It is also a matter of employability. Trades might lead to a quicker payoff but the public perception is for the most part you need to a professional to be a success. That means university and you'll pay what you need too. Heck it isn't exactly like the prospects for someone with just highschool is looking any better as time goes on that has to affect the price of higher education. The schools could pretty much charge me whatever they wanted to because it will sure beat being 60 years old and shoveling shit in the sun in the summer. Everything isn't just money: getting paid to sit on my ass, drink free coffee and play with a computer all day is its own reward.
Small government repubtards: government is bad always. Hmm, if the government is already paying towards peoples education shouldn't they at least be able to base their loans on affordability or results (percentage of grads employed in their field, percentage making larger than median wage etc)? Somehow it is better to keep things the way they are then to risk actually considering whether or not to subsidize an expensive basket weaving program.
Make the AI play piano, be part of the math team, and about 50% of the time be a conservative protestant and the other 50% of the time not speak a lick of english and they'll be perfect match for any university in Canada.
I think IPOs kill innovation. When a company is new they are still searching for the best market and best product to meet that market. As soon as they take on a bunch of investor money it becomes lets get something out the door so we can start milking it. Doesn't have to be great it just has to meet the quarterly street estimate.
20% time can be used to work for yourself I guess:) I really don't like non-competes. From what I gather from what I've read on the subject in a lot of jurisdictions they get rejected when challenged its just employees often never think to challenge them and it is a little late when you've quit your job and have started building a company to find out if you own something or not.
The thing is if a non-compete is too broad it can be challenged on the grounds that it prevents you from performing your profession (which it does). I once worked for a small startup in the anti-spam space, and while I think if I was going to work for another division within one of these companies the company would be fine (everyone was on very friendly terms) their non-compete included: MacAfee, Norton, Yahoo, Google, Microsoft and others. You sign on because at the moment you aren't particularly committed or knowledgeable to a particular industry. But say 10 years from now you've decided that spam fighting is your reason for living and you are recognized internationally for your skills in that area? I'm pretty sure you could successful challenge that non-compete because it effectively prevents you from working for any relevant company in that space. It would be like a hospital making a heart surgeon sign a contract saying they won't work for any other hospitals that do heart surgeries after they leave. Sure they are still a surgeon and probably could take up general surgery instead but you do have a right to exercise your expertise in your specific occupation. On the flipside say I got an offer from Microsoft to work on the XBox team I'm pretty sure I could challenge the non-compete because I wouldn't actually be competing and given they size of MS in particular areas (databases, OS, game consoles etc) it would be excluding me from large parts of the job market without reason.
Productivity sadly is usually defined as percentage of time where the employee has their ass in their seat doing the job that matches their job description. This is due to in my mind (I have a MMSci degree so am pretty close to being a pointheaded bastard myself) MBA schools obsession with metrics. It works fine when you are building identical widgets and you can clearly see that Bob's 67 a day is much better than Carl's 52. But it falls on its ass when it comes to measuring innovation projects. That guy picking his nose for 7.5hrs a day might get more done in the other 30min then the rest of the department does all day because ideas don't generally come on demand or require a fixed amount of "effort" to come to from person to person (or even just the randomness of an individual). But that won't stop the MBA from coming in and saying clearly the nose picker has to go because he only works 30min a day and our network graph shows that he isn't the best connected node.
What that often translates into is: do stuff we aren't paying you for. Why can't the staff handle their own secretarial needs? Why can't they clean up their own workspace, get their own supplies from storage, install their own software etc etc. We take what was before someone elses full time job and just tack it on to everyone else's day but don't reduce the productivity expectations to compensate.
Now that they got a product they want to stop looking for new ones. When people move on from android to something else, when browser vendors have a way to search the web without relying on Google and friends etc Google will have no replacement products.
R&D isn't something that is ever done. You can't just say: we have a product now so lets cut the expense of the engineering department. Your competitors are always looking to leapfrog you or make your entire business obsolete. That is why you hire smart people and pay them to keep thinking.
Ah but that is where it could be a pain in the ass. You go to school out of state. You want your books before the term starts so you order them to your parents. You finish the term and then need to return them. You then have to drag them back home to your parents to mail them back. Probably pretty tight windows since they probably want the books back in plenty of time before the next term so there is a good chance the state they are in when they need to go back is different than the one that you got them.
That said I'm Canadian and though not perfect still much easier for almost everything cross border.You pay tax where you buy if you do it in a store or if online pay tax based on your province. Done. No games like is it a Tuesday and you are in the cornbelt buying a food product from out of state or anything.
