A union is as bad as the people within it. It's a democracy and the people are voted into it by people like your mom. So she no one but herself and her fellow teachers to blame.
Since everyone in here is so certain that they're so perfect and don't need a union then they'll vote for good people only and the IT union will be perfect.
Aren't you just acting brainwashed by assuming all unions are bad because you know one person that has had a bad experience?
I pay £10 a month and yes, in general, they do nothing for me but it's the same as insurance. You don't get anything until you need it and when other departments within my company were facing lay-offs, quite a few jobs were saved and those that were laid off ended up with much better leaving packages. They did help negotiate an inflation based pay rise system.
They didn't ask for too much they just said if things get more expensive they we deserve to keep the buying power we had. Last year was a bad year for the economy and no one got a pay rise. No one complained because the system is fair and makes sense.
They don't try to keep jobs for useless workers. I've seen people get told they've fucked up so nothing can really be done. Ironically, from my experience most useless workers aren't union members because useless people seem to generally be selfish too, from my experience. I think it has to do with keeping people away from then to no draw attention to the fact they're useless.
I'm just surprised that so many people can trust their employer but not a union. A union and company are effectively the same and that means some are good and some are shit and if you can't find a good one then start you own union or company even.
It's easy to say that until your job is shipped over seas regardless of your quality. I hope giving up your social life will be worth it once your job is in another country.
Then create your own union. A union is just a group of people willing to pull together to help each other. Besides, I prefer being £10 a month out of pocket rather than doing enough overtime to basically be like a week or more out of pocket per month.
There are many more unions than the auto makers union so the odds are it won't go that way.
That said unions can be just as bad as companies but if an industry can't afford to pay for all the hours actually put into creating a game then there is something fundamentally wrong and it needs correcting in one way or another.
I think the problem is that the industry absolutely loves young employees. People straight out of uni will work as hard as possible because they'll likely be single and assume that's just the way it is. They lack job experience and don't want to rock the boat because they're afraid of being jobless with potentially a load of uni debt.
The government has always gone for the lowest bidder and then people say their stuff is shit. But if they started paying more then they'd be accused of wasting tax payer money.
Sure there is still government waste but until people realise that the government should spend a premium for some stuff while people vote out those who just waste money.
I think you just have to play a game. You either enjoy it or you don't. Cost per time may work in most instances but I wouldn't have said Street Fighter 2 was less worthy than Tetris just because I've played Tetris longer or that Portal wasn't very enjoyable despite being very short.
A lot of companies don't want to pay for kernel devs. While getting in consultants from companies may appear to be expensive, you don't have to provide them with healthcare, pensions, etc and most importantly you can get rid of them pretty much the second you feel like it which is not the case with full-time employees.
I've been in a company that has had consultants from the publisher of the software they're using for years. To the point, imo, they could have just hired people full-time and when they do switch software those people would still be of some use but the company does not see it that way.
As proactive as you may be as an admin you don't know about every bug in the system, nor does the developer (otherwise it likely wouldn't be there) and not every company will pay for someone in-house to fix it.
That's the problem you can't really say who and who can't be a father (or mother) but unfortunately it's often the people that shouldn't have kids that have them because they're as irresponsible about having sex as they are with kids.
They're either small companies or they'll most likely be in deep shit when things do go wrong. A large company can't wait around for someone to search for solutions on the internet.
Parents, yet again, are the true problem. If these kids weren't gaming, they'd be chatting on the computer or watching tv or just playing in their bedroom because parents won't let them outside since there are paedophiles on every street corner. Having both parents working also stops kids from getting out because no one is there to watch them when they're out or even to ensure they go out rather than stay inside all day.
It depends on what they think the value of clicking is. A lot of people won't stray from their routine. They will always use Outlook Express and only click on the things they were taught to use.
Yet when promised a better sex life or money, something they really want, then they'll be willing to do what they're told and click whatever they need to.
Google is not the sole owner of Android. The Open Handset Alliance is in control and Motorola is part of that alliance there. This is also the great thing about it being open source. Whether you agree or not with China's activities (I don't), each company should be able to decide what to do and hopefully if western consumers don't agree either they will use their free will to vote against Motorola by not buying from them.
