Perhaps someone who needed money soon, home was at risk, etc, is today employed by Tesla? This wasn't a bailout of a tired, failed company that's never going anywhere - this was a loan to a company that did quite well once it got past its cash crunch. Many jobs were saved, many were later created. Big win for taxpayers.
That seems to be the entire, comprehensive list of old Google products. Unlike, for example:
Google Answers Lively Google Reader Deskbar Clic-to-Call Writely Hello Send to Phone Google Audio Ads Google Catalogs Dodgeball Google Ride Finder Shared stuff Page creator Marratech GOOG-411 (which was awesome) Google Labs Google Buzz Google Gears
and on, and on, and on (that's maybe 1/3rd of the graveyard)
The rule of thumb is lower - 100 months rent maximum (and lower in times of high interest rates). Anything above that is land price speculation, not investment. Rental stuff gets built in Cali precisely as speculation on rising house prices, not as a sound rental investment.
That 100-month rule is based on cost of money, property taxes, maintenance, property management, etc. You're doing well to keep your long-term-average ongoing costs down around 1% a month. At 100 months you can expect to break even for some years, so if you think conditions will improve it's a way to "get in early" without losing money every month to do so. In sensible markets you can usually do better, however.
Lucas is just using his "fuck you money" as such, not to make a profit here.
Wait, people buy games as boxes, in stores? Did you buy the game that way in Ye Olde 20th Century, and haven't bought anything since? Have the Amish started gaming now?
The 5 cents a bag thing is different, because it's a political statement. I switched stores immediately when that happened, as I find it politically offensive (and when my city passed a law requiring it, I moved to a new state - no joke). And I have/use re-usable bags since they work better, but it's a matter of principle.
in the US, if you're laid off you can collect the unemployment insurance you've already paid for. If you're fired or leave voluntarily, you can't collect unemployment insurance.
Can you point to a single state's laws that use that terminology? I've never heard of one. It's all about "fired for cause" vs "fired without cause". You may prefer the terms "fired" vs "laid off", but that's a newish meaning for "laid off".
What really matters to me is "do you get a respectable severance package?" You don't necessarily get one even if you're 'laid off", as some companies are really broke, and some are complete assholes.
The real question is, after 30 years of personal computers, why can't we simply hit the "off" switch or pull the power plug?
On my Windows boxes, the (soft) power switch works just fine, thanks. It's set up to do a graceful shutdown, so it won't shut down if an application foolishly needs to ask me whether or not to save changes, but that's mostly the application's fault (see Notepad++ for how to do it right), and I could set up the power button to do a "maintenance shutdown," which force closes everything, if applications were written better.
Powering off without any notice at all, safely, would really limit performance in many ways - I'm just as happy to wait a second or two for unsaved changes to be parked, all the write caches to flush and so on.
I want a computer that I can just switch off, then switch on and be instantly back at what I was working on, or at a login screen. Instantly.
Basic physics will keep persistent storage slower than volatile memory, but if you're content with 1990s performance, you could probably build a PC that worked that way. Heck, it probably exists for some exotic use case.
He writes his paper and submits for publication: "Rats prefer to turn left", P 0.05, the effect is real, and all is good.
There's no realistic way that a reviewer can spot the flaw in this paper.
Actually, let's pose this as a puzzle to the readers. Can *you* spot the flaw in the methodology? And if so, can you describe it in a way that makes it obvious to other readers?
I guess I don't see it. While P 0.05 isn't all that compelling, it does seem like prima facie evidence that the rats used in the sample prefer to turn left at that intesection for some reason. There's no hypothesis as to why, and thus way to generalize and no testable prediction of how often rats turn left in a different circumstances, but it's still an interesting measurement.
You have a null hypothesis and some data with a very low probability. Let's say it's P 0.01. This is such a good P-value that we can reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative explanation....
Can you point out the flaw in this reasoning?
You have evidence that the null hypothesis is flawed, but none that the alternative hypothesis is the correct explanation?