You can look at the flip side of it though too: you can learn from and talk to more historical people. What if you could watch the latest Churchhill interview, or learn relativity from Einstein. Even less intellectual things: I'd love for Colonel Sanders to still be around so he could slap the shit out of the bastards that are screwing with his secret recipe.
Or have their 2 kids then have 20 more years to have a mistake. People would have to keep the birthcontrol going for decades longer or get snipped. Delaying kids till later in life sounds good assuming the longer lifespan meant we worked out effectively younger at any give point. What if we end up with 60 year old joints, hearing, eyesight etc but 30 year olds gonads?
Stupid people won't suddenly learn not to breed. They yet after 1000's of generations and they won't given parents that can keep earning long enough to bail them out of any crap they get themselves into.
That isn't even counting if people remained fertile longer. Lets say we doubled the lifespan. People would have 2 litters instead of 1 likely. They'd have a couple in their late 20's, then a couple more in their mid 40's. It would lead to a really crowded world and too many damn strollers on the bus;)
I agree with differing skillsets. A dev shop can hire the people that know the tech they want. A enterprise can in theory too but they are much more limited because rather than having say 50% technical staff they'll have more like 2-5% so each person they pick has to have a little knowledge of networking, windows servers, linux servers, sans, client cloning, business apps etc. Keeping the existing business systems working is more important as a hiring criteria and as a work practice than learning a new tech to do something innovative. They are too scattered and for mid sized companies ( 2000 in my mind) they might have 5-10 IT/devs to take on any serious experimental work. Not enough to give breadth of knowledge since they also need overlapping skillsets to be able to do any projects of meaningful size.
you guarantee you'll lose. MySQL isn't for the enterprise. Linux isn't for the enterprise. Hadoop, SaaS offerings like Salesforce, GDocs, etc. Once you say something isn't for the enterprise you almost guarantee that it will be a > $1B business (or fundamental tech used in a $1B business) in the next couple years.
Well the iMac and OSX were pretty huge too at least for a company that had single digit market share. The iPod came out in 2001 and they gradually took over music. But yeah a lot of time between Jobs coming back and the truly huge successes. Part of that was just technological: I'm sure they would have liked to make the iPod an iPhone from the start of things but you just didn't have screens, wireless bandwidth etc to make it worthwhile. Sometimes ideas have to wait for supporting tech.
I agree. The bb gun guys (hopefully) waited until they were high enough to pick off. The people hurt were probably the idiots piling up on eachother trying to get up that wall.
Looking at the tower of people trying to climb up the wall trying to get these things I think the company knew people were going to go crazy and did it because they wanted the publicity. ~$850 for a phone and people call Apple's crap expensive or were these really tricked out phones? The top model iPhone 5 goes for that I think but that is after paying the "Apple tax"... LG isn't as respected a brand so I'd think they must think their hardware makes up for the brand difference.
Agreed. Don't always have to be in the same person though. I've known brilliant people that were jerks and generally didn't have time for anyone beneath them. But occasionally they'd drop a gold nugget on someone in one snarky comment rather than a turd and that hard working but less skilled person could go away and pound out the working implementation that they couldn't think up themselves.
I think some of the cause of this behaviour (not that it justifies it) but the truly gifted among us feel that their time is wasted once they know how to solve a problem. After that it just becomes typing and debugging work which really isn't that interesting.
Couldn't agree more. The level of talent varies between program and part of a program. Assuming you don't go out of your way to shoot yourself in the foot most people can get a usable UI up and going. Might need designers to make it look pretty but generally persistence will get your labels and buttons properly aligned, fonts consistent across the windows etc. Persistence will not get your caching layer optimized without some talent: you simply won't even know that their is a problem, and if there is you won't have the skill to track down concurrency problems, etc. We all know developers (and probably have been one at some point in our career) that just throws their hands up and says "I don't get it it doesn't happen all the time. Oh well I'll just mark the bug as unrepeatable and hope someone finds the problem later."
;) Agreed never normal. People used to get married younger. You might have lived with your parents for the first few years but even then you'd be out of the house by your early 20's when the kids started coming. Now we delay things with college education, a few years looking to land a job in your field, then another few to find your 'soul mate" and viola we are 30+ years old still trying to figure out what to do with your life rather than actually having a life. Pretty sad actually.
