Unfortunately, even if you try to maintain a firewall in that sense, the institution will be inventing reasons why it should be torn down (and then grow itself). Such as:
- Separation of local & federal investigative bureaus - Separation of normal police & SWAT powers - Separation of commercial & investment banking
"The proposal claims to be based on users' rights and claims they are protected, that they should feel safe. He writes at the beginning that he did not want to create a new Big Brother Society. But then the whole document is about just that."
This is a good point. I'm kind of appalled to realize how common it is now to hear presentations of the form, "I don't want to be Big Brother, but [insert Big Brother project here]." I just experienced that exact delivery from the security department at my college a few weeks back.
Those are outliers/anecdotes, not data. It's enormously well-known that being a female actress and somewhat older is highly correlated with having fewer parts available.
Similarly, there's a libertarian blog that I read occasionally, and once when this came up there was an outpouring of "I loathe all government expenditures, but NASA rocketing men into space is the one exception, that's one thing we should definitely be doing". Pretty funny.
I've been here for over 10 years, and I've never seen any of these complaints of submitter favoritism. Not once that I can recall. Maybe there's some insider-y meta-forum I don't know about.
But this "first time submitter" thing craps on my face every single day now.
"Not only do you have to start over with no rapport with the rest of the office, no seniority, no earned respect, but your current employer is blindsided and almost surely in rough shape because of it."
From the employee's POV, all of this is exactly reversed. - "no rapport" -- an opportunity to expand professional contacts. - "no seniority" -- or greater seniority, if hired into a higher-up position. - "no earned respect" -- or greater earned respect, if a higher price-point has been set to your skills. And the fourth point is obviously moot for the employee.
Personally, if I spent time interviewing for other positions, then a priori I would not "have been satisfied to stay if the compensation was appropriate". Why wasn't I given regular raises to keep my compensation competitive? Why do I have to spend extra time confirming that's the case? If this is the established operating procedure, then I should go, and have an opportunity to expand my skills, work variety, and professional networking.
The employer should be paying enough in advance, and with a hospitable work environment, to insure against this happening. And from personal experience I know that getting outside offers are routinely held grudgingly against the existing employee, whatever the immediate end result.
Taking this a case study, do not give your employer unwarranted information like the parent is lobbying for. It weakens your bargaining and decision-making abilities. Make the decision for yourself and just go.
"I'd stay until the project is complete - explain that to company B. If they don't appreciate that, then they don't really want you that badly."
Not terrible, but the problem is, what if the project runs long with delays? If you don't set a hard leave-date with company A, then the project might run indefinitely long, and you'll wind up burning goodwill with company B. But if you do inform and set a far-out deadline with company A, then that can cause a bad political situation there (or they may just tell you to stop coming in immediately, I've seen that happen).
Personally, I think this is the worst possible plan. There's the problems everyone else has pointed out (bad blood, start training a replacement, etc.) But for the primary thing is that you're putting the decision in someone else's hands. You should know which place your heart is telling you to work at, and pursue that place. Throwing a "hail mary pass" out and letting someone else dictate your path is generally not a recipe for personal satisfaction.
I don't think that the current system is caused by "absurd, outdated Protestant work ethics". I think it's caused by greedy and sociopathic robber-baron types who simply want to control as much money and power as they possibly can. There's been a concerted propaganda campaign for 40 years or more trying to convince Americans this is the way it has to be. The "work ethics" part of it is just one prong of that rhetorical offensive.
"The spread of organized Christian creationism to Islam began in the 1980s, when the Muslim minister of education in Turkey turned to the Institute of Creation Research (ICR), a Christian institution in Dallas Texas, for help in developing twofold curriculum that would teach evolution and creation side by side."
"There seems to be a lot of misinformation originating from all parties involved making it difficult to know how large the protest actually is at this point and whether or not the police are being quite as universally violent as the protestors imply."
Why did I not see any editorializing tags like this for any of the Middle East protests in the last year? Surely protesters there had at least as much motivation to skew the case that they were making (on YouTube and various social networks).
This seems twice as weird as the price hike earlier in the summer. "I messed up," says the CEO (FTA), but at the same he's going to double the mess-up by even further separating and ghettoizing the DVD customers, am I right? Seems not only tone-deaf, but more like a pathological liar. "Sorry that hurt, to make it up to you I'm fucking you in the ass twice as hard right now." Total doublespeak.
(I'm not a customer, sure it's just business, but seriously this statement makes my brain hurt.)
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution, known as the Copyright Clause: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
I think that's a reasonable and praiseworthy understanding of what art, and copyright ownership, should be for. The time of creator-control should be "limited" to something like 14 or 28 years (one generation), as was originally intended. Afterward, it belongs to the world.
Maine has already been giving every junior-high student in the state a laptop for the last 10 years. From a relative who works in a school district there, I understand that there's a shipment in & out every morning of broken laptops and replacements.
Slashdot Mirror
"Everything The Media Told You About Occupy Wall Street Is Wrong -- Myth #5. They're Just Modern-Day Hippies."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/keith-boykin/occupy-wall-street-media_b_1019707.html
Unfortunately, even if you try to maintain a firewall in that sense, the institution will be inventing reasons why it should be torn down (and then grow itself). Such as:
- Separation of local & federal investigative bureaus
- Separation of normal police & SWAT powers
- Separation of commercial & investment banking
Etc.
