first - assume your company isn't stupid. They know you're going to retire.
second - I wouldn't prematurely discuss retirement with them. Yes, it will take time for them to find a replacement...but I wouldn't discuss it with them if you're not willing to be let go immediately. (Just in case)
third - when you ARE ready...discuss. Offer to train replacement. Discuss a date when you're ready to leave.
When you're ready to leave - offer a consulting contract (1099) to come back if necessary on a limited (expensive) engagement.
Big orgs like this have the bargaining power to negotiate "fast lane" traffic and use those agreements to squash their competitors if Neutrality was rolled back
Cough. Big orgs like this have the bargaining power to be PAID if Neutrality is rolled back.
No one watches CableVision/BrightHouse. They watch CBS, NBC, Fox. CableVision/BrightHouse PAY CBS, NBC, Fox to carry their content.
The government can keep their goddamned hands off of the fucking internet.
Wow.
Do you know the internet never would've even happened without the government right?
CompuServe, Delpha, Genie -- LOTS of companies were offering "internet-like" services back in the 80s. Want to know where they all are? In the garbage.
Capitalism...the premise of everything "good" only happens via competition (and w/o the Government) -- never could develop the internet. The technology was all there - but let's face it - no Board of Execs would every have bought into the idea of a cooperative agency.
When Al Gore suggested it - they thought he was a nut.
You also probably don't want to own ANY comcast / telecom stock. They're all going to tank...the question is when.
Everyone thinks telecoms can charge more for that last mile service. The problem is that their model is that of a cable company.
Cable companies (generally speaking) do NOT provide content. They PAY for content. ABC, CBS, Comedy Central, etc....they PAY for that. The stuff that is offered for free is "The Shark Vacuum cleaner channel". No one wants it.
These telecoms think they can charge Netflix/Google? But without Google (for most people) and you aren't offering an internet service anymore - all you're offering is an end of cable (perhaps with videos of a "Shark Vacuum Cleaner").
Finally...this "removal of roadblocks" works BOTH ways. Finally Google can run fiber out to Comcast's best (most profitable) areas and charge whatever they want?
Competition? Google can slow Comcast's content in that area to whatever they want. Are you going to pay comcast for an internet that isn't responsive? Or are you going to switch to Google Fiber?
I tell people this. Most don't believe me. That's fine. But I wouldn't own any telecom stock.
Why shouldn't the high-bandwidth users pay more for their use?
For the record -- I'm ALREADY paying for my high-bandwidth. $50 a month is a LOT more than the $14 for dial-up I used to use.
I do have an issue with companies committing fraud. For example : those that offer "unlimited" bandwidth now lying and saying "you should pay more". (I did pay more...I bought unlimited for a reason)
I understand that there are a lot of folks out there who are down on the idea of "superstar programmers" and who believe the idea that anyone mastering the art of development is somehow detrimental.
It's worth remembering (and cited in MMM), that the 20-to-1 gap isn't present solely in programming. Rate-Busters have existing for years.
Linux is fundamentally a good idea, but between the dozens of distros, the rather steep learning curve for new users, and the bi-polar nature of the community, it's pretty off-putting to most people.
You say this like it's a bad thing.
No seriously. I mean that. I've done the fanboy bit before. OS/2. There. BeOS. Yep. Lots of others.
I do NOT recommend Linux to people. In fact, I say to NOT use it. Why? Cause most people want to play games, browse the web, do their email and watch NetFlix.
For them - use Windows.
If I tell them no....and then they ask what I use....and why. Only THEN do I begin the conversation with them. What do they want to do on their computer? Oh, you need programming languages? A database? Source code control? Then yes, you should start looking at Linux. It's got a hell of a learning curve but damn it's worth it.
Don't get me wrong. Linux has won. Windows has Ubuntu shell. Docker is linux.
But I'll be damned before I spend time trying to convince someone who doesn't want to use Linux and doesn't need it that they should be using it.
Either Linux sells itself or it doesn't. (And it has...)
Even a strict 10-year cutoff is ludicrous. I'm sure if anything were passed, it would be a very gradual phaseout, with lots and lots of exceptions. While the vast majority of Californians could do all of their daily driving on electric, not all can. And there are plenty of "special case" trips (vacations, mountains) that can't either. Or the entire trucking industry. Or any business needing heavy duty pickup trucks.
Most city driving is probably fine for battery work. Highway driving (trips > 100 miles) is likely going to require an infrastructure change.
Redoing the highways to allow for charging of vehicles while enroute is still coming. Once that's done - there won't be a reason for ICEs except for extreme cases.
Okay, now turn that around.
How do you feel about DACA, total amnesty, and unrestricted immigration?
No problems with DACA. Disagree on total amnesty and unrestricted immigration.
Lots and lots of people are screaming for DACA and giving citizenship to just about anyone who can evade the border guards and get here.
I see a lot of screaming about DACA. I do NOT see a lot of "giving citizenship to just about anyone who can evade the border guards and get here".....unless you want to turn it around and talk about Cuban wetfoot/dryfoot.
So where do *YOU* stand on Cuban immigration. (Note: I live in Florida)
Finally where do you stand on DACA -- particular as some of those affected by DACA are serving in our military (in particular MAVNI).
Slashdot Mirror
second - I wouldn't prematurely discuss retirement with them. Yes, it will take time for them to find a replacement...but I wouldn't discuss it with them if you're not willing to be let go immediately. (Just in case)
third - when you ARE ready...discuss. Offer to train replacement. Discuss a date when you're ready to leave. When you're ready to leave - offer a consulting contract (1099) to come back if necessary on a limited (expensive) engagement.
