And perhaps take some time to reflect on what the world would be like without people willing to sacrifice everything for someone else, even a stranger.
Sometimes being in the limbo between life and death, waiting for it to arrive, is too much to bear. Give him peace in a dignified and respectful way.
Perhaps it says something about us, that we require a psych eval before allowing someone to give so freely of themselves?
+1 Insightful. I think you're on to something there, it's a different way of looking at everything. (admitting my Japanese knowledge is limited)
As a westerner, I've noticed people look quickly at things without absorbing any of the details. We're too "cool" to care about the features / details. Intelligence is perceived and often mocked as a weakness rather than appreciated. People from other countries are listening to the details, and they're more aware, and they're kicking our ass in things which should alarm us but -- ooo a cheeseburger -- our attention spans are dwindling as a society.
Idiocracy is playing IRL somewhere near you, and I fear we won't be able to stop it now that it's started.
And yet some of this behavior is required to keep things going as well as it has. Just imagine a day in his life, a mix of technical issues, coordination, flames and people wanting attention because they think their idea is the best. That's assuming you ignore personal issues and demands for time.
I don't have anywhere near his skills / reputation / influence / pressure, and the days when I have to fend off multiple groups of people demanding time, technical issues, and balance that with my schedule are draining for me. Some days I get to relax with hands-on physical work instead of managing systems, even if it's crimping cables, moving equipment or rearranging my office. Having his responsibility and maintaining his pace long-term would probably (understandably?) increase my self-worth (ego) and frustration to the point that I'd be seen in a negative way.
When you work in a high-performance way you can become very intolerant of others' shortcomings because you just assume that if you can do something that they can do it too, and if you "get it", then they of course should be able to comprehend it too. The limitations of language and slow communication speed are bothersome, you want to do a brain dump but teaching one thing requires a host of background on other issues so you have to start from the beginning, which takes time and effort you probably don't want to spend.
So perhaps with his imperfections he is the best person for the job at this time, and perhaps that will be delegated more to others in the future. All we know is that at some point passing the baton will be required and hope for a successful switchover.
The same can be said of influential people in various sectors of industry. What happens with Apple when Steve Jobs is no longer there? Microsoft after Bill Gates (I know he's out of the picture somewhat, but really he's not totally out of the loop yet). Samba team after Jeremy Allison. There are so many more influential people in huge roles that I see this as part of the necessary burden of being so good at what you do that others pale in comparison. Future generations will have to sort it out when these people leave, and hopefully they're grooming the apprentices so they can be ready when needed.
In my role it's always better to be aware and try it out than pretend it doesn't exist. You can't thoroughly research every solution in advance every time. We call it due diligence even after the fact because you might find a better way of doing something and it's always good to have options. If nothing else it may also give you some negotiating room with the proprietary vendor at renewal time.
Setup a VM; not only can you monitor / limit its communication but it's a cinch to back up. In my environment this is the easiest way to test something also. I use ntop for monitoring and it works ok; it would probably be a good fit in this case.
At the time of my decision to move to OO, Office XP was the current version. Since that time I have not upgraded Office, that's true. The employees we've given Office 2007 to report issues and I see any emailed requests (I'm not front-line support so I don't take calls or answer help desk voicemails).
Why would I spend company money to upgrade when the current solution works fine for my needs?
Agreed. I have a license for MS Office XP and there are only a few things I use it for:
Some of the meeting requests from newer versions of Exchange don't send an ICS file (so they can't be accepted in Thunderbird / Lightning). I use Exchange webmail for these.
Sometimes I need to open a file which uses macros / crosstabs and links.
Calc has poor trendline capabilities for charting.
That's about it. OO Write has been far superior to Word on long technical documentation (doesn't crash, isn't slow, TOC entries are simple, styles are sane). OO Calc is quicker and easier at inserting large amounts of data from text / delimited files. OO Calc and Write can open MS Office 2007 files but MS Office XP and 2003 can't. We have the MS Office "converter" installed on everyone's machine for those 2007 / 2010 documents, and it gives poor results and is the source of a lot of headaches for my department to support.
And then there's the usability issue (at least for me) -- I've been using office apps since GEOS, so Quattro Pro, AmiPro, Lotus 1-2-3, etc menus are familiar to me. I dislike personalized menus and especially dislike the ribbon. I dislike the slow load times of Office in general and the frequent patches / crashes.
