I know, I know. I am just saying that as a kid a long time ago, in a small town and not a city, that is what we were told to do. We didn't have that many pedestrians in residential areas and there were easy to see. It was easier to see cars backing out of their house driveway from the sidewalk than from the road where all the parked cars block your view. Cyclists meant 95% kids, they were not going full speed like modern tour-de-commute racers. There were ZERO bike lanes.
The reasoning to be on sidewalks was because it was indeed safer, in that time and place. Today though - NOWHERE is safe for bikes (unless it's a bike-only trail which are very rare).
I was in a small town too, everyone know sidewalks were for pedestrians and bikes. And we went slow, we stopped, we started, we stopped again, etc. We did not ride like modern cyclists with full set of expensive gear trying to make a speed record on the way to work weaving into and out of traffic. The road was much less safe. Even in the city now, the roads are murderous, viewing is bad, speed limit for cars too high, bike lanes too small (and when they aren't the cyclists still want to be far left on the white line for some reason).
Your comment is interesting, but you could improve it with flashing pink letters and lots of emojis. I don't know why you're so opposed to all my good ideas.
It's a correlation, not a one-to-one mapping. By "thin people also drink diet sodas" what does that mean, and what does that refute? Do you mean all thin people, or the same proportion of thin people drink diet sodas as fat people, or more or less, or? With out any numbers this does nothing whatsoever to refute the suggestion that the causality may be due to being overweight rather than due to drinking diet sodas.
A correlation could mean that there's only a 5% difference in fat versus thin people in their soda drinking habits. And correlation also means you can't show which is the cause and which is the effect. We can come up with ideas about what the causality might be of course, and it's worth discussing.
Used to have some coworkers pressuring me to join the cycling cult. Never mind that I hadn't been on a bike in twenty years, was 10 miles away, and heavy traffic most of the distance, they would be utterly convinced that it was perfect for a beginner. I also saw one of them on the road riding her bike in the most dangerous way and never stopping at signs. I was getting exercise at the time, it just wasn't cycling so I don't understand the "join us!" attitude of those damned militants.
I've rarely done this, but when I did I definitelly wanted to send the message that the worker is not just playing games with me alone. And this was a next-to-last resort, I had already talked to the boss privately, the boss talked to the worker privately, etc.
There was a report from somewhere last year that when the new iphone models are announced that the number of accidentally broken or lost phones increased. It was surmised that perhaps this occured subconsciously so that there would be an excuse to get a new one. Possibly this applies to Android? http://brobible.com/life/artic...
If your chicken patty really is 50% soy, you could tell just by looking, and if you didn't look you would know at the first bite because it wouldn't taste or feel like chicken. If someone really is trying to make fake meat that tastes and looks like meat then they wouldn't use soy to do it. Fake meat that actually fools people will be much more expensive than chicken anyway.
Agreed. But so many people just read the headline and believe it. A few more go to the article, which has been highly edited and compressed to catch eyeballs and earn ad revenue, and believe that. Only a very few people take to time to actually get the real original report, much less wonder how accurate the report really is.
The boss has a need to know what you're doing. This is not an optional thing. Keeping the boss informed is a necessary part of the job. This is easy to do: speak up during meetings, tell the truth during scrums, send the weekly status reports. It's when the boss ends up not know what a particular worker is doing that things start falling apart. The boss is going to be asked by all the other bosses up the chain of command about what is going on and needs to answer.
So let's say the boss has no idea that you're working on three different projects at once, that might lead to a fourth project being assigned by mistakenly assuming you have free time. That's not that difficult a situation to get into at some companies, when other people come in from the sides and give you a task without your boss knowing; which is the perfect time to "cc" the boss that some random sales guy wants you to work on a new feature.
When it comes around to performance review and raise time, the boss is going to be happier with the workers who communicate more, and unhappy with those who he had to constantly struggle to get any information out of. The performance rating is almost never based upon the ability to get the job done while never communicating. Even if the work is excellent, the lack of communication will always send the signal that the work could be better.
