil is Stupid. Don't be Stupid.
    1. Re:At least there is no cameras by ducomputergeek · · Score: 2

      Last two companies most of the dev staffs have worked from home. Some have been in other states. But it was software and we could track things like did we make milestones, how often and what did they check into the repository, etc.. They were, however, all salaried. Frankly I never cared if it took them 4 hours or 8 hours to solve a problem or add feature so long as it was delivered on time according to what the project needed.

      The other rule was quite simple: If the phone rings between 9AM and 5PM office time you'd better damn well answer it. I'm not calling you to chat I'm calling you because something is broke and needs to be urgently fixed. And I stuck to that. if I wanted a status update I'd send an email.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  20. Re:Is removing the badge from your shirt a crime? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can see the reports now:

    Employee report #27135: "Employee arrived in the office, turned on their computer, and then crammed himself into a small drawer in his desk for the duration of the work day. He didn't move during this time except to climb out for meetings. Employee emerged from his desk at the end of the day."

    Employee report #27136: "After speaking with four other employees in an energetic fashion regarding the new tracking systems, these employees went to the restroom and proceeded to flush themselves down the toilet. It might be worth noting that, following this, unknown individuals sent e-mails from these employees computers insulting their managers, most of HR, and the company executives. These unknown individuals then noted that the flushed employees had quit. As the unknown individuals didn't seem to be wearing tracking badges, it is not known what happened to them next. They either left or are living in the ventilation ducts."

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  21. Re:Good luck with getting people to wear those by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2

    Are there sensors that can measure height? If so, you can really mess with them by hanging the badge from the ceiling. "Employee seems to enjoy clinging to the ceiling for the entire workday."

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  22. Re:Why? by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have to agree, this goes against everything that is said about good management. Most good MBA schools would disprove of this.
    Why?
    1. There is a calculated benefit towards (water cooler chats), this increases overall productivity, by allowing informal collaboration and knowledge exchange.
    2. The issue between Introverted and Extroverted employees. An introverted employee in a meeting may seem very quite and engaged, however they are there listening and taking in the information, where they may come up with better solution later on. Extroverted may seem like they are engaged however they are just talking a lot of nonsense, and off topic, because they like talking.
    3. Employee intensive is Work Environment + Pay. If they feel like their freedom is being taken away from them, it is equivalent to paying them less. If an employee feels like they are being paid fairly they will perform better then one who feels like they are not.
    4. Synergy. How can you have Synergy if people are not working together, and knowing each others strengths and weaknesses?

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  23. You got it all wrong, this is GOOOOOD. by aix+tom · · Score: 2

    After all, it's the first step of automating management, and replacing all that management types with a bunch of shell scripts.

    And who gets to write those shell-scripts in the end? Who? Exactly, we, the techies.

    So it may be a slight inconvenience for a time, but in the end we will only have to do what the shell scripts we wrote ourselves are telling us to do. Sounds pretty much like paradise to me.

    1. Re:You got it all wrong, this is GOOOOOD. by genner · · Score: 3, Funny

      After all, it's the first step of automating management, and replacing all that management types with a bunch of shell scripts.

      And who gets to write those shell-scripts in the end? Who? Exactly, we, the techies.

      So it may be a slight inconvenience for a time, but in the end we will only have to do what the shell scripts we wrote ourselves are telling us to do. Sounds pretty much like paradise to me.

      Yes but will those shell scripts be written with vi or emacs?

  24. Alternately... by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 3, Informative

    The virtual boss will see - contrary to what the eyes of the real bosses tell them - employees who never get up from their desks, never go to the bathroom, and never hang around in the break room... because those badges are left behind on the desk all the time whenever the employees get up from their desks, go to the bathroom, and hang around the break room.

    Because employees will quickly learn to "game" the system, rendering the whole thing useless.

    Hell, most of the time those badges aren't even necessary to get into the office, since somebody inevitably will open the door for you. And inevitably the employees are going to discover that their badges are ratting them out.

    Not that any of this matters. This is just another way for managers to collect "metrics" on their staff, to prove with the magic of numbers that their staff is working, rather than - oh, I don't know - looking to see if the work is actually getting done. But the latter would actually require the managers to understand what their reports are doing, and that requires knowledge and effort on their part. Better to just rely on computers to create a useless spreadsheet that they can point to during the yearly reviews.

  25. It's not as horrible as it seems. by aaronsb · · Score: 2

    I know this might sound a little crazy, but I don't think it's designed for the whole workforce to wear. It's used during a study in a large environment to see how the workforce performs tasks. You assign it to a number of statistically neutral individuals, and they represent the workforce as a whole. An analyst (or consultant) determines work patterns and can charge the company $10,000 to move the water cooler from one side of the office to the other to promote efficiency in movement, or even relocate a team within a building so they don't have to walk across the building to interact with them.

    Sure, it's orwell in a can, but it's not designed for every day use. Can you even imagine the nightmare of tracking those on people that don't want to wear them?

  26. A good argument for unions by mbone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I cannot imagine a better argument for unionization than such gizmos.