Yes if you ignore the fact that VB macros causes loads of security head aches and issues with compatibility.
Imo, VB wasn't actually that bad in the hands of people that took a real effort to learn how to program but in the hands of most it was a freaking nightmare and caused loads of problems.
DIY programming is fine for personal use but it should never be used for businesses.
Actually brownies (or a lot of food) isn't that hard to cook if you follow the instructions and people would probably be healthier if they would actually learn how to cook rather than rely on chemically pre-made foods. It's no surprise some of the fattest nations are full of people who can't cook.
HTML and CSS is pretty easy to learn, at least enough to produce the shit people produce with front-page.
Sikuli is good though it would appear it takes control of your computer so really it's pretty useless aside from dong batch repetitive jobs. You can probably get around that by learning more Python but the demo didn't interest me but I'm sure loads of people will love it for automating tasks.
Front-page on the other hand was awful and produced loads of awful sites that unfortunately affect more people. When it's a personal site that's fine but when you used to get businesses knocking out shit websites in frontpage, I don't think anyone can justify it by comparing it to DIY jobs or saying web develops are expensive. Companies should consider some level of accessibility and you'll never really get that from front page. If you learn to do html, css and JavaScript then just do it in Notepad++
And no one *needs* a master in CS. A lot of professional developers don't.
I thought about this after reading it last night. I'm pretty sure it's fake. What the guy says about PHP sounds a bit like someone who knows nothing about coding at all commenting on it yet trying to sound like they do.
I think it sounds a bit too casual and there's too much swearing for someone who is already risking his job by talking. Making it appear as if a company is full of immature jerks (however true it is) won't go down well with your employer.
br/
Similar things happened with search for blue screen of death and windows as I recall. Admittedly both instances don't do that now which is no surprise considering how much attention it received.
To be fair it wasn't "Chuck Norris" but used a combination of symbols, numbers and letters to spell that out in some way and then required you to be within the network. Not ideal but not that irresponsible either. Certainly not as irresponsible as putting your whole life onto Facebook.
Perhaps they shouldn't be shoving bloated OSes, like Windows onto their netbooks and trying to turn netbooks into laptops. Replacing SSDs and Linux with HDs and Windows was just dumb.
Hopefully Google won't cock up their Chrome OS and we'll see some decent netbooks back on the market.
Look at the auto-suggest. It suggests something up to "switching to" and then goes away where as it does not on Google. Further examination shows that auto-suggest mysterious dies when trying to combine both ubuntu and windows together.
"unbuntu to windows fails", even "unbuntu windows" fails, "ubuntu download" works but trying to get anything after download seems to fail especially typing windows.
A lot of people are dependant on auto-suggest now, especially for topics new to them (ie switching to a new OS) and by manipulating the results of auto-suggest (but not the actual results) they can sway people without being flat out accused of censorship of the competition.
Actually the error should lie with Firefox because what Google does is not Google specific. If most of the major search engines do it then you should account for that.
But that said, I tested Firefox and it does copy the correct URL. I'm not sure what other people have that's causing it to act different.
Bing: <h3><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pie" onmousedown="return si_T('&ID=SERP,119.1')"><strong>Pie</strong> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</a></h3>
Slashdot Mirror
A union is as bad as the people within it. It's a democracy and the people are voted into it by people like your mom. So she no one but herself and her fellow teachers to blame.
Since everyone in here is so certain that they're so perfect and don't need a union then they'll vote for good people only and the IT union will be perfect.
Aren't you just acting brainwashed by assuming all unions are bad because you know one person that has had a bad experience?
I pay £10 a month and yes, in general, they do nothing for me but it's the same as insurance. You don't get anything until you need it and when other departments within my company were facing lay-offs, quite a few jobs were saved and those that were laid off ended up with much better leaving packages. They did help negotiate an inflation based pay rise system.
