I once worked for a technology company that offered shared in lieu of bonuses. I figure after taxes, accepting them cost me $10,000 or so. Unless they essentially let you write your own terms and conditions of the stock transfer, you can't help but lose. And maybe even if they do.
Ever take a lie detector test? Years back, a prospective employer sent me for one. Unlike most people, I actually read the release they asked me to sign, and discovered: 1. I'd be giving up the right to challenge the results of the test, by any manner, and 2. The testing agency reserved the right to sell the results of the test, good or bad, to ANYONE, in perpetuity.
Does this sound ethical, or as though they trust their own test? I told them to stuff the test, and the job.
The next day, I was called about the position, and explained I could not, in conscience, acquiesce to the polygraph test. They said, "Oh, don't worry about that, we get it if we can, but it doesn't mean anything. Welcome aboard!"
You're probably right. I do quite a bit of consulting for K-12 schools; the watchword there is that once you attempt to filter content, you'd better filter perfectly, as you're responsible for anything that gets past.
Does this translate into sanctioning your own users for inappropriate actions? I think it does.
Hah! I recall an incident maybe 15 years ago when a customer called to delay picking up a computer system: "It'll take me a couple of days to transfer the funds to an account I can write a check from." I suggested he simply with draw the money in cash, and hand it to me. He was amazed! "I never considered you might accept cash."
And I've paid for more than one new car with cash.
It may in reality be the largest factor. After the PlaysForSure fiasco, who in their right mind would ever buy ANYTHING with DRM from Microsoft, ever again?
I'm not surprised in the slightest; I think the majority of "product reviews" on the internet are corrupted this way. But it works.
A friend was looking for floor mats for her car. She pointed out a brand I personally KNEW to be garbage, and said they had "perfect feedback." Well, all the review were written in the same style, and the text even repeated every dozen or so reviews. But she ordered them anyway, and it took her three months to get them to issue an RMA.
I think that most people want the computer to anticipate their actions and adjust accordingly
No. I think people who use computers professionally, instead of as toys, want computers to react to input the exact same way, every time. When a system tries to anticipate me by automating functions or customizing my menus, it throws me completely off task the first time I do something different.
When I look at Vista, the help system assumes I'm doing every task for the first time - every time I do it. It's recursive; instructions FROM the help system often tell you to "Choose Help, then type..."
I take this to mean that MS is admitting their OS is basically unlearnable.
The overwhelming majority of the "firefighters" and "police" solicitations are outside organizations; sometimes hired by the charity, often acting without authorization at all. They'll usually send a few cents per dollar to the charity, just to maintain the illusion of being legit. The rest goes to "expenses." Why would organizations EVER authorize this? It's free money. They essentially do nothing other than authorize use of their name, and get a check. It matters not that someone else gets 10X as much.
Slashdot Mirror
I once worked for a technology company that offered shared in lieu of bonuses. I figure after taxes, accepting them cost me $10,000 or so. Unless they essentially let you write your own terms and conditions of the stock transfer, you can't help but lose. And maybe even if they do.
Ever take a lie detector test? Years back, a prospective employer sent me for one. Unlike most people, I actually read the release they asked me to sign, and discovered: 1. I'd be giving up the right to challenge the results of the test, by any manner, and 2. The testing agency reserved the right to sell the results of the test, good or bad, to ANYONE, in perpetuity. Does this sound ethical, or as though they trust their own test? I told them to stuff the test, and the job. The next day, I was called about the position, and explained I could not, in conscience, acquiesce to the polygraph test. They said, "Oh, don't worry about that, we get it if we can, but it doesn't mean anything. Welcome aboard!"
You're probably right. I do quite a bit of consulting for K-12 schools; the watchword there is that once you attempt to filter content, you'd better filter perfectly, as you're responsible for anything that gets past. Does this translate into sanctioning your own users for inappropriate actions? I think it does.
Hah! I recall an incident maybe 15 years ago when a customer called to delay picking up a computer system: "It'll take me a couple of days to transfer the funds to an account I can write a check from." I suggested he simply with draw the money in cash, and hand it to me. He was amazed! "I never considered you might accept cash." And I've paid for more than one new car with cash.
It may in reality be the largest factor. After the PlaysForSure fiasco, who in their right mind would ever buy ANYTHING with DRM from Microsoft, ever again?
I'm not surprised in the slightest; I think the majority of "product reviews" on the internet are corrupted this way. But it works. A friend was looking for floor mats for her car. She pointed out a brand I personally KNEW to be garbage, and said they had "perfect feedback." Well, all the review were written in the same style, and the text even repeated every dozen or so reviews. But she ordered them anyway, and it took her three months to get them to issue an RMA.
I think that most people want the computer to anticipate their actions and adjust accordingly
No. I think people who use computers professionally, instead of as toys, want computers to react to input the exact same way, every time. When a system tries to anticipate me by automating functions or customizing my menus, it throws me completely off task the first time I do something different. When I look at Vista, the help system assumes I'm doing every task for the first time - every time I do it. It's recursive; instructions FROM the help system often tell you to "Choose Help, then type..." I take this to mean that MS is admitting their OS is basically unlearnable.
The overwhelming majority of the "firefighters" and "police" solicitations are outside organizations; sometimes hired by the charity, often acting without authorization at all. They'll usually send a few cents per dollar to the charity, just to maintain the illusion of being legit. The rest goes to "expenses." Why would organizations EVER authorize this? It's free money. They essentially do nothing other than authorize use of their name, and get a check. It matters not that someone else gets 10X as much.
Best way to avoid this is to never register to vote. Cuts way back on the political calls (mailings, too.) I've never received either.