So what's the counter-proposal? The better mechanism?
Today, if a school receives an influx of white or asian students, the school's average test score will increase, even if no actual change happened to the quality of education, and no changes were made to the curriculum, funding or staffing. Conversely, if a school receives a sudden influx of black or hispanic students, the school's averages test score will decrease, even if no actual change happened to the quality of education, and no changes were made to the curriculum, funding or staffing. It might be racist, but unfortunately it's a reality.
School test scores measure the community demographics, NOT quality of education.
Changes to the demographic makeup of your community will far more reliably affect your school's test scores than any change in the way the schools are run, funded, or staffed.
Despite the existence of all the "merit" based predictors of income, the most reliable predictor of one's adult income is what their father's income was.
Because of our first-past-the-post system, if you're in a swing state, a vote for a third party is not in your best interest, because it will likely help the viable candidate who you least agree with more than it will help the candidate you voted for.
Maybe we could just let people learn to be responsible with their information and let the market work like it always does. If a website leaks your information, then don't use it. Why should we have the right to sue them?
We should have the right to sue them because they were negligent with our personal information.
If a brick and mortar store writes down my debit card number, and then throws the paper in the trash, where anyone can find and abuse it, shouldn't I be able to sue that store? Why should it be different with a web site?
Bingo, I work for an American company that is mostly Chinese, and always has tons of Chinese visitors, and all the bathrooms used to have signs that say "Please do not stand on the toilets". It's a Chinese thing, nothing weird.
Seriously... a company that consistently ranks among the top of every "Best Companies to work for" list keeps trying to recruit you, and you're complaining??? While tons people struggle to find work and would love to even get past the first round at Google?
It's like passing by people dying in the desert, complaining about how that awful water you're drinking should taste better.
This article is more about the culture of quick-hit startups in Silicon Valley these days, which are built more around buzz, hype and marketing vapidity than they are around serious engineering or any kind of long-term planning. It's questioning the culture of founding a company around a cute idea with the aim of selling out in two years to become a millionaire.
While everything you say is probably true, it's the kids that flipped their vapid start-ups who are buying 5-million dollar mansions in the hills, and it's the hard-working "traditional company" schmucks toiling away making "competitive" wages who are renting the 900 sq.ft. flats.
Given the choice, I'd take the vapid start-up path every time. Do what society rewards best.
Even the new shit is unoccupied. There are buildings in Milpitas that are going on 12 years old and have never had a business in them
Well, to be fair, it's Milpitas. People normally like to breathe through their noses.
And still new shit is going up today for the same reason, the fed gave them stimulus dollars to put union members to work, whether there was an actual need or not for the structure is irrelevant, it's jobs the current administration can claim to have saved or created.
Same shit goes on in China; they have work crews building cities that no one will ever live in, a second crew comes along behind the first and demolishes what was built, followed by a third crew that cleans it all up, it comes full circle and is repeated again and again. It accomplishes nothing other then give people something to do. The members of the work crew know full well that what they're doing is meaningless, its just busy work.
Would you rather the people just sit at home unemployed? I'd rather the government pay people to build, then knock over buildings, than have them unemployed, hungry and ready to rob me to feed their kids.
Are you kidding me? Congress has lost its goddamned mind and now works for the "job creators" who complain about a shortage of cheap labor. There's plenty of domestic labor in this country, its just not being considered because it has the audacity to ask for a living wage.
People keep saying this, but it does not gel with reality (at least what I've been observing lately).
From the employer's side of things, I can't even tell you how many candidates we brought in to interview (mobile C++ and Objective-C) who simply don't know what they are doing. Most have great resumes: lots of referenced work experience and good education credentials, but when you ask them to write simple programs or describe a data structure or algorithm, they're kind of lost. When you dig deep on a topic, you find they don't really know. It's all surface knowledge. They can talk and talk and talk, but there's no depth. It's as if there's some interview prep class out there that is teaching people to just keep talking and saying buzzwords, even if you don't know what any of it means.
This isn't an American thing or an H1-b thing, it cuts across nationality. It REALLY is tough to find qualified technical labor, domestic or otherwise. If there's an opportunity to bring more into the labor pool, it would be welcome.
The same stupid justification could be made for doing a drone strike on you. I'd rather not wait until you took a shot at me, as you might also be a terrorist.
If I were someone who is considering working for your company, I think the information is very relevant. If a company looks like they have something to hide about their turnover rate or about why the position is vacant, I would consider that a major red flag and have serious reservations about accepting the job.
As an interviewee, that's pretty much a standard question on my list: Who was in this previous position and why did they leave? If answered honestly it is very helpful.
Make telephone numbers 16 digits or so, so everyone in the world can have millions of them. Now your phone service can include a secondary service through which you can assign yourself randomly generated phone numbers. Use those numbers when signing up for credit cards, web forms, Radio Shack, etc. Give customers the option of making each of their assigned numbers either ring, get silently logged, or get ignored. Only give your "real" number out to friends.