Yup, I feel I'm spending too much time sweeping up messes that could have been fixed by having some conversations weeks earlier. I'd much rather hear someone say that they might be late than for them to actually be late at the same time that I'm telling my boss that everything is going smoothly. I'd much rather critique in a design review than to find out in the code review that everything is done wrong, and yet the latter seems to happen more often. I have a few people that never send me ask questions in email or in person unless I'm walking past their cubicles. I don't necessarily think this is about secrecy, but some people seem like they don't like to communicate and just want to huddle up inside the cube.
I do have a direct report that just does not do what I say. I just want a weekly status report, and it never arrives. After a late project I wanted a daily status because the director keeps asking me at random times what the status is, and so I cc the boss as proof that I have asked for the status and so that the boss can indeed apply pressure. It's sort of a way of handing the boss some proof that I'm not being listened to.
The cc is also backup support for when I'm dealing with a person outside of the group trying to get me to do work I don't have time for; if I cc the boss then the pressure eases up, or at least they badger the boss instead of me. A way of saying "I can't make that decision on my own".
I find I have to do it to appeal to authority. My worker is ignoring me, so I cc the boss, and suddenly the work starts. It also helps with emails to project managers and the like who may be badgering me about something and when I cc the boss they become more polite. I also sometimes do this as a way of saying "see, I told you this guy was nuts, here's proof".
But this misses a few things that juicers provide: - the ability to sprinkle bee pollen, acacia, flax, and other nasty stuff into the juice - the uplifting effect you get from joining a cult - ability to have more recyclable containers that will get tossed into a landfill. - smugness.
(don't forget, Whole Foods once sold pre-peeled oranges in plastic containers because the original container (aka, peel) wasn't hip enough)
Even weirder than Silicon Valley is the media perception of Silicon Valley. Seriously, the valley is nothing whatsoever like the media portrayal, or even the news media portrayal. The far out wierdos are rare. Yes there are a lot of stupid startups, but those generally have 2 or 3 people with a dumb idea expecting to get rich, and 10-20 more who just want a paycheck and don't expect to get rich but treat it as a nice thing if it did happen.
It is not full of wacked out leftists, there's a distinct trend towards libertarians, a solid backing of down to earth moderates, and enough hard core conservatives to balance it out. There are plenty of gun clubs here.
Even if you head to San Francisco there are indeed moderate streaks to be found, and conservative areas. There is no place anywhere in America that is all red or all blue. Just because a few peacocks strut around doesn't mean those are the only birds. When a gun toting crazy redneck walks around Alabama asking to see the passport of anyone with a tan you don't assume that the entire state is full of wackos, so why assume all of SF or Silicon Valley are full of ditzy goofballs just because you bump into someone that makes vegan quinoa jello?
And what's wrong the customers with that viewpoint? Why should a company treat past loyal customers like scum just because they like an older version? Even if it's a pain in the ass to maintain, it's a huge PR hit to dismiss most of your installed base that way. There's a big shift away from their core loyal base of office workers towards home users who were already migrating away from PCs. If they want customers to upgrade then they should make upgrading attractive to the customers, rather than a ho-hum release with no value to most customers that's coupled with a heavy adware campaign and dirty tricks.
Seriously, there is no reason to upgrade if Windows 7 is working and supported because upgrading provides little value, and what value it has is easily offset by the drawbacks. So their marketing response is not to improve the product but rather to browbeat the users and degrade the older versions. Any other company would fade to obscurity with tricks like that, and since Microsoft is rapidly losing its monopoly it's a rather bad business move to treat customers that way.
Well any decent company would support past customers just for the sake of keeping customers. Whether it's a new feature or not it make sense to support it.
I never say MSTK epidoes in order. The entire backstory was always entirely confusing. Not that there was much backstory to start with, but for me it was almost irrelevant (except for the being who no longer had a need for physical bodies).
That was one of the things that made the show work, it was basically the anti Star Trek. The heroes weren't heroes and the tropes were turned upside down. There werre some parts that didn't work well, but some parts were brilliant (the hall of records with the time prophet's instructions to Stanley).
Slashdot Mirror
I know, I know. I am just saying that as a kid a long time ago, in a small town and not a city, that is what we were told to do. We didn't have that many pedestrians in residential areas and there were easy to see. It was easier to see cars backing out of their house driveway from the sidewalk than from the road where all the parked cars block your view. Cyclists meant 95% kids, they were not going full speed like modern tour-de-commute racers. There were ZERO bike lanes.