"The proposal claims to be based on users' rights and claims they are protected, that they should feel safe. He writes at the beginning that he did not want to create a new Big Brother Society. But then the whole document is about just that."
This is a good point. I'm kind of appalled to realize how common it is now to hear presentations of the form, "I don't want to be Big Brother, but [insert Big Brother project here]." I just experienced that exact delivery from the security department at my college a few weeks back.
Those are outliers/anecdotes, not data. It's enormously well-known that being a female actress and somewhat older is highly correlated with having fewer parts available.
Good points. Perhaps we should call them "junk games", similar to "junk food".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtqGTn7PCBw ... The Space Pope
Agreed.
Similarly, there's a libertarian blog that I read occasionally, and once when this came up there was an outpouring of "I loathe all government expenditures, but NASA rocketing men into space is the one exception, that's one thing we should definitely be doing". Pretty funny.
I agree.
Agreed. My two engineering jobs had version control, and none of the other stuff the OP mentions. Not having version control is pretty jarring.
I've been here for over 10 years, and I've never seen any of these complaints of submitter favoritism. Not once that I can recall. Maybe there's some insider-y meta-forum I don't know about.
But this "first time submitter" thing craps on my face every single day now.
As a non-Eve player, I'd like to say: That's a very nice writeup. Thank you for that.
"Not only do you have to start over with no rapport with the rest of the office, no seniority, no earned respect, but your current employer is blindsided and almost surely in rough shape because of it."
From the employee's POV, all of this is exactly reversed.
- "no rapport" -- an opportunity to expand professional contacts.
- "no seniority" -- or greater seniority, if hired into a higher-up position.
- "no earned respect" -- or greater earned respect, if a higher price-point has been set to your skills.
And the fourth point is obviously moot for the employee.
Personally, if I spent time interviewing for other positions, then a priori I would not "have been satisfied to stay if the compensation was appropriate". Why wasn't I given regular raises to keep my compensation competitive? Why do I have to spend extra time confirming that's the case? If this is the established operating procedure, then I should go, and have an opportunity to expand my skills, work variety, and professional networking.
The employer should be paying enough in advance, and with a hospitable work environment, to insure against this happening. And from personal experience I know that getting outside offers are routinely held grudgingly against the existing employee, whatever the immediate end result.
Taking this a case study, do not give your employer unwarranted information like the parent is lobbying for. It weakens your bargaining and decision-making abilities. Make the decision for yourself and just go.
"I'd stay until the project is complete - explain that to company B. If they don't appreciate that, then they don't really want you that badly."
Not terrible, but the problem is, what if the project runs long with delays? If you don't set a hard leave-date with company A, then the project might run indefinitely long, and you'll wind up burning goodwill with company B. But if you do inform and set a far-out deadline with company A, then that can cause a bad political situation there (or they may just tell you to stop coming in immediately, I've seen that happen).
Personally, I think this is the worst possible plan. There's the problems everyone else has pointed out (bad blood, start training a replacement, etc.) But for the primary thing is that you're putting the decision in someone else's hands. You should know which place your heart is telling you to work at, and pursue that place. Throwing a "hail mary pass" out and letting someone else dictate your path is generally not a recipe for personal satisfaction.
I don't think that the current system is caused by "absurd, outdated Protestant work ethics". I think it's caused by greedy and sociopathic robber-baron types who simply want to control as much money and power as they possibly can. There's been a concerted propaganda campaign for 40 years or more trying to convince Americans this is the way it has to be. The "work ethics" part of it is just one prong of that rhetorical offensive.
Anyone remember Geraldo Rivera's live TV special to open Al Capone's vault? This reminds me a lot of that.
"The spread of organized Christian creationism to Islam began in the 1980s, when the Muslim minister of education in Turkey turned to the Institute of Creation Research (ICR), a Christian institution in Dallas Texas, for help in developing twofold curriculum that would teach evolution and creation side by side."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adnan_Oktar
"There seems to be a lot of misinformation originating from all parties involved making it difficult to know how large the protest actually is at this point and whether or not the police are being quite as universally violent as the protestors imply."
Why did I not see any editorializing tags like this for any of the Middle East protests in the last year? Surely protesters there had at least as much motivation to skew the case that they were making (on YouTube and various social networks).
This seems twice as weird as the price hike earlier in the summer. "I messed up," says the CEO (FTA), but at the same he's going to double the mess-up by even further separating and ghettoizing the DVD customers, am I right? Seems not only tone-deaf, but more like a pathological liar. "Sorry that hurt, to make it up to you I'm fucking you in the ass twice as hard right now." Total doublespeak.
(I'm not a customer, sure it's just business, but seriously this statement makes my brain hurt.)
You just blew my mind.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution, known as the Copyright Clause: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."
I think that's a reasonable and praiseworthy understanding of what art, and copyright ownership, should be for. The time of creator-control should be "limited" to something like 14 or 28 years (one generation), as was originally intended. Afterward, it belongs to the world.
"I wondered if they were just overly well-off:"
No, bottom half of state median income (#31):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_income
Maine has already been giving every junior-high student in the state a laptop for the last 10 years. From a relative who works in a school district there, I understand that there's a shipment in & out every morning of broken laptops and replacements.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25782209/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/t/maine-laptop-every-middle-schooler/
I am from Maine. A close family member of mine works in a school district there.
My judgment is that frequently Mainers are a bunch of rubes, and surprisingly easy prey for slick business salespeople in this regard.