The scientific method centers on making testable predictions that differ from the null hypothesis, then finding new data to see if the new hypothesis made correct predictions, or was falsified. Statistical methods can only support the new hypothesis once you have new data to evaluate.
Oh goodness, are people reading this headline to think they are removing p-values in favor of just accepting speculation with no statistical analysis!?!
This is a social science journal. Statistics are obviously a tool of the Patriarchy and should be shunned. (This mockery has become a meme now - you can buy "logic is a tool of the Patriarchy" t-shirts for goodness sake.)
No, we're aware of it, as it fails on rare occasions. The point is: the company sucks it up - all large companies do - and it doesn't impede the candidate switching jobs (unless the lawyer screws up, but that happens less than losing candidates due to recruiter screw-ups).
I think we're facing a test of [our flavor of representative-] democracy as a model this decade. The voters on the right have actually started to notice this, and care. But can they fix it? The Tea Party went from grassroots to establishment in one election, but it did briefly make a difference. There's a growing conservative group at least in the House, but still a minority of the GOP, and almost all lacking seniority. It still seems possible to reform the GOP, though the national debt will likely be too far gone by then.
Yes, that distinction is everything. I think America would benefit hugely from an actual conservative party - in fact, it may be the only thing that can save us from some serious problems we face. I don't know that I'd necessarily vote for such a party - maybe. But we'd be having the right debates, and issues like this and Net Neutrality might actually get some airtime on the actual issues and content of the law, instead of everything being about earmarks and favors owed.
The conservative base is actually very anti-TSA (or, at least, those active online are). It's such a clear sign of government overreach (literally, in this case), disrespect for the constitution, and so on. Heck, half this crowd thinks the right answer is just to issue all passengers guns. Not that the current GOP gives a shit what the voters want.
Came here to ask this. Found it second post. Well done, sir.
It's gets silly these days to think of congresscritters as "Democrat" or "Republican" on issues like this. Who represents Comcast? Who represents Google? For damn sure none of them represent voters.
I know dozens of people who have changed jobs on H-1Bs. My team is currently hiring, and we interview someone here on an H-1B exactly like anyone else, and it's no harder (or easier) to make them an offer if we like them. Been that way every place I've worked.
If someone needs sponsorship to come into the country in the first place, that's different - there's a 1 in 3 chance each year, right now. That's BS (of course the whole H-1B system is as well): anyone who can work as a professional should we welcome, and get a green card after a year IMO. That immigration can only benefit America.
On a WORM tape, that's the only right answer to this particular question.
Not true. As compliance officer, you job is not to store data such that it can be recovered later, your job is to store data such that you pass auditing requirements, and actually being able to restore the data is a negative. This is why WORM disk sells well at 100x the cost of normal drives (really) - passes all the auditing requirements, much more likely to fail mysteriously.
But I'd seriously go with something cloud-based for this. Does Iron Mountain still have their service? Or did that get spun off to Autonomy/HP? At least at one point they had cloud-based storage that passed auditing requirements for archiving (thanks to good lobbying), with the added bonus that not only might the disks fail, the company might just end the service, saving on that pesky "restore" nonsense that can only hurt you in a lawsuit.
Well, there has really been a genuine shortage in the last several companies I worked at. We simply couldn't find people good enough to make the cut, and we're not going to lower our standards. Maybe it depends on what kind of work you do.
I've worked with dozens of H-1Bs, and hundreds who wanted to be but were stuck home. None of them had anything to do with body shops. I don't doubt they exist -- there's always a market for "lowest price, quality irrelevant" -- but they're breaking the law if they aren't paying competitively, and the best remedy is to enforce that law, not to punish the companies playing by the rules.
And, again, there are plenty of smart people in places like India and Russia (even Canada) who I compete with for my job: it's easier to compete with them here than someplace where $30k is great pay.
I've only ever heard of those companies in/. threads.
Google, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple - these are big-name companies trying to get more H-1Bs, and they are legitimately having difficulty hiring people of the quality they want (and they pay well).
I just want to work with the smart, competent people, where they happened to be born isn't important.