The reasoning to be on sidewalks was because it was indeed safer, in that time and place. Today though - NOWHERE is safe for bikes (unless it's a bike-only trail which are very rare).
I was in a small town too, everyone know sidewalks were for pedestrians and bikes. And we went slow, we stopped, we started, we stopped again, etc. We did not ride like modern cyclists with full set of expensive gear trying to make a speed record on the way to work weaving into and out of traffic. The road was much less safe. Even in the city now, the roads are murderous, viewing is bad, speed limit for cars too high, bike lanes too small (and when they aren't the cyclists still want to be far left on the white line for some reason).
Your comment is interesting, but you could improve it with flashing pink letters and lots of emojis. I don't know why you're so opposed to all my good ideas.
Cancer causes smoking! It's true, I looked at the numbers.
It's a correlation, not a one-to-one mapping. By "thin people also drink diet sodas" what does that mean, and what does that refute? Do you mean all thin people, or the same proportion of thin people drink diet sodas as fat people, or more or less, or? With out any numbers this does nothing whatsoever to refute the suggestion that the causality may be due to being overweight rather than due to drinking diet sodas.
A correlation could mean that there's only a 5% difference in fat versus thin people in their soda drinking habits. And correlation also means you can't show which is the cause and which is the effect. We can come up with ideas about what the causality might be of course, and it's worth discussing.
When I was growing up, we were taught to ride out bikes on the sidewalk since it was safer.
Used to have some coworkers pressuring me to join the cycling cult. Never mind that I hadn't been on a bike in twenty years, was 10 miles away, and heavy traffic most of the distance, they would be utterly convinced that it was perfect for a beginner. I also saw one of them on the road riding her bike in the most dangerous way and never stopping at signs. I was getting exercise at the time, it just wasn't cycling so I don't understand the "join us!" attitude of those damned militants.
I've rarely done this, but when I did I definitelly wanted to send the message that the worker is not just playing games with me alone. And this was a next-to-last resort, I had already talked to the boss privately, the boss talked to the worker privately, etc.
There was a report from somewhere last year that when the new iphone models are announced that the number of accidentally broken or lost phones increased. It was surmised that perhaps this occured subconsciously so that there would be an excuse to get a new one. Possibly this applies to Android?
http://brobible.com/life/artic...
I drank so much juicero juice I no longer have sharp white things in my mouth, you insensitive clod!
Why blame Apple when you can blame Apple customers who feel they need a new model every year?
If your chicken patty really is 50% soy, you could tell just by looking, and if you didn't look you would know at the first bite because it wouldn't taste or feel like chicken. If someone really is trying to make fake meat that tastes and looks like meat then they wouldn't use soy to do it. Fake meat that actually fools people will be much more expensive than chicken anyway.
Agreed. But so many people just read the headline and believe it. A few more go to the article, which has been highly edited and compressed to catch eyeballs and earn ad revenue, and believe that. Only a very few people take to time to actually get the real original report, much less wonder how accurate the report really is.
So by doing the exact opposite of being motivated, how does that help your career advancement?
The boss has a need to know what you're doing. This is not an optional thing. Keeping the boss informed is a necessary part of the job. This is easy to do: speak up during meetings, tell the truth during scrums, send the weekly status reports. It's when the boss ends up not know what a particular worker is doing that things start falling apart. The boss is going to be asked by all the other bosses up the chain of command about what is going on and needs to answer.
So let's say the boss has no idea that you're working on three different projects at once, that might lead to a fourth project being assigned by mistakenly assuming you have free time. That's not that difficult a situation to get into at some companies, when other people come in from the sides and give you a task without your boss knowing; which is the perfect time to "cc" the boss that some random sales guy wants you to work on a new feature.
When it comes around to performance review and raise time, the boss is going to be happier with the workers who communicate more, and unhappy with those who he had to constantly struggle to get any information out of. The performance rating is almost never based upon the ability to get the job done while never communicating. Even if the work is excellent, the lack of communication will always send the signal that the work could be better.
