with such a great attitude If you can't tell that the attitude was provoked by the troll then you're a smaller piece of d*gsh*t than I thought you were before you posted.
That only works if the Dilbertesque organizations aren't being artificially propped up. Stock investors love money mills and Dilbertesque organizations are great money mills. Dilbertesque organizations have massive amounts of internal strife and are easy to manipulate. Once they become large enough then the internal strife isn't even an external consideration anymore. There will always be enough workers to get the job done. It's just money in and money out on the accounting ledger.
When there's a monopoly on money (Federal Reserve, Wall Street, DC) overseeing which organizations (all of which are kept in a perturbed state) become big and which don't there isn't anywhere else to walk to. It's all the same.
Metaphorically: It does not matter which game you choose to play in the casino. The House always wins the most.
walk through the door with every hacker tool known to man, and just go all out on your own network Whatever two-player game you enjoy, play it against yourself a few times.
The days of careful analysis and investigation I didn't study the whole article like scripture. I didn't see any mention of novel zero day exploits. I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few in the competition, though.
That means that they own it. They control it That's my point.
The employees work for the business My comment covered a scale much larger than employees within a single company.
The owners can do whatever they'd like with the business I never said they couldn't.
and do not have to have approval from the employees or the customers I never said they did.
you're talking about Socialism That would involve government regulation, which I most certainly did not talk about--guess what? You're wrong!
you have no grasp of the fundamentals of private property You obviously had no grasp on this conversation. Perhaps you were maddened by some bestial need to turn this thread into a personal vendetta against me. I can't possibly think of any other explanation for your complete lack of comprehension.
You seem to think that the people getting the paychecks should be telling the people who write the paychecks what their priorities should be. Guess what, you're wrong.
just talk some people into lending you the money to start your own business That was my point.
just like you think it should be done Hey look, you're wrong again.
And since (as you seem to think) Still wrong.
you obviously don't think that you Still wrong. You're like a Satanic Energizer bunny.
should be making any money How much is "any"?
you can just leave Preferably you never showed up--since you're so wrong.
I really don't think you understood my question. Let's try again:
If an employee can not produce or save more money Do you seriously view "more money" as an all or nothing thing?
The business needs of the business The employees and customers are as much a part of the business as the major shareholders and executives.
all of the workplace laws You seriously believe that legal code is less exploitable than computer code?
look for work elsewhere Poor ignoramus. My post covered a much larger scale.
workers are unpaid workers providing slave labor Everybody is paid. The question was about profit and control.
You are being paid less money than your create (or save) the business. Otherwise, you wouldn't have a job Do you seriously view "less money" as an all or nothing thing?
is patently absurd You so wanted to make this a personal attack ("Grow up") that you missed it again, and ended up talking about yourself.
bring some of those ideas into your organization? If the fellow that I had lined up for a promotion does it then so much the better--it'll help the promotion paperwork. If the fellow who has the wrong color hair does it, especially if he brings it up during a project meeting where I was trying to talk up the guy I was lining up for a promotion and steals the meeting thunder, then I'm so going to overload his workday with meaningless useless crap duties that eventually he'll slip up a few times and I'll get to fire his ass.
That's Dilbertization. That's what the rest of the world faces.
It's totally a point of view thing. If you're a Bad Guy then anything which maximizes your personal profit, no matter how many people it causes grief for, is a good thing--including ploys in which losses Over There are used to distract people from noticing profits Here. If you're a Good Guy then balancing personal profit with community profit is more important--including going back to help those who are being greased by Bad Guys.
The successive alignment of an industry towards the profiteering motives, alluded to in TFA, points to a trend where the Bad Guys are winning--perhaps because the Good Guys aren't paying enough attention. It's totally a point of view thing.
profit is somehow evil See, you're already wrong. Profit is not evil. How (most) people (most commonly) use profit is evil.
But you wanted to make this a slam against me ("attitudes like yours") so bad that you couldn't be bothered to think past your first impression.
What needs to happen is that IT people need to stop being treated like children Which is an effect of the way profit is being used to control people.
Management needs to stop being afraid of IT people Which is an effect of the need to control those people using profit.
understand the business needs Whose business needs are we understanding? Are we understanding the business needs of the execs and venture capitalists, or are we understanding the business needs of the employees, or are we understanding the business needs of the customers?
Remind me not to apply for whomever you work for These days it's everywhere. Any organization of more than 20 people is going to contain some members trying to game the system for their own profit--and it scales exponentially. From an IRC chatroom, to webboards, to startups, to Twitter, to EVE online, to a national corporation, to international corporations such, to global conglomerate investing groups, to world banks... Microsoft, Enron, Google, Apple, Soloman Smith Barney, the Federal Reserve...the game is the same: The first person (people) to the trough eat the largest amount, and often they do it just because they know that, by creating and using debt, they can control the people who come next.
That's what the.com boom and bust was all about. That's where all the money went. There are people who have billions because they actually need to move billions every day--and then there are people who have billions because they know that, as long as they have it, they can control those who come to them in need of it.
"Debt" is a ten thousand year old playground game.
why is it such a hostile work environment We're fighting over scraps because people at the top are hoarding the profit--and not even because they want it, per se, but because they want us to think there's a shortage and keep fighting over the scraps. For them it's entertainment.
If you believe in such deep associations then why bother to post AC? Wouldn't you want to have a good piece in your comment history?
Intelligent AC posts are suspicious by nature. Who wouldn't want to take credit for a timely intellectual response unless they had some trollage scheme in mind?
The Dilbertization of IT brings the plight of the rest of the working world to the IT industry. This is what the other professions, older than IT, have developed into. The ultimate authority of the almighty dollar, the ability to profile the workgroup and monetize it quarter by quarter, the ability to make it absorb losses and give up profit on demand, the ability to control promotions and maintain authority over the social order has crept slowly into the IT world.
"We'd seen very narrow computer science departments graduating students focused only on specific kinds of technologies, and frankly, it is the least exciting part of the field," said DeMillo. In the minds of the venture capitalists and the stock brokers who, ultimately, allow the business venture to exist, though, those students are the most predictable. They can be profiled and fit into the business projections. Groups of them can be expanded when necessary to give shareholders a good feeling and contracted when necessary to create profit at precisely the right time when nobody will notice if the top level execs and board members take an extra slice.
Their creativity and imagination isn't being tapped the way it was when they were first in IT," said Skaistis. Creativity and imagination is not predictable, it does not fit into the yearly goals, serendipitous discoveries upend carefully planned social promotions and often steal the limelight away from the intended recipient at the most inopportune time. Nobody along the ladder of social control inside of a corporation wants a creative or imaginative star who will probably surface at the least convenient moment and disrupt their carefully planned business projections.
Welcome to the world profiled, catalogued, and databased such that every person is pigeonholed into their own individual spreadsheet cell--and heaven help them if they should try to take up more space than the metaphorical spreadsheet maintainers (the stock brokers, analysts, and accountants) have allotted.
I'd like to build a mobo with a RISC descendant (PPC), Intel, and AMD processor sockets, a POST menu to select the processor of choice, and multiple flashable BIOS (post-POST) banks. Maybe even made so that the other processors can be accessed (somehow) after boot. Two top video cards (nV and ATI), TV tuner capable, whatever SoundBlaster's latest extreme audio card preferably with RCA or bare wire connectors like the back of a home audio receiver. After that I guess it'd be just technicalities. Network, wireless, 56k modem (just for phun), stack in the RAM and storage space. I like experimenting.
Slashdot Mirror
Spread the word.
That only works if the Dilbertesque organizations aren't being artificially propped up. Stock investors love money mills and Dilbertesque organizations are great money mills. Dilbertesque organizations have massive amounts of internal strife and are easy to manipulate. Once they become large enough then the internal strife isn't even an external consideration anymore. There will always be enough workers to get the job done. It's just money in and money out on the accounting ledger.
When there's a monopoly on money (Federal Reserve, Wall Street, DC) overseeing which organizations (all of which are kept in a perturbed state) become big and which don't there isn't anywhere else to walk to. It's all the same.
Metaphorically: It does not matter which game you choose to play in the casino. The House always wins the most.
Wow. That's about all I can say. That's an impressive display of crying for a bottle.
Today's news indicates that the Chinese are holding the IP on 0-day sploits.
That brought back so many memories. And yet people act surprised when I tell them I voluntarily left my last two employment positions.
Imagine how the hypothetical manager would react when his "serf" leaves. Maybe that explains why I'm homeless.
That's Dilbertization. That's what the rest of the world faces.
It's totally a point of view thing. If you're a Bad Guy then anything which maximizes your personal profit, no matter how many people it causes grief for, is a good thing--including ploys in which losses Over There are used to distract people from noticing profits Here. If you're a Good Guy then balancing personal profit with community profit is more important--including going back to help those who are being greased by Bad Guys.
The successive alignment of an industry towards the profiteering motives, alluded to in TFA, points to a trend where the Bad Guys are winning--perhaps because the Good Guys aren't paying enough attention. It's totally a point of view thing.
But you wanted to make this a slam against me ("attitudes like yours") so bad that you couldn't be bothered to think past your first impression. What needs to happen is that IT people need to stop being treated like children Which is an effect of the way profit is being used to control people. Management needs to stop being afraid of IT people Which is an effect of the need to control those people using profit. understand the business needs Whose business needs are we understanding? Are we understanding the business needs of the execs and venture capitalists, or are we understanding the business needs of the employees, or are we understanding the business needs of the customers?
That's what the
"Debt" is a ten thousand year old playground game.
I prefer to see it as socially stratified. What we're seeing is the triumph of social precepts over scientific precepts.
If you believe in such deep associations then why bother to post AC? Wouldn't you want to have a good piece in your comment history?
Intelligent AC posts are suspicious by nature. Who wouldn't want to take credit for a timely intellectual response unless they had some trollage scheme in mind?
Welcome to the world profiled, catalogued, and databased such that every person is pigeonholed into their own individual spreadsheet cell--and heaven help them if they should try to take up more space than the metaphorical spreadsheet maintainers (the stock brokers, analysts, and accountants) have allotted.
BSD is dead.
I was hoping for Cheeky Koala.
I'd like to build a mobo with a RISC descendant (PPC), Intel, and AMD processor sockets, a POST menu to select the processor of choice, and multiple flashable BIOS (post-POST) banks. Maybe even made so that the other processors can be accessed (somehow) after boot. Two top video cards (nV and ATI), TV tuner capable, whatever SoundBlaster's latest extreme audio card preferably with RCA or bare wire connectors like the back of a home audio receiver. After that I guess it'd be just technicalities. Network, wireless, 56k modem (just for phun), stack in the RAM and storage space. I like experimenting.
I've also been surprised to learn that the stock market has more than one sector.