That's all flat wrong, and such misinformation doesn't help. You're repeating propaganda, probably not by intention.
What you describe is an L-1 visa. An L-1 means you're here at the whim of the company, and it's nearly impossible to change jobs. There's no legal requirement for pay comparable to US pay.
For an H-1B, it's possible to change jobs (and every large software corp has a legal staff that specializes in it). There is a legal requirement to pay the going wage for the position, and in practice every place I've worked has paid a bit less than the rest of us, but only by (about) what the legal costs for the Visa/immigration work costs. All H-1B pay is a matter of public record, and you can discover what your co-worker is getting paid if you know his start date and google around for the public records. (Yes there are companies that do nothing but scam the system, but they aren't the big names in TFS.)
And, besides all that, would you rather compete with the same guy living in the US, with US cost of living, or compete with him with the cost of living of his home country?
Legal departments already know how to deal with that (I've signed something at every new job promising I wouldn't do that, as a condition of employment), and it's obviously the wrong thing to do. Open source code is right there when you google for a solution to the problem in front of you, and it's often fine to incorporate. Quick, what license is the code you find on Stack Overflow under? OK to copy into commercial code or not?
How does this disagree with the GP? Comply with the license, or pay to license something proprietary. It's not that hard.
I'm sure these guys did it on purpose, but that's not always the case. Many junior developers are simply oblivious to any concern about mixing GPL code in with their own work, and a few will cheat deliberately. Do you rely on code reviews? Do you run an auditing tool like Black Duck? In a large enough shop, you can't just make a policy and hope for the best, so the very existence of GPL code causes headaches for the legal team.
Yeah, sure, someone could copy closed source too, but that's much less likely to happen, especially by ignorance or accident.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps someone who needed money soon, home was at risk, etc, is today employed by Tesla? This wasn't a bailout of a tired, failed company that's never going anywhere - this was a loan to a company that did quite well once it got past its cash crunch. Many jobs were saved, many were later created. Big win for taxpayers.
Adsense, gMail, Youtube, Android?
Never heard of em?
That seems to be the entire, comprehensive list of old Google products. Unlike, for example:
Google Answers
Lively
Google Reader
Deskbar
Clic-to-Call
Writely
Hello
Send to Phone
Google Audio Ads
Google Catalogs
Dodgeball
Google Ride Finder
Shared stuff
Page creator
Marratech
GOOG-411 (which was awesome)
Google Labs
Google Buzz
Google Gears
and on, and on, and on (that's maybe 1/3rd of the graveyard)
Spaces muthafucka!
This can only be settled by a cage match, with the cage suspended over a shark tank filled with ravenous clowns!
The rule of thumb is lower - 100 months rent maximum (and lower in times of high interest rates). Anything above that is land price speculation, not investment. Rental stuff gets built in Cali precisely as speculation on rising house prices, not as a sound rental investment.
That 100-month rule is based on cost of money, property taxes, maintenance, property management, etc. You're doing well to keep your long-term-average ongoing costs down around 1% a month. At 100 months you can expect to break even for some years, so if you think conditions will improve it's a way to "get in early" without losing money every month to do so. In sensible markets you can usually do better, however.
Lucas is just using his "fuck you money" as such, not to make a profit here.
Wait, people buy games as boxes, in stores? Did you buy the game that way in Ye Olde 20th Century, and haven't bought anything since? Have the Amish started gaming now?
The 5 cents a bag thing is different, because it's a political statement. I switched stores immediately when that happened, as I find it politically offensive (and when my city passed a law requiring it, I moved to a new state - no joke). And I have/use re-usable bags since they work better, but it's a matter of principle.
in the US, if you're laid off you can collect the unemployment insurance you've already paid for. If you're fired or leave voluntarily, you can't collect unemployment insurance.
Can you point to a single state's laws that use that terminology? I've never heard of one. It's all about "fired for cause" vs "fired without cause". You may prefer the terms "fired" vs "laid off", but that's a newish meaning for "laid off".