    1. Re:A good argument for unions by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right, and they(the 1%) know that.

      That is why they have been successfully dismantling the unions in the US and the rest of the world since the 1980's.
      Unless more of this information comes to the forefront of American culture and Media, it will slide in "under the radar" and then it will be too late to bring back unions.

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
  27. A solution in search of a problem... by hey! · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Years ago I worked on early mobile field work software on GPS enabled PDAs. Periodically I'd take an installation and training trip so I could hear the stakeholder concerns. One of the concerns I frequently heard from field workers in private was that the boss would be tracking their movements every moment of the day, and he'd use this to go after workers he didn't like. This was new stuff, and it had a bit of a creepiness factor for people who'd never used a computer in their life.

    My response was always this: What would *you* do if you wanted to show someone is goofing off instead of working? You'd go to the site where he claimed to have done the work and see if it actually got done. It's what you'd do, it's what I'd do, and it's what your boss does if he has any common sense. If he doesn't, *he's* the one who's goofing off. Field work is hard; traveling around and keying a few bogus entries is much easier, and would be sufficient to fool the system.

    With a few exceptions like security guards, you don't need technology to tell if a worker is doing his job. You need to manage your employees by measuring the things you expect them to accomplish.

    We are far from having a technological substitute for intelligent supervision. Anything that falls short of that is just pandering to management laziness.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:A solution in search of a problem... by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We are far from having a technological substitute for intelligent supervision.

      The cynic in me would say that you pretty much analyzed why we need that technological substitute.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  28. Re:Good luck with getting people to wear those by psmears · · Score: 2

    Go across the street, there's another Starbucks hiring.

    Don't have stats for Starbucks, but at another well-known coffee chain, it might not be quite as easy as you think...

  29. Re:Why? by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What problem are they trying to solve? They want to recover the cost of managers. They can't get rid of the technical staff - they actually need them - but they can get rid of that expensive middle tier by automating the tracking part of management. Which all they think there is to management.

    Before you all say "Woohoo", think of this: The CIO is now your boss. You are no longer a person, you're a resource. The only way he knows you or of you is a set of numbers on a report. You either make whatever metric they use to gauge your performance or you don't. They don't care if you're sick, or if you're taking care of a child, or if you've got a personal problem - you don't make the numbers and you're gone.

  30. Re:You can't measure what really matters by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    I do measure just that. It's actually easy.

    I don't tend to micro manage my teams. First of all, I'm lazy and I sure as hell have something more important to do than tell a programmer how to type. Second, they hate it and I can sympathize, I hated it too when I was still in programming. And third, they're adults, I don't see the necessity to treat them like kids who don't know how to work.

    I give them a project and I expect to hear from them when they need resources or when some department gives them troubles. Other than that I expect them to report back when they're done.

    They meet their deadline, they do fine. They don't meet their deadlines, they don't do fine. What's hard to measure about that?

    Stuff like that is only hard to measure if you insist in micro management and having some arbitrary performance figure for your monthly report. My solution is to simply make up a performance figure so the powers that are are happy.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  31. Sigh by ledow · · Score: 2

    A "perfect" boss does not need to instruct workers to wear a badge, need to know who you talk to, how often, where or how energetically, need to track everything, need to know how often / fast you walk around an office, who (or indeed) how much you stop to talk to.

    Because he doesn't hire fecking idiots who he thinks need to be babysat by metrics in order to do their job. And he trusts them as professionals. And only needs bother even investigate if there are specific allegations or failings that he becomes aware of (and he WILL become aware of them if he's any kind of decent boss).

    It's shit like that that propagates that entire fake management crap.

    If you ever consider any of these things metrics even WORTH bothering to measure, you're a fecking idiot of a boss.

  32. Re:Why? by jythie · · Score: 2

    Even when the state or country has at-will firing, you still have to justify it to other members of the management team. Either horizontally or vertically, there are often political consequences for firing people for personal, arbitrary, or even counterproductive reasons.

  33. Calm down by sjbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have a hard time believing someone can be so ignorant of history. Do you think slaves were happy? What about feudal serfs? Or pre-unionized steel workers? Or the children working in textile factories?

    He said "happy workers are productive workers". He did NOT say "all productive workers are happy workers". See the difference? What he probably meant was "companies that use policies that keep their workers happy are more likely to have workers that are productive". Sure you can force someone to be productive under miserable conditions but you can get terrific productivity as well by treating your employees nicely.

    Capital has never, and will never, care about the happiness of their workers unless those workers force them to care

    True and there has been tremendous progress on that front. Working conditions in the US are FAR better in most cases than they were 100 years ago, sometimes to a fault.

    1. Re:Calm down by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sure you can force someone to be productive under miserable conditions but you can get terrific productivity as well by treating your employees nicely.

      Actually you really can't - its a policing fallacy. People count the costs of welfare, but don't count the costs of their police force.

      Similarly, a part of that "force people to be productive" is paying a whole bunch of managers to stand around and bear over them.