They didn't ask for too much they just said if things get more expensive they we deserve to keep the buying power we had. Last year was a bad year for the economy and no one got a pay rise. No one complained because the system is fair and makes sense.
They don't try to keep jobs for useless workers. I've seen people get told they've fucked up so nothing can really be done. Ironically, from my experience most useless workers aren't union members because useless people seem to generally be selfish too, from my experience. I think it has to do with keeping people away from then to no draw attention to the fact they're useless.
I'm just surprised that so many people can trust their employer but not a union. A union and company are effectively the same and that means some are good and some are shit and if you can't find a good one then start you own union or company even.
It's easy to say that until your job is shipped over seas regardless of your quality. I hope giving up your social life will be worth it once your job is in another country.
Then create your own union. A union is just a group of people willing to pull together to help each other. Besides, I prefer being £10 a month out of pocket rather than doing enough overtime to basically be like a week or more out of pocket per month.
There are many more unions than the auto makers union so the odds are it won't go that way.
That said unions can be just as bad as companies but if an industry can't afford to pay for all the hours actually put into creating a game then there is something fundamentally wrong and it needs correcting in one way or another.
I think the problem is that the industry absolutely loves young employees. People straight out of uni will work as hard as possible because they'll likely be single and assume that's just the way it is. They lack job experience and don't want to rock the boat because they're afraid of being jobless with potentially a load of uni debt.
The government has always gone for the lowest bidder and then people say their stuff is shit. But if they started paying more then they'd be accused of wasting tax payer money.
Sure there is still government waste but until people realise that the government should spend a premium for some stuff while people vote out those who just waste money.
I think you just have to play a game. You either enjoy it or you don't. Cost per time may work in most instances but I wouldn't have said Street Fighter 2 was less worthy than Tetris just because I've played Tetris longer or that Portal wasn't very enjoyable despite being very short.
A lot of companies don't want to pay for kernel devs. While getting in consultants from companies may appear to be expensive, you don't have to provide them with healthcare, pensions, etc and most importantly you can get rid of them pretty much the second you feel like it which is not the case with full-time employees.
I've been in a company that has had consultants from the publisher of the software they're using for years. To the point, imo, they could have just hired people full-time and when they do switch software those people would still be of some use but the company does not see it that way.
As proactive as you may be as an admin you don't know about every bug in the system, nor does the developer (otherwise it likely wouldn't be there) and not every company will pay for someone in-house to fix it.
That's the problem you can't really say who and who can't be a father (or mother) but unfortunately it's often the people that shouldn't have kids that have them because they're as irresponsible about having sex as they are with kids.
They're either small companies or they'll most likely be in deep shit when things do go wrong. A large company can't wait around for someone to search for solutions on the internet.
Parents, yet again, are the true problem. If these kids weren't gaming, they'd be chatting on the computer or watching tv or just playing in their bedroom because parents won't let them outside since there are paedophiles on every street corner. Having both parents working also stops kids from getting out because no one is there to watch them when they're out or even to ensure they go out rather than stay inside all day.
It depends on what they think the value of clicking is. A lot of people won't stray from their routine. They will always use Outlook Express and only click on the things they were taught to use.
Yet when promised a better sex life or money, something they really want, then they'll be willing to do what they're told and click whatever they need to.
Google is not the sole owner of Android. The Open Handset Alliance is in control and Motorola is part of that alliance there. This is also the great thing about it being open source. Whether you agree or not with China's activities (I don't), each company should be able to decide what to do and hopefully if western consumers don't agree either they will use their free will to vote against Motorola by not buying from them.
Yes if you ignore the fact that VB macros causes loads of security head aches and issues with compatibility.
Imo, VB wasn't actually that bad in the hands of people that took a real effort to learn how to program but in the hands of most it was a freaking nightmare and caused loads of problems.
DIY programming is fine for personal use but it should never be used for businesses.
Actually brownies (or a lot of food) isn't that hard to cook if you follow the instructions and people would probably be healthier if they would actually learn how to cook rather than rely on chemically pre-made foods. It's no surprise some of the fattest nations are full of people who can't cook.