What really matters to me is "do you get a respectable severance package?" You don't necessarily get one even if you're 'laid off", as some companies are really broke, and some are complete assholes.
It is the brilliant minds of Microsoft that conceived of putting " shut down " in the "start" menu
I've never been able to find "shut down" in the Ubuntu menu tree - does it even exist?
The real question is, after 30 years of personal computers, why can't we simply hit the "off" switch or pull the power plug?
On my Windows boxes, the (soft) power switch works just fine, thanks. It's set up to do a graceful shutdown, so it won't shut down if an application foolishly needs to ask me whether or not to save changes, but that's mostly the application's fault (see Notepad++ for how to do it right), and I could set up the power button to do a "maintenance shutdown," which force closes everything, if applications were written better.
Powering off without any notice at all, safely, would really limit performance in many ways - I'm just as happy to wait a second or two for unsaved changes to be parked, all the write caches to flush and so on.
I want a computer that I can just switch off, then switch on and be instantly back at what I was working on, or at a login screen. Instantly.
Basic physics will keep persistent storage slower than volatile memory, but if you're content with 1990s performance, you could probably build a PC that worked that way. Heck, it probably exists for some exotic use case.
He writes his paper and submits for publication: "Rats prefer to turn left", P 0.05, the effect is real, and all is good.
There's no realistic way that a reviewer can spot the flaw in this paper.
Actually, let's pose this as a puzzle to the readers. Can *you* spot the flaw in the methodology? And if so, can you describe it in a way that makes it obvious to other readers?
I guess I don't see it. While P 0.05 isn't all that compelling, it does seem like prima facie evidence that the rats used in the sample prefer to turn left at that intesection for some reason. There's no hypothesis as to why, and thus way to generalize and no testable prediction of how often rats turn left in a different circumstances, but it's still an interesting measurement.
You have a null hypothesis and some data with a very low probability. Let's say it's P 0.01. This is such a good P-value that we can reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative explanation. ...
Can you point out the flaw in this reasoning?
You have evidence that the null hypothesis is flawed, but none that the alternative hypothesis is the correct explanation?
The scientific method centers on making testable predictions that differ from the null hypothesis, then finding new data to see if the new hypothesis made correct predictions, or was falsified. Statistical methods can only support the new hypothesis once you have new data to evaluate.
Oh goodness, are people reading this headline to think they are removing p-values in favor of just accepting speculation with no statistical analysis!?!
This is a social science journal. Statistics are obviously a tool of the Patriarchy and should be shunned. (This mockery has become a meme now - you can buy "logic is a tool of the Patriarchy" t-shirts for goodness sake.)
No, we're aware of it, as it fails on rare occasions. The point is: the company sucks it up - all large companies do - and it doesn't impede the candidate switching jobs (unless the lawyer screws up, but that happens less than losing candidates due to recruiter screw-ups).
I think we're facing a test of [our flavor of representative-] democracy as a model this decade. The voters on the right have actually started to notice this, and care. But can they fix it? The Tea Party went from grassroots to establishment in one election, but it did briefly make a difference. There's a growing conservative group at least in the House, but still a minority of the GOP, and almost all lacking seniority. It still seems possible to reform the GOP, though the national debt will likely be too far gone by then.
Yes, that distinction is everything. I think America would benefit hugely from an actual conservative party - in fact, it may be the only thing that can save us from some serious problems we face. I don't know that I'd necessarily vote for such a party - maybe. But we'd be having the right debates, and issues like this and Net Neutrality might actually get some airtime on the actual issues and content of the law, instead of everything being about earmarks and favors owed.
The conservative base is actually very anti-TSA (or, at least, those active online are). It's such a clear sign of government overreach (literally, in this case), disrespect for the constitution, and so on. Heck, half this crowd thinks the right answer is just to issue all passengers guns. Not that the current GOP gives a shit what the voters want.
Came here to ask this. Found it second post. Well done, sir.
It's gets silly these days to think of congresscritters as "Democrat" or "Republican" on issues like this. Who represents Comcast? Who represents Google? For damn sure none of them represent voters.