And playing games on an MSDN OS is explicitly forbidden in the FAQ.
Using the software in any other way, such as for doing email, playing games, or editing a document is another use and is not covered by the MSDN Subscription license.
They are giving all people who either already bought a phone or have one on order adequate time to determine if the case fixes their problem, because changing devices is chaotic and time-consuming. For new users, they have been aptly warned and they have enough time to back out, change their mind, etc, before disrupting their plans.
In the meantime, you can bet they're working on the issue. I think it's a very reasonable approach actually.
Exactly, the only thing is I wish the media circus hadn't occurred prior to this announcement. It could be construed that Apple caved to pressure from various organizations and offered the cases only for that reason. Perhaps a better approach in the future would be to hold a press conference earlier, even if no immediate solution is evident. People (especially early adopters) just want to know they will be taken care of when they spend a lot of money on a totally redesigned device, that the company is aware of the problem, and that they're working on it. A free case in this instance is cheap PR, and offering it sooner would have laid a lot of the hoopla to rest.
some people go out and get the certification so they can get past the HR droid
Agreed. Yet some of us, who have spent decades in the business, never had to get the certs because we interviewed well / got lucky / whatever. It seems awfully expensive to send someone making $XX an hour out to get certs when you know they can do the job. If they want a class, great. I've done that. But although I'd like to, say, get my RHCE, I have work to do and if I'm off at class there is no one to do it for me. So it's a balancing thing.
Were I starting over, I'd probably have to get my RHCE first. But again, I've always interviewed very well, so who knows.
I'm sure you're joking, but a cert has almost zero value. Too many mills and too many cram courses mean the cert holder often can't do the job. It's too bad, really, as that was once a useful filter for candidates. The last candidate we hired had no certs but most of the 12 or so applicants before him did -- and guess what, they couldn't do trivial things, not even explain how they might do it in pseudocode let alone use pencil and paper to write a SQL statement.
Perhaps the half-dozen word problems were the culprit. Too often people are stymied when presented with a written problem. It's a sign of our failed educational system (speaking for the US).
Requires Silverlight? Yeah you can shove that
on
Recomputing the Sky
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Interesting until I saw it required Silverlight. Microsoft is getting really desperate trying to find a way to push Silverlight, so they throw a lot of money into research or science but bada-bing the requirement is you must use their software. It's not altruism when the planned result is sales of your product, it's an investment.
I already have Flash and that's bad enough, thank you, I don't need two companies competing for who can screw me the hardest.
And some of us aren't afraid of using our real names. Anon when necessary but most of the time I post as myself, even / especially when I think I've got an important point.
Karma be damned, you can't get higher than excellent anymore. What am I saving up all that karma for?
It isn't merely the cost of the subscription, which is expensive to me (not to you, I get that). It's constantly having to up your hardware because if you don't you can't compete in arenas, you can't see the graphical effects for timing events in various raids, you can't DO some of the raids because of the heavier loads, events such as the Lich King expansion are frustrating because you're endlessly ganked by those who have lower latency, smoother screen refreshes etc.
As content is added there is a load that seems to require more PC gear to compensate. THAT is the cost of which I refer, and playing WoW over a year's timespan I saw the effects gradually reduce my online experience.
Well, there's no simple answer for that unfortunately. That's one of the reasons consoles' offerings define the platform. There's no way (of which I'm aware) of migrating code easily from one system to another.
In addition, the licensing fees / different coding environment etc that make coding a game challenging present hurdles for someone wanting to release on multiple platforms. It seems a lot of the developers (unless they're huge) have to choose a single platform.
For some people, the convenience of a console is more important than having the absolute best graphical experience, having nearly unlimited input options, customization / hacking, etc, and those "islands" their platform creates causes developers to have to choose their target platform wisely.
Now if there were a smoother way to translate a game from PC / platform to another, THAT would bring in a pretty huge surge of gaming options which would enable more publishers to reach larger audiences. Whoever does this is going to pocket some serious money.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a nickel, go get yourself a better browser.
Those are just automated emails coming from the Botnet ; )
And perhaps take some time to reflect on what the world would be like without people willing to sacrifice everything for someone else, even a stranger.
Sometimes being in the limbo between life and death, waiting for it to arrive, is too much to bear. Give him peace in a dignified and respectful way.
Perhaps it says something about us, that we require a psych eval before allowing someone to give so freely of themselves?
"Dirty girl" comments coming in 3... 2... 1...