    2. Re:Calm down by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 2

      Actually you're incorrect.

      Modern archeological evidence shows that the pyramids were almost certainly not built by slaves. While it's true the Egyptians had slaves, from the building layout and likely meal compositions, the pyramid builders were actually working a well-paid, high status job (and why not, its building the tombs of the emperor - working on things for the whitehouse is usually considered to hold prestige as well).

      Fast-forward to World War II and see how well slave labor worked out for the Germans building rockets. They sank staggering amounts of resources into the enterprise, and despite it were still having frequent problems with V2s being sabotaged or not working from poorly built components. A problem Von Braun himself recognized.

      Just because you can enslave people and do something doesn't mean you're being remotely efficient about it.

    3. Re:Calm down by HiThere · · Score: 2

      OTOH, the Great Wall of China *WAS* built with slave labor...i.e., with labor of political prisoners. IIUC it was often intended that they be worked to death, unlike many other projects where a high death rate was accepted as "the cost of doing business". I include in this latter group the Grand Canal. That was built by conscripted peasants, but it really was desired that they survive. Many of them didn't, but that wasn't really intended. But the Great Wall was an intentional sentence of internal exile, and many of those working on it were intentionally worked to death.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  34. Libertarianism explained! by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 5, Informative

    Tyranny by government dictators: Bad.
    Tyranny by corporate dictators: Good.

    Any questions?

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    1. Re:Libertarianism explained! by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 2

      Money is power. Government is power. In a broader sense, unions are an attempt to equalize the power playing field. Naturally, this is why they are fought tooth and nail by monetary power (i.e. wealthy owners).

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  35. Most interesting read in decades..... by rts008 · · Score: 2

    I don't know whether to thank you, or curse you!
    I went to the author's page and read "Manna" just now, and the first half of that book scared me tremendously(more than any other sci-fi work I have ever experienced), then the second half was soul-tearing.

    What I mean by soul-tearing, is seeing the possibilities in the Australia Project, and loving the whole concept...at the same time knowing it could probably never happen on this planet.

    Too many entrenched entities(gov't. and corp) would see this as a worse cancer than USA saw communism.
    In the real world, the Australia Project would only be nuked out of existence before it could get viable.

    We have to protect those corp. markets and profits for national security, ya know. (it IS NOT about protecting people or 'democracy')

    Which brings up an interesting thought to me:
    The last war that the USA was successful at, was WW2. We had a common rally point:we were attacked, and fought back. We were fighting to actually protect our citizens and land...the Axis expansion was coming to our shores.
    Since then, all of the wars we have been in have all been about protecting markets and profits[1], and we have universally failed.

    I think that troop motivation has a significant factor with that, in that there is now common rally point for the people to get behind. (another part is HOW we have went about war)

    Well, in the end, I'm going to count reading 'Manna" as a positive experience, so thanks! :-)

    [1] the whole anti-communism thing is rooted in protecting corp. markets and profits, and is also the root of the anti-socialist attitude in the USA

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
  36. People have twisted those definitions by dbIII · · Score: 3

    It's because the words have been applied far too much to be sheeps clothing for wolves. Some of those that most loudly shout that they are Christian are instead merchants in the temple. It makes others wary of anyone that makes similar noises in case they have an extremist or confidence trickster on their hands.
    As for "conservative", when people verbally push how conservative they are in politics it's sometimes part of a shell game to get away with doing something radical. I've got one of those in my state that is really 99% fascist and is trying to change or destroy everything he can - so much for "conservative".
    So when you fit the original definitions I can see how it's a bit tough that people assume you are a disguised wolf instead as soon as you mention the label. Maybe don't. Democratic Socialists would be laughed out of this place or called Communists as soon as they bring up their label.

  37. What left? by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    Maybe you're from France or something, but in America we don't have anything that even remotely resembles a Left Wing party. There's a few pundits who're left wing on _social_ issues, but I can count the number of economic liberals that show up in public discourse on one hand (Robert Reich, Liz Warren, Rachel Maddow and that old guy who plays her second fiddle).

    Heck, when Liz Warren suggested reinstating Glass-Seagal to prevent another crash like in 2008 the question wasn't if it was right or wrong, but why she was even bothering having a discussion on something when it's got zero chance of happening ...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  38. Obvious solution: MOVE. by ulatekh · · Score: 3

    The state I live in has weak labor laws, and the company believes it can do as it pleases. My fellow co-workers and I have been looking for other jobs for a few years now, but the market sucks. (BTW, all of us have at least a bachelors degree, mine is in engineering). There are thousands of jobs around here that pay minimum wage, but almost nothing paying any more than that.

    I have an obvious solution for you. MOVE.

    That's what I've had to do for years, just to stay employed. My last move was 200 miles. The one before that was 650 miles.

    I see my family a week at Thanksgiving and a week at Christmas. Sure that sucks, but it's what I had to do in order to avoid what you're going through.

    --
    "Once we've identified and embraced our sickness, we'll have strength...and that's when we get dangerous." - John Waters