I know dozens of people who have changed jobs on H-1Bs. My team is currently hiring, and we interview someone here on an H-1B exactly like anyone else, and it's no harder (or easier) to make them an offer if we like them. Been that way every place I've worked.
If someone needs sponsorship to come into the country in the first place, that's different - there's a 1 in 3 chance each year, right now. That's BS (of course the whole H-1B system is as well): anyone who can work as a professional should we welcome, and get a green card after a year IMO. That immigration can only benefit America.
On a WORM tape, that's the only right answer to this particular question.
Not true. As compliance officer, you job is not to store data such that it can be recovered later, your job is to store data such that you pass auditing requirements, and actually being able to restore the data is a negative. This is why WORM disk sells well at 100x the cost of normal drives (really) - passes all the auditing requirements, much more likely to fail mysteriously.
But I'd seriously go with something cloud-based for this. Does Iron Mountain still have their service? Or did that get spun off to Autonomy/HP? At least at one point they had cloud-based storage that passed auditing requirements for archiving (thanks to good lobbying), with the added bonus that not only might the disks fail, the company might just end the service, saving on that pesky "restore" nonsense that can only hurt you in a lawsuit.
Well, there has really been a genuine shortage in the last several companies I worked at. We simply couldn't find people good enough to make the cut, and we're not going to lower our standards. Maybe it depends on what kind of work you do.
My mailman leaves stuff in my mudroom to keep it out of the rain & dirt (sometimes bears).
Yikes, your mailman sometimes leaves bears in your mudroom? You must have really pissed him off!
I've worked with dozens of H-1Bs, and hundreds who wanted to be but were stuck home. None of them had anything to do with body shops. I don't doubt they exist -- there's always a market for "lowest price, quality irrelevant" -- but they're breaking the law if they aren't paying competitively, and the best remedy is to enforce that law, not to punish the companies playing by the rules.
And, again, there are plenty of smart people in places like India and Russia (even Canada) who I compete with for my job: it's easier to compete with them here than someplace where $30k is great pay.
I've only ever heard of those companies in /. threads.
Google, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple - these are big-name companies trying to get more H-1Bs, and they are legitimately having difficulty hiring people of the quality they want (and they pay well).
I just want to work with the smart, competent people, where they happened to be born isn't important.
That's all flat wrong, and such misinformation doesn't help. You're repeating propaganda, probably not by intention.
What you describe is an L-1 visa. An L-1 means you're here at the whim of the company, and it's nearly impossible to change jobs. There's no legal requirement for pay comparable to US pay.
For an H-1B, it's possible to change jobs (and every large software corp has a legal staff that specializes in it). There is a legal requirement to pay the going wage for the position, and in practice every place I've worked has paid a bit less than the rest of us, but only by (about) what the legal costs for the Visa/immigration work costs. All H-1B pay is a matter of public record, and you can discover what your co-worker is getting paid if you know his start date and google around for the public records. (Yes there are companies that do nothing but scam the system, but they aren't the big names in TFS.)
And, besides all that, would you rather compete with the same guy living in the US, with US cost of living, or compete with him with the cost of living of his home country?
Legal departments already know how to deal with that (I've signed something at every new job promising I wouldn't do that, as a condition of employment), and it's obviously the wrong thing to do. Open source code is right there when you google for a solution to the problem in front of you, and it's often fine to incorporate. Quick, what license is the code you find on Stack Overflow under? OK to copy into commercial code or not?
p.s., probably not
How does this disagree with the GP? Comply with the license, or pay to license something proprietary. It's not that hard.
I'm sure these guys did it on purpose, but that's not always the case. Many junior developers are simply oblivious to any concern about mixing GPL code in with their own work, and a few will cheat deliberately. Do you rely on code reviews? Do you run an auditing tool like Black Duck? In a large enough shop, you can't just make a policy and hope for the best, so the very existence of GPL code causes headaches for the legal team.
Yeah, sure, someone could copy closed source too, but that's much less likely to happen, especially by ignorance or accident.