+1 Insightful. I think you're on to something there, it's a different way of looking at everything. (admitting my Japanese knowledge is limited)
As a westerner, I've noticed people look quickly at things without absorbing any of the details. We're too "cool" to care about the features / details. Intelligence is perceived and often mocked as a weakness rather than appreciated. People from other countries are listening to the details, and they're more aware, and they're kicking our ass in things which should alarm us but -- ooo a cheeseburger -- our attention spans are dwindling as a society.
Idiocracy is playing IRL somewhere near you, and I fear we won't be able to stop it now that it's started.
No and No.
And yet some of this behavior is required to keep things going as well as it has. Just imagine a day in his life, a mix of technical issues, coordination, flames and people wanting attention because they think their idea is the best. That's assuming you ignore personal issues and demands for time.
I don't have anywhere near his skills / reputation / influence / pressure, and the days when I have to fend off multiple groups of people demanding time, technical issues, and balance that with my schedule are draining for me. Some days I get to relax with hands-on physical work instead of managing systems, even if it's crimping cables, moving equipment or rearranging my office. Having his responsibility and maintaining his pace long-term would probably (understandably?) increase my self-worth (ego) and frustration to the point that I'd be seen in a negative way.
When you work in a high-performance way you can become very intolerant of others' shortcomings because you just assume that if you can do something that they can do it too, and if you "get it", then they of course should be able to comprehend it too. The limitations of language and slow communication speed are bothersome, you want to do a brain dump but teaching one thing requires a host of background on other issues so you have to start from the beginning, which takes time and effort you probably don't want to spend.
So perhaps with his imperfections he is the best person for the job at this time, and perhaps that will be delegated more to others in the future. All we know is that at some point passing the baton will be required and hope for a successful switchover.
The same can be said of influential people in various sectors of industry. What happens with Apple when Steve Jobs is no longer there? Microsoft after Bill Gates (I know he's out of the picture somewhat, but really he's not totally out of the loop yet). Samba team after Jeremy Allison. There are so many more influential people in huge roles that I see this as part of the necessary burden of being so good at what you do that others pale in comparison. Future generations will have to sort it out when these people leave, and hopefully they're grooming the apprentices so they can be ready when needed.
Mod +1 Informative please; the link is informative as well.
In my role it's always better to be aware and try it out than pretend it doesn't exist. You can't thoroughly research every solution in advance every time. We call it due diligence even after the fact because you might find a better way of doing something and it's always good to have options. If nothing else it may also give you some negotiating room with the proprietary vendor at renewal time.
Setup a VM; not only can you monitor / limit its communication but it's a cinch to back up. In my environment this is the easiest way to test something also. I use ntop for monitoring and it works ok; it would probably be a good fit in this case.
At the time of my decision to move to OO, Office XP was the current version. Since that time I have not upgraded Office, that's true. The employees we've given Office 2007 to report issues and I see any emailed requests (I'm not front-line support so I don't take calls or answer help desk voicemails).
Why would I spend company money to upgrade when the current solution works fine for my needs?
That's about it. OO Write has been far superior to Word on long technical documentation (doesn't crash, isn't slow, TOC entries are simple, styles are sane). OO Calc is quicker and easier at inserting large amounts of data from text / delimited files. OO Calc and Write can open MS Office 2007 files but MS Office XP and 2003 can't. We have the MS Office "converter" installed on everyone's machine for those 2007 / 2010 documents, and it gives poor results and is the source of a lot of headaches for my department to support.
And then there's the usability issue (at least for me) -- I've been using office apps since GEOS, so Quattro Pro, AmiPro, Lotus 1-2-3, etc menus are familiar to me. I dislike personalized menus and especially dislike the ribbon. I dislike the slow load times of Office in general and the frequent patches / crashes.
It cost me nothing because I had 10 win7 licenses from an MSDN subscription paid for by my previous employer.
So these licenses are owned by a previous employer? It is my understanding that if the company owned it, your rights to use it were lost when you left the company. (from http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&FamilyID=2b1504e6-0bf1-46da-be0e-85cc792c6b9d#Overview )
And playing games on an MSDN OS is explicitly forbidden in the FAQ.
Using the software in any other way, such as for doing email, playing games, or editing a document is another use and is not covered by the MSDN Subscription license.
(from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/subscriptions/cc150618.aspx )
If you're looking for a valid reason to run Windows, "just because you happen to have an (unlicensed) copy" isn't it.
