That's why I'm almost 30 and still stuck in bullshit, entry-level type positions: not because I lack the qualifications or knowhow to do more complex work, but rather that having such an exhuberantly curious personality and powerful urge to get shit done tends to alienate management types, who subsequently take it out on you by making sure you go nowhere in that company (management types are usually threatened by intellect and strong work ethic, as they often lack both qualities themselves).
The best advice I can give you: If you're looking for financial success, keep your smarts and curiosity to yourself. Do just good enough work to be better than the guy next to you, but not good enough to draw the attention (and subsequent ire) of the less-intelligent Philistines who decide your fate. If you do end up coming up with something quite clever, work on it on your own time so the company can't try and lay claim to your work, and get yourself out of the corporate wage-enslavement loop.
Yes, Virginia, the business world really is that fucked up.
As someone who has, many times, been told I was turned down for a position because I was "just too young," I can promise you that people under 65 enjoy no such protection.
The walled garden isn't what's bad - what's bad is the assumption, on the part of the 'gardners,' that they can and should have completely unfettered access to your data, regardless of whether or not you've given them permission.
"But but but, you're in our garden, permission is implied!"
Bullshit; When I take a cab, the drivers do not magically gain the right to go through my personal effects, merely because I'm "using their service."
It never ceases to amaze me the kind of abuse people won't take from brick-and-mortars, but will line up in droves to take it from a toy maker.
Everyone knows the Free Software Foundation cannot be trusted, but Microsoft can.
I just got back from vacation...did the universe invert while I was away?
Oh yea, that - we sent you an email, but since everything inverted it must have gone to your outbox instead of your inbox, so you must have thought you sent it to yourself...
The worst part (of Grub2, IMO) is, you can't even make configuration changes without blindingly painful, self-inflicted dental surgery, or installing a separate, non-default GUI package (startup-config-manager or some such shit) to your Ubuntu box.
The reason you are allowed to film (some) public servants in the course of their public duty is because they are, you know, IN PUBLIC,
Communications between ANY two parties are, by default, private.
I assume you didn't realize that you contradicted yourself in those two statements... unless you're under the impression that the 'public duty' of police officers does not involve "Communications between ANY two parties?"
You don't magically lose your right to privacy just because you happen to work for the government.
When you're at work, you do. I know, because I used to be a government employee. What about you, what's your experience that makes you more an expert than someone who's actually been there?
That's not to say that diplomates and politicos don't have the right to privacy during their off hours, in their own homes (cops, too), but when in the commission of their public office, doing their public duty, funded by public monies, privacy does not exist, and for good reason.
Ah, so I'm required to be an MD who is specialized in all things seen and unseen in order to deserve to live. Nice to know.
Don't be silly; being smart enough to get medical advice from a medical professional, as opposed to an advertisement, is a basic use of common sense. I never said or implied that one had to be a medical expert themselves (nice try w/ the hyperbole, a bit over the top tho).
Seriously though, I can't possibly think of all the possible ways in which I could die and act on them.
So? What's that have to do with trusting a sales pitch as if it were valuable medical advice?
I need some way of narrowing it down for me.
Then talk to a doctor, not a damn pharma salesman! You wouldn't take engine repair advice from a used car salesman, would you (FYI, the correct answer is 'an emphatic NO')? So why trust a drug salesman when it comes to life or death decisions?
I don't think it should be the only and it doesn't need to be the primary source, but they're not entirely, 100% without value.
The majority of drug adverts I see these days spend about 10 seconds telling you why you should take it (normally to alleviate symptoms of erectile dysfunction), and the next 50 seconds listing the reasons you shouldn't. So yea, I suppose there is value in letting people know how much worse the drug will make their life than the disease it's meant to 'treat' does.
Right, because more government control = less evil and well maintained. Just look at the US's current infrastructure and areas of oversight (e.g. the FCC).
Yea, but you should have seen 'em when they were new, before the lobbyists and their pet congresspeople got ahold of them!