This will also let you know who's spamming you. "Oh, I gave 483929599838282300406192 out to Best Buy, and lo and behold a credit card telemarketer is logged as trying to call it.
If they've had open houses and were over, say 1,200 sq.ft. or so, I probably was in each of them:-) I've seen so many dumps in the past year it's not funny. Anything that actually closes under $500K probably needs about $50K of remodeling.
To buy that $625K house, you need a down payment of $125K in CASH. You pay $3,000 in rent instead because you are a normal person who does not have that kind of coin burning a hole in your pocket.
Quite frankly, you have no idea what you are talking about. As someone who has been looking to buy in that range for the past YEAR, I can tell you with certainty that you are full of shit.
1. There is very little 3-bed inventory at all in the $400K-$500K range right now. 2. 3-bed houses in this range are almost all in South San Jose or the East Side, where the neighborhoods/schools are crap and you have a lot of gang activity. 3. What inventory IS at that range and not in the ghetto is getting multiple offers and generally selling at 25% above asking. I just saw 60 offers on one $500K house and it ended up going for above $600K.
For $400K-$500K (closing price, not offer price), your options are: * East Palo Alto (get a bullet proof vest) * Lakewood in Sunnyvale (East P.A.-lite) * East Side (good luck) * Hayward *...or something at least an hour commute to the valley
At the moment, there's really nothing I'd consider BOTH livable and commutable that is actually selling for less than $650K.
At $100,000 a year, you're probably taking home around $75,000 after taxes. That's $6,250/mo for ALL your expenses. Let's say rent is about $3,000/mo, pretty common in areas like DC, NYC and the Bay Area. You have a student loan payment of $2,000/mo. You're responsible, so you're trying to save $500/mo for retirement (a measly 6% of your salary). You have a car payment of $200/mo. Gas $100/mo, groceries $150/mo, utilities $150/mo if you're lucky. That gives you about $150/mo walking around money. Not poverty level, but you're not even close to being in the lap of luxury.
If you're making as little as $100K in one of these major tech hubs, you are BARELY scraping by.
Bullshit. They skim the difference between what someone would be prepared to sell for and what someone is prepared to pay (ie an investor may be prepared to pay 1.25 for a share, but you are offering to sell for 1.20 -- instead of the investor paying only 1.20, the HFT jumps in, buys for 1.20 and sells for 1.25, pocketing the difference). This is not just HFTs screwing each other, it screws the normal investor (which includes, you know, funds investing your pension money).
Huh? If the stock is offered for 1.20, it'll be purchased by the investor for 1.20. Why in the world would someone pay more than the offer price? This does not make sense.
Slashdot Mirror
So what's the counter-proposal? The better mechanism?
Today, if a school receives an influx of white or asian students, the school's average test score will increase, even if no actual change happened to the quality of education, and no changes were made to the curriculum, funding or staffing. Conversely, if a school receives a sudden influx of black or hispanic students, the school's averages test score will decrease, even if no actual change happened to the quality of education, and no changes were made to the curriculum, funding or staffing. It might be racist, but unfortunately it's a reality.
School test scores measure the community demographics, NOT quality of education.
Changes to the demographic makeup of your community will far more reliably affect your school's test scores than any change in the way the schools are run, funded, or staffed.
Despite the existence of all the "merit" based predictors of income, the most reliable predictor of one's adult income is what their father's income was.
Because of our first-past-the-post system, if you're in a swing state, a vote for a third party is not in your best interest, because it will likely help the viable candidate who you least agree with more than it will help the candidate you voted for.
If he's a teenager, that money's got to last 50+ years. By that time, with inflation, that $250K will buy a loaf of bread.
We should have the right to sue them because they were negligent with our personal information.
If a brick and mortar store writes down my debit card number, and then throws the paper in the trash, where anyone can find and abuse it, shouldn't I be able to sue that store? Why should it be different with a web site?
Bingo, I work for an American company that is mostly Chinese, and always has tons of Chinese visitors, and all the bathrooms used to have signs that say "Please do not stand on the toilets". It's a Chinese thing, nothing weird.
Ahh, the old, "If you've ever bought anything from a corporation, you can't criticize corporations" argument still gets modded up here.
So, you're one of the chosen few who see the shadows on the cave wall for what they truly are, eh, Plato?
Seriously... a company that consistently ranks among the top of every "Best Companies to work for" list keeps trying to recruit you, and you're complaining??? While tons people struggle to find work and would love to even get past the first round at Google?
It's like passing by people dying in the desert, complaining about how that awful water you're drinking should taste better.
While everything you say is probably true, it's the kids that flipped their vapid start-ups who are buying 5-million dollar mansions in the hills, and it's the hard-working "traditional company" schmucks toiling away making "competitive" wages who are renting the 900 sq.ft. flats.
Given the choice, I'd take the vapid start-up path every time. Do what society rewards best.