By "collapse" do you mean a smaller swing than the stock has had regularly over the past 3 months? Take a look at the chart and tell me someone noticed. http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&chvs=maximized&chdeh=0&chfdeh=0&chdet=1279381456599&chddm=24633&chls=IntervalBasedLine&q=NASDAQ:AAPL&ntsp=0 Take a look at the 6-month wile you're at it, then remind yourself that AAPL investors and management can't see a "collapse" that isn't there.
They are giving all people who either already bought a phone or have one on order adequate time to determine if the case fixes their problem, because changing devices is chaotic and time-consuming. For new users, they have been aptly warned and they have enough time to back out, change their mind, etc, before disrupting their plans.
In the meantime, you can bet they're working on the issue. I think it's a very reasonable approach actually.
Exactly, the only thing is I wish the media circus hadn't occurred prior to this announcement. It could be construed that Apple caved to pressure from various organizations and offered the cases only for that reason. Perhaps a better approach in the future would be to hold a press conference earlier, even if no immediate solution is evident. People (especially early adopters) just want to know they will be taken care of when they spend a lot of money on a totally redesigned device, that the company is aware of the problem, and that they're working on it. A free case in this instance is cheap PR, and offering it sooner would have laid a lot of the hoopla to rest.
some people go out and get the certification so they can get past the HR droid
Agreed. Yet some of us, who have spent decades in the business, never had to get the certs because we interviewed well / got lucky / whatever. It seems awfully expensive to send someone making $XX an hour out to get certs when you know they can do the job. If they want a class, great. I've done that. But although I'd like to, say, get my RHCE, I have work to do and if I'm off at class there is no one to do it for me. So it's a balancing thing.
Were I starting over, I'd probably have to get my RHCE first. But again, I've always interviewed very well, so who knows.
I'm sure you're joking, but a cert has almost zero value. Too many mills and too many cram courses mean the cert holder often can't do the job. It's too bad, really, as that was once a useful filter for candidates. The last candidate we hired had no certs but most of the 12 or so applicants before him did -- and guess what, they couldn't do trivial things, not even explain how they might do it in pseudocode let alone use pencil and paper to write a SQL statement.
Perhaps the half-dozen word problems were the culprit. Too often people are stymied when presented with a written problem. It's a sign of our failed educational system (speaking for the US).
Interesting until I saw it required Silverlight. Microsoft is getting really desperate trying to find a way to push Silverlight, so they throw a lot of money into research or science but bada-bing the requirement is you must use their software. It's not altruism when the planned result is sales of your product, it's an investment.
I already have Flash and that's bad enough, thank you, I don't need two companies competing for who can screw me the hardest.
Our users are safe. They use Outlook for all their shortcuts.
<rimshot>
Well at least you weren't modded troll (at this time modded -1, flamebait)
And some of us aren't afraid of using our real names. Anon when necessary but most of the time I post as myself, even / especially when I think I've got an important point.
Karma be damned, you can't get higher than excellent anymore. What am I saving up all that karma for?
Oh, please tell me you're not that guy...
It isn't merely the cost of the subscription, which is expensive to me (not to you, I get that). It's constantly having to up your hardware because if you don't you can't compete in arenas, you can't see the graphical effects for timing events in various raids, you can't DO some of the raids because of the heavier loads, events such as the Lich King expansion are frustrating because you're endlessly ganked by those who have lower latency, smoother screen refreshes etc.
As content is added there is a load that seems to require more PC gear to compensate. THAT is the cost of which I refer, and playing WoW over a year's timespan I saw the effects gradually reduce my online experience.
Well, there's no simple answer for that unfortunately. That's one of the reasons consoles' offerings define the platform. There's no way (of which I'm aware) of migrating code easily from one system to another.
In addition, the licensing fees / different coding environment etc that make coding a game challenging present hurdles for someone wanting to release on multiple platforms. It seems a lot of the developers (unless they're huge) have to choose a single platform.
For some people, the convenience of a console is more important than having the absolute best graphical experience, having nearly unlimited input options, customization / hacking, etc, and those "islands" their platform creates causes developers to have to choose their target platform wisely.
Now if there were a smoother way to translate a game from PC / platform to another, THAT would bring in a pretty huge surge of gaming options which would enable more publishers to reach larger audiences. Whoever does this is going to pocket some serious money.