FWIW, our infrastructure isn't all that fucked up, it's just that it hasn't been maintained and/or expanded as necessary, mostly due to the aforementioned lobbyist/congresscritter carnal relationship.
Unless it advises a potential patient to a more effective treatment that leaves him alive instead of dead at the end.
If I never hear about Lipitor maybe I never bother getting a cholesterol screening and then die of heart disease at 37 instead of going to my doctor at 35 and saying, "Hey, I heard about this Lipitor thing and that men from age 35 should have cholesterol screenings."
IMO, a person who gets their medical advice from drug ads deserves to die at 35.
Funded via NIH and public universities... in other words, exactly the way we fund it now.
The difference would be, the public (who already pays for the research) would be the direct beneficiaries of the research, instead of pharmaceutical companies getting to claim a monopoly on what should, by all law and rights, be public domain.
Where, exactly, in the Constitution does it say anything about internal State Department documents being open?
The same place where it states that you have the right to film public servants in the course of their public duty. Or are you somehow confused into thinking American diplomats aren't public servants?
I'm as anti fiat money as the next libertarian but I think you are falling into a common mental trap. You are mistaking meta problems with current faith based currencies with a problem with the idea of money in general.
Nah, just a semi-random rant unrelated to the other content of the post.
What can I say, the mere concept of fractional reserve just pisses me off to no end.
Diplomatic cables ARE private communication, dumbass.
No, they aren't; they are official US government documents, which, according to the U.S. Constitution, very much are not private. As a matter of fact, by definition nothing the US government engages in can be considered 'private.'
You may want to avoid throwing such epithets, considering your own quite obvious lack of understanding.
Lot of words there, and not a lot to respond to, but I'm enjoying our conversation and did have a few points of interest I wanted to mention:
Any vacuum tube can emit ionizing radiation...
So... does that mean my old Marshall tube amp could be spitting out dangerous forms of RF? ... That's... That's kind of awesome, dude.
Non-ionizing RF radiation can indeed be biologically harmful due to thermal effects, but that takes a certain amount of power at a given frequency. We are all familiar with the microwave oven... Wi-Fi transmitters also operate at microwave frequencies, very close to the frequency used by the ovens, and they can also excite water molecules the same way... Wi-Fi (and smart meters and cell phones) emit less than 1 watt, while microwave ovens emit hundreds of watts.
So, *theoretically* a wifi antennae could cause damage to lifeforms, but only if cranked up to a ridiculous amount of voltage? I see a very poorly thought out experiment in my near future...
Radiation isn't a boolean:
Truth time: I almost fell out of my chair laughing when I read that. Good show, man, good show.
A friend of mine once worked in a nuclear power plant, and he tells a story of long ago, when during some maintenance they had a "problem". As you might imagine, nuclear plant mechanics are in short supply, because they can only be exposed to so much radiation before their annual limits are used up. They needed to get a number of tools and parts to a hot spot where they had to make the repairs. So they had different people from the plant take turns hauling parts to the repair area. My friend was an office worker, but as he wasn't near his limit they asked him to push a couple carts full of tools to the zone and then retreat. The mechanics were lined up, each one taking a carefully rehearsed task, such as lifting a part into place and turning a wrench for a total of 60 seconds, and then retreating. They burned through a large number of employees recovering from that problem.
I must say, if I were your friend I would have thought it pretty cool to get the chance to help out. Sounds rather awesome.
Except that most of the leaked stuff wasn't about anybody DOING anything. It was about people THINKING things.
Expressing a thought to another person, especially via official channels, is DOING something.
If, for example, a diplomat is asked what his opinion of someone he is negotiating with is, he better be able to privately and honestly say 'I don't really trust the guy - I think he is lying'.
Again, there's a difference between a private conversation, and OFFICIAL DIPLOMATIC CABLES. One doesn't leave the room; the other is a reflection upon our nation as a whole.
Make all the excuses you want to try and justify your incorrect thinking, but the fact remains that sunshine really is the best disinfectant, and right now our government can use as much sunshine as we can force upon