Even the new shit is unoccupied. There are buildings in Milpitas that are going on 12 years old and have never had a business in them
Well, to be fair, it's Milpitas. People normally like to breathe through their noses.
And still new shit is going up today for the same reason, the fed gave them stimulus dollars to put union members to work, whether there was an actual need or not for the structure is irrelevant, it's jobs the current administration can claim to have saved or created.
Same shit goes on in China; they have work crews building cities that no one will ever live in, a second crew comes along behind the first and demolishes what was built, followed by a third crew that cleans it all up, it comes full circle and is repeated again and again. It accomplishes nothing other then give people something to do. The members of the work crew know full well that what they're doing is meaningless, its just busy work.
Would you rather the people just sit at home unemployed? I'd rather the government pay people to build, then knock over buildings, than have them unemployed, hungry and ready to rob me to feed their kids.
People keep saying this, but it does not gel with reality (at least what I've been observing lately).
From the employer's side of things, I can't even tell you how many candidates we brought in to interview (mobile C++ and Objective-C) who simply don't know what they are doing. Most have great resumes: lots of referenced work experience and good education credentials, but when you ask them to write simple programs or describe a data structure or algorithm, they're kind of lost. When you dig deep on a topic, you find they don't really know. It's all surface knowledge. They can talk and talk and talk, but there's no depth. It's as if there's some interview prep class out there that is teaching people to just keep talking and saying buzzwords, even if you don't know what any of it means.
This isn't an American thing or an H1-b thing, it cuts across nationality. It REALLY is tough to find qualified technical labor, domestic or otherwise. If there's an opportunity to bring more into the labor pool, it would be welcome.
The same stupid justification could be made for doing a drone strike on you. I'd rather not wait until you took a shot at me, as you might also be a terrorist.
Good advice, you could also ask if the engineers who originally wrote the code are still on the project and/or working at the company.
If I were someone who is considering working for your company, I think the information is very relevant. If a company looks like they have something to hide about their turnover rate or about why the position is vacant, I would consider that a major red flag and have serious reservations about accepting the job.
As an interviewee, that's pretty much a standard question on my list: Who was in this previous position and why did they leave? If answered honestly it is very helpful.
I'll also note that using disposable E-mail addresses has been the most reliable way I've found to stop SPAM.
Make telephone numbers 16 digits or so, so everyone in the world can have millions of them. Now your phone service can include a secondary service through which you can assign yourself randomly generated phone numbers. Use those numbers when signing up for credit cards, web forms, Radio Shack, etc. Give customers the option of making each of their assigned numbers either ring, get silently logged, or get ignored. Only give your "real" number out to friends.
This will also let you know who's spamming you. "Oh, I gave 483929599838282300406192 out to Best Buy, and lo and behold a credit card telemarketer is logged as trying to call it.
If they've had open houses and were over, say 1,200 sq.ft. or so, I probably was in each of them :-) I've seen so many dumps in the past year it's not funny. Anything that actually closes under $500K probably needs about $50K of remodeling.
I'm talking selling price, not offer price. Guarantee those both go for well above asking.
To buy that $625K house, you need a down payment of $125K in CASH. You pay $3,000 in rent instead because you are a normal person who does not have that kind of coin burning a hole in your pocket.
Quite frankly, you have no idea what you are talking about. As someone who has been looking to buy in that range for the past YEAR, I can tell you with certainty that you are full of shit.
1. There is very little 3-bed inventory at all in the $400K-$500K range right now.
2. 3-bed houses in this range are almost all in South San Jose or the East Side, where the neighborhoods/schools are crap and you have a lot of gang activity.
3. What inventory IS at that range and not in the ghetto is getting multiple offers and generally selling at 25% above asking. I just saw 60 offers on one $500K house and it ended up going for above $600K.
For $400K-$500K (closing price, not offer price), your options are: ...or something at least an hour commute to the valley
* East Palo Alto (get a bullet proof vest)
* Lakewood in Sunnyvale (East P.A.-lite)
* East Side (good luck)
* Hayward
*
At the moment, there's really nothing I'd consider BOTH livable and commutable that is actually selling for less than $650K.
You're not going to live in much more than a mud hut for less than $2,000 a month in the Bay Area.
At $100,000 a year, you're probably taking home around $75,000 after taxes. That's $6,250/mo for ALL your expenses. Let's say rent is about $3,000/mo, pretty common in areas like DC, NYC and the Bay Area. You have a student loan payment of $2,000/mo. You're responsible, so you're trying to save $500/mo for retirement (a measly 6% of your salary). You have a car payment of $200/mo. Gas $100/mo, groceries $150/mo, utilities $150/mo if you're lucky. That gives you about $150/mo walking around money. Not poverty level, but you're not even close to being in the lap of luxury.
If you're making as little as $100K in one of these major tech hubs, you are BARELY scraping by.
Huh? If the stock is offered for 1.20, it'll be purchased by the investor for 1.20. Why in the world would someone pay more than the offer price? This does not make sense.
Revere Group "Partner" implies an ownership stake.