Then this ISN'T we're going to take more risks.
This is....we're screwed...and I"m going to claim we "took risks" when it hits the fan.
He's going to get Mexico to pay for it!
and it's going to be YUGE!
Cough. Big orgs like this have the bargaining power to be PAID if Neutrality is rolled back.
No one watches CableVision/BrightHouse. They watch CBS, NBC, Fox. CableVision/BrightHouse PAY CBS, NBC, Fox to carry their content.
Except that....CenturyLink bought Level 3. Try to keep up.
You have to admire people who don't bother learning internet history.
I remember when the internet didn't allow ANY commercial traffic. Do you?
Wow.
Do you know the internet never would've even happened without the government right?
CompuServe, Delpha, Genie -- LOTS of companies were offering "internet-like" services back in the 80s. Want to know where they all are? In the garbage.
Capitalism...the premise of everything "good" only happens via competition (and w/o the Government) -- never could develop the internet. The technology was all there - but let's face it - no Board of Execs would every have bought into the idea of a cooperative agency.
When Al Gore suggested it - they thought he was a nut.
You also probably don't want to own ANY comcast / telecom stock. They're all going to tank...the question is when.
Everyone thinks telecoms can charge more for that last mile service. The problem is that their model is that of a cable company.
Cable companies (generally speaking) do NOT provide content. They PAY for content. ABC, CBS, Comedy Central, etc....they PAY for that. The stuff that is offered for free is "The Shark Vacuum cleaner channel". No one wants it.
These telecoms think they can charge Netflix/Google? But without Google (for most people) and you aren't offering an internet service anymore - all you're offering is an end of cable (perhaps with videos of a "Shark Vacuum Cleaner").
Finally...this "removal of roadblocks" works BOTH ways. Finally Google can run fiber out to Comcast's best (most profitable) areas and charge whatever they want?
Competition? Google can slow Comcast's content in that area to whatever they want. Are you going to pay comcast for an internet that isn't responsive? Or are you going to switch to Google Fiber?
I tell people this. Most don't believe me. That's fine. But I wouldn't own any telecom stock.
Management just heard: "I get to keep everyone on premises (and working) 24x7? Where do I sign up?"
For the record -- I'm ALREADY paying for my high-bandwidth. $50 a month is a LOT more than the $14 for dial-up I used to use.
I do have an issue with companies committing fraud. For example : those that offer "unlimited" bandwidth now lying and saying "you should pay more". (I did pay more...I bought unlimited for a reason)
The point is that this is a different treatment than say concocting another chemo combo.
Leukemia is a different beast though. The risk factors for Leukemia are fairly weak (Familial, Radiation exposure, Smoking....)
Same IP Address...and same MAC address....and same OS....and same...(yadda yadda yadda)
Agreed. But I wasn't claiming that she was cheating vs Trump. I just claim she cheated.
Basically ol' Donna Brazile and DWS did whatever they could to favor Hillary over Bernie. Notice how fast Hillary's campaign hired DWS.
It was fixed.
So...this means that Clinton - who had to cheat to win....still was better liked that Cheeto.
You might want to rethink your arguments. Your lameness is actually a poor reflection on the whole Cheeto affair.
It's worth remembering (and cited in MMM), that the 20-to-1 gap isn't present solely in programming. Rate-Busters have existing for years.
Note however it's not Linux. AWS instances - lots of Linux. Docker - lots of Linux.
Shrug. YMMV.
I believe you can watch NetFlix on a Mac (don't own a Mac).
I know you can watch NetFlix on a Linux Box. (I've done it).
That said, you can read email, browse the web also on Mac/Linux box.
But if that's ALL you want to do...then (imo) the learning curve for Linux is greater than with staying with a system they already know.
I speak as a person who used WordPerfect and who still misses the "Show Formatting" feature it had.
But I was there when DR Dos and the others fight to try. They got close....
Even Window's 10 Bash is better than Cygwin...(and I LIKED Cygwin)
Cough. BS.
I have had Linux boxes running for years. No problem with updates.
I leave my Windows box up...a "magical" update comes down and the next thing I know my box is rebooted....
You say this like it's a bad thing.
No seriously. I mean that. I've done the fanboy bit before. OS/2. There. BeOS. Yep. Lots of others.
I do NOT recommend Linux to people. In fact, I say to NOT use it. Why? Cause most people want to play games, browse the web, do their email and watch NetFlix.
For them - use Windows.
If I tell them no....and then they ask what I use....and why. Only THEN do I begin the conversation with them. What do they want to do on their computer? Oh, you need programming languages? A database? Source code control? Then yes, you should start looking at Linux. It's got a hell of a learning curve but damn it's worth it.
Don't get me wrong. Linux has won. Windows has Ubuntu shell. Docker is linux.
But I'll be damned before I spend time trying to convince someone who doesn't want to use Linux and doesn't need it that they should be using it.
Either Linux sells itself or it doesn't. (And it has...)
Most city driving is probably fine for battery work. Highway driving (trips > 100 miles) is likely going to require an infrastructure change.
Redoing the highways to allow for charging of vehicles while enroute is still coming. Once that's done - there won't be a reason for ICEs except for extreme cases.
He's do a better job than the current President.
No problems with DACA. Disagree on total amnesty and unrestricted immigration.
I see a lot of screaming about DACA. I do NOT see a lot of "giving citizenship to just about anyone who can evade the border guards and get here".....unless you want to turn it around and talk about Cuban wetfoot/dryfoot.
So where do *YOU* stand on Cuban immigration. (Note: I live in Florida)
Finally where do you stand on DACA -- particular as some of those affected by DACA are serving in our military (in particular MAVNI).