Yup, I feel I'm spending too much time sweeping up messes that could have been fixed by having some conversations weeks earlier. I'd much rather hear someone say that they might be late than for them to actually be late at the same time that I'm telling my boss that everything is going smoothly. I'd much rather critique in a design review than to find out in the code review that everything is done wrong, and yet the latter seems to happen more often. I have a few people that never send me ask questions in email or in person unless I'm walking past their cubicles. I don't necessarily think this is about secrecy, but some people seem like they don't like to communicate and just want to huddle up inside the cube.
I do have a direct report that just does not do what I say. I just want a weekly status report, and it never arrives. After a late project I wanted a daily status because the director keeps asking me at random times what the status is, and so I cc the boss as proof that I have asked for the status and so that the boss can indeed apply pressure. It's sort of a way of handing the boss some proof that I'm not being listened to.
The cc is also backup support for when I'm dealing with a person outside of the group trying to get me to do work I don't have time for; if I cc the boss then the pressure eases up, or at least they badger the boss instead of me. A way of saying "I can't make that decision on my own".
I find I have to do it to appeal to authority. My worker is ignoring me, so I cc the boss, and suddenly the work starts. It also helps with emails to project managers and the like who may be badgering me about something and when I cc the boss they become more polite. I also sometimes do this as a way of saying "see, I told you this guy was nuts, here's proof".
But this misses a few things that juicers provide:
- the ability to sprinkle bee pollen, acacia, flax, and other nasty stuff into the juice
- the uplifting effect you get from joining a cult
- ability to have more recyclable containers that will get tossed into a landfill.
- smugness.
(don't forget, Whole Foods once sold pre-peeled oranges in plastic containers because the original container (aka, peel) wasn't hip enough)
Even weirder than Silicon Valley is the media perception of Silicon Valley. Seriously, the valley is nothing whatsoever like the media portrayal, or even the news media portrayal. The far out wierdos are rare. Yes there are a lot of stupid startups, but those generally have 2 or 3 people with a dumb idea expecting to get rich, and 10-20 more who just want a paycheck and don't expect to get rich but treat it as a nice thing if it did happen.
It is not full of wacked out leftists, there's a distinct trend towards libertarians, a solid backing of down to earth moderates, and enough hard core conservatives to balance it out. There are plenty of gun clubs here.
Even if you head to San Francisco there are indeed moderate streaks to be found, and conservative areas. There is no place anywhere in America that is all red or all blue. Just because a few peacocks strut around doesn't mean those are the only birds. When a gun toting crazy redneck walks around Alabama asking to see the passport of anyone with a tan you don't assume that the entire state is full of wackos, so why assume all of SF or Silicon Valley are full of ditzy goofballs just because you bump into someone that makes vegan quinoa jello?
And what's wrong the customers with that viewpoint? Why should a company treat past loyal customers like scum just because they like an older version? Even if it's a pain in the ass to maintain, it's a huge PR hit to dismiss most of your installed base that way. There's a big shift away from their core loyal base of office workers towards home users who were already migrating away from PCs. If they want customers to upgrade then they should make upgrading attractive to the customers, rather than a ho-hum release with no value to most customers that's coupled with a heavy adware campaign and dirty tricks.
Seriously, there is no reason to upgrade if Windows 7 is working and supported because upgrading provides little value, and what value it has is easily offset by the drawbacks. So their marketing response is not to improve the product but rather to browbeat the users and degrade the older versions. Any other company would fade to obscurity with tricks like that, and since Microsoft is rapidly losing its monopoly it's a rather bad business move to treat customers that way.
Well any decent company would support past customers just for the sake of keeping customers. Whether it's a new feature or not it make sense to support it.
I prefer OSX look and feel to Windows 7 and 8. Simple, minimalistic, no ribbons, no gloss, no extra junk to get in your way.
I never say MSTK epidoes in order. The entire backstory was always entirely confusing. Not that there was much backstory to start with, but for me it was almost irrelevant (except for the being who no longer had a need for physical bodies).
That was one of the things that made the show work, it was basically the anti Star Trek. The heroes weren't heroes and the tropes were turned upside down. There werre some parts that didn't work well, but some parts were brilliant (the hall of records with the time prophet's instructions to Stanley).