HTML and CSS is pretty easy to learn, at least enough to produce the shit people produce with front-page.
Sikuli is good though it would appear it takes control of your computer so really it's pretty useless aside from dong batch repetitive jobs. You can probably get around that by learning more Python but the demo didn't interest me but I'm sure loads of people will love it for automating tasks.
Front-page on the other hand was awful and produced loads of awful sites that unfortunately affect more people. When it's a personal site that's fine but when you used to get businesses knocking out shit websites in frontpage, I don't think anyone can justify it by comparing it to DIY jobs or saying web develops are expensive. Companies should consider some level of accessibility and you'll never really get that from front page. If you learn to do html, css and JavaScript then just do it in Notepad++
And no one *needs* a master in CS. A lot of professional developers don't.
I thought about this after reading it last night. I'm pretty sure it's fake. What the guy says about PHP sounds a bit like someone who knows nothing about coding at all commenting on it yet trying to sound like they do.
I think it sounds a bit too casual and there's too much swearing for someone who is already risking his job by talking. Making it appear as if a company is full of immature jerks (however true it is) won't go down well with your employer.
br/
That would make sense if there weren't documented examples of biased results linux auto suggestions
http://lpdc.be/colar/brols/Google-Bing.png
Similar things happened with search for blue screen of death and windows as I recall. Admittedly both instances don't do that now which is no surprise considering how much attention it received.
To be fair it wasn't "Chuck Norris" but used a combination of symbols, numbers and letters to spell that out in some way and then required you to be within the network. Not ideal but not that irresponsible either. Certainly not as irresponsible as putting your whole life onto Facebook.
Perhaps they shouldn't be shoving bloated OSes, like Windows onto their netbooks and trying to turn netbooks into laptops. Replacing SSDs and Linux with HDs and Windows was just dumb.
Hopefully Google won't cock up their Chrome OS and we'll see some decent netbooks back on the market.
Look at the auto-suggest. It suggests something up to "switching to" and then goes away where as it does not on Google. Further examination shows that auto-suggest mysterious dies when trying to combine both ubuntu and windows together.
"unbuntu to windows fails", even "unbuntu windows" fails, "ubuntu download" works but trying to get anything after download seems to fail especially typing windows.
A lot of people are dependant on auto-suggest now, especially for topics new to them (ie switching to a new OS) and by manipulating the results of auto-suggest (but not the actual results) they can sway people without being flat out accused of censorship of the competition.
Also, where was microsoft when Google was making a stand in China?
Touching themselves over the thought of Google leaving a potentially huge market.
Actually the error should lie with Firefox because what Google does is not Google specific. If most of the major search engines do it then you should account for that.
But that said, I tested Firefox and it does copy the correct URL. I'm not sure what other people have that's causing it to act different.
Bing:
<h3><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pie" onmousedown="return si_T('&ID=SERP,119.1')"><strong>Pie</strong> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</a></h3>
Ask.com
<a target="_blank" class="L4" onmousedown="return fp(this,{en:'sx',io:'0',b:'a002',tp:'d',ec:'2',ex:'tsrc%3DRFE'},'false',0)" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pie" id="r1_t"><b>Pie</b> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</a>
Yahoo's solution, while different, is, imo, worse:
<a href="http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A03uv8YGr1hLLIwA_2xLBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTE1MGRnOXJpBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkA1VLMDY1MF82NTA-/SIG=11kfvbjli/EXP=1264189574/**http%3a//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pie" class="yschttl spt" orighref="http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A03uv8YGr1hLLIwA_2xLBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTE1MGRnOXJpBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2lyZAR2dGlkA1VLMDY1MF82NTA-/SIG=11kfvbjli/EXP=1264189574/**http%3a//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pie"><b>Pie</b> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</a>
BTW, I'm aware you mentioned it but you didn't really go into and your post is tl;dr so I made it clearer for others.
Well you won't get away from mousedown on Bing. Here's what their link consists of:
<h3><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pie" onmousedown="return si_T('&ID=SERP,119.1')"><strong>Pie</strong> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</a></h3>