Slashdot Mirror
It is also a matter of employability. Trades might lead to a quicker payoff but the public perception is for the most part you need to a professional to be a success. That means university and you'll pay what you need too. Heck it isn't exactly like the prospects for someone with just highschool is looking any better as time goes on that has to affect the price of higher education. The schools could pretty much charge me whatever they wanted to because it will sure beat being 60 years old and shoveling shit in the sun in the summer. Everything isn't just money: getting paid to sit on my ass, drink free coffee and play with a computer all day is its own reward.
Small government repubtards: government is bad always. Hmm, if the government is already paying towards peoples education shouldn't they at least be able to base their loans on affordability or results (percentage of grads employed in their field, percentage making larger than median wage etc)? Somehow it is better to keep things the way they are then to risk actually considering whether or not to subsidize an expensive basket weaving program.
Make the AI play piano, be part of the math team, and about 50% of the time be a conservative protestant and the other 50% of the time not speak a lick of english and they'll be perfect match for any university in Canada.
I think IPOs kill innovation. When a company is new they are still searching for the best market and best product to meet that market. As soon as they take on a bunch of investor money it becomes lets get something out the door so we can start milking it. Doesn't have to be great it just has to meet the quarterly street estimate.
20% time can be used to work for yourself I guess :) I really don't like non-competes. From what I gather from what I've read on the subject in a lot of jurisdictions they get rejected when challenged its just employees often never think to challenge them and it is a little late when you've quit your job and have started building a company to find out if you own something or not.
The thing is if a non-compete is too broad it can be challenged on the grounds that it prevents you from performing your profession (which it does). I once worked for a small startup in the anti-spam space, and while I think if I was going to work for another division within one of these companies the company would be fine (everyone was on very friendly terms) their non-compete included: MacAfee, Norton, Yahoo, Google, Microsoft and others. You sign on because at the moment you aren't particularly committed or knowledgeable to a particular industry. But say 10 years from now you've decided that spam fighting is your reason for living and you are recognized internationally for your skills in that area? I'm pretty sure you could successful challenge that non-compete because it effectively prevents you from working for any relevant company in that space. It would be like a hospital making a heart surgeon sign a contract saying they won't work for any other hospitals that do heart surgeries after they leave. Sure they are still a surgeon and probably could take up general surgery instead but you do have a right to exercise your expertise in your specific occupation. On the flipside say I got an offer from Microsoft to work on the XBox team I'm pretty sure I could challenge the non-compete because I wouldn't actually be competing and given they size of MS in particular areas (databases, OS, game consoles etc) it would be excluding me from large parts of the job market without reason.
Productivity sadly is usually defined as percentage of time where the employee has their ass in their seat doing the job that matches their job description. This is due to in my mind (I have a MMSci degree so am pretty close to being a pointheaded bastard myself) MBA schools obsession with metrics. It works fine when you are building identical widgets and you can clearly see that Bob's 67 a day is much better than Carl's 52. But it falls on its ass when it comes to measuring innovation projects. That guy picking his nose for 7.5hrs a day might get more done in the other 30min then the rest of the department does all day because ideas don't generally come on demand or require a fixed amount of "effort" to come to from person to person (or even just the randomness of an individual). But that won't stop the MBA from coming in and saying clearly the nose picker has to go because he only works 30min a day and our network graph shows that he isn't the best connected node.
What that often translates into is: do stuff we aren't paying you for. Why can't the staff handle their own secretarial needs? Why can't they clean up their own workspace, get their own supplies from storage, install their own software etc etc. We take what was before someone elses full time job and just tack it on to everyone else's day but don't reduce the productivity expectations to compensate.
Now that they got a product they want to stop looking for new ones. When people move on from android to something else, when browser vendors have a way to search the web without relying on Google and friends etc Google will have no replacement products.
R&D isn't something that is ever done. You can't just say: we have a product now so lets cut the expense of the engineering department. Your competitors are always looking to leapfrog you or make your entire business obsolete. That is why you hire smart people and pay them to keep thinking.
Ah but that is where it could be a pain in the ass. You go to school out of state. You want your books before the term starts so you order them to your parents. You finish the term and then need to return them. You then have to drag them back home to your parents to mail them back. Probably pretty tight windows since they probably want the books back in plenty of time before the next term so there is a good chance the state they are in when they need to go back is different than the one that you got them.
That said I'm Canadian and though not perfect still much easier for almost everything cross border.You pay tax where you buy if you do it in a store or if online pay tax based on your province. Done. No games like is it a Tuesday and you are in the cornbelt buying a food product from out of state or anything.
You can look at the flip side of it though too: you can learn from and talk to more historical people. What if you could watch the latest Churchhill interview, or learn relativity from Einstein. Even less intellectual things: I'd love for Colonel Sanders to still be around so he could slap the shit out of the bastards that are screwing with his secret recipe.
Or have their 2 kids then have 20 more years to have a mistake. People would have to keep the birthcontrol going for decades longer or get snipped. Delaying kids till later in life sounds good assuming the longer lifespan meant we worked out effectively younger at any give point. What if we end up with 60 year old joints, hearing, eyesight etc but 30 year olds gonads?
Stupid people won't suddenly learn not to breed. They yet after 1000's of generations and they won't given parents that can keep earning long enough to bail them out of any crap they get themselves into.
That isn't even counting if people remained fertile longer. Lets say we doubled the lifespan. People would have 2 litters instead of 1 likely. They'd have a couple in their late 20's, then a couple more in their mid 40's. It would lead to a really crowded world and too many damn strollers on the bus ;)
I agree with differing skillsets. A dev shop can hire the people that know the tech they want. A enterprise can in theory too but they are much more limited because rather than having say 50% technical staff they'll have more like 2-5% so each person they pick has to have a little knowledge of networking, windows servers, linux servers, sans, client cloning, business apps etc. Keeping the existing business systems working is more important as a hiring criteria and as a work practice than learning a new tech to do something innovative. They are too scattered and for mid sized companies ( 2000 in my mind) they might have 5-10 IT/devs to take on any serious experimental work. Not enough to give breadth of knowledge since they also need overlapping skillsets to be able to do any projects of meaningful size.
you guarantee you'll lose. MySQL isn't for the enterprise. Linux isn't for the enterprise. Hadoop, SaaS offerings like Salesforce, GDocs, etc. Once you say something isn't for the enterprise you almost guarantee that it will be a > $1B business (or fundamental tech used in a $1B business) in the next couple years.
Well the iMac and OSX were pretty huge too at least for a company that had single digit market share. The iPod came out in 2001 and they gradually took over music. But yeah a lot of time between Jobs coming back and the truly huge successes. Part of that was just technological: I'm sure they would have liked to make the iPod an iPhone from the start of things but you just didn't have screens, wireless bandwidth etc to make it worthwhile. Sometimes ideas have to wait for supporting tech.
Just goes to show you can't get head without Skulley.
Yep but the upgrades are free ... the diamond necklaces just go to the next one rather than last years model.
A supermodel with a Gucci bag. Lots of storage space and everyone in the room will be jealous.
I agree. The bb gun guys (hopefully) waited until they were high enough to pick off. The people hurt were probably the idiots piling up on eachother trying to get up that wall.
Looking at the tower of people trying to climb up the wall trying to get these things I think the company knew people were going to go crazy and did it because they wanted the publicity. ~$850 for a phone and people call Apple's crap expensive or were these really tricked out phones? The top model iPhone 5 goes for that I think but that is after paying the "Apple tax" ... LG isn't as respected a brand so I'd think they must think their hardware makes up for the brand difference.
We'll at least they weren't american they would be using bird shot.
Agreed. Don't always have to be in the same person though. I've known brilliant people that were jerks and generally didn't have time for anyone beneath them. But occasionally they'd drop a gold nugget on someone in one snarky comment rather than a turd and that hard working but less skilled person could go away and pound out the working implementation that they couldn't think up themselves.
I think some of the cause of this behaviour (not that it justifies it) but the truly gifted among us feel that their time is wasted once they know how to solve a problem. After that it just becomes typing and debugging work which really isn't that interesting.
Couldn't agree more. The level of talent varies between program and part of a program. Assuming you don't go out of your way to shoot yourself in the foot most people can get a usable UI up and going. Might need designers to make it look pretty but generally persistence will get your labels and buttons properly aligned, fonts consistent across the windows etc. Persistence will not get your caching layer optimized without some talent: you simply won't even know that their is a problem, and if there is you won't have the skill to track down concurrency problems, etc. We all know developers (and probably have been one at some point in our career) that just throws their hands up and says "I don't get it it doesn't happen all the time. Oh well I'll just mark the bug as unrepeatable and hope someone finds the problem later."
;) Agreed never normal. People used to get married younger. You might have lived with your parents for the first few years but even then you'd be out of the house by your early 20's when the kids started coming. Now we delay things with college education, a few years looking to land a job in your field, then another few to find your 'soul mate" and viola we are 30+ years old still trying to figure out what to do with your life rather than actually having a life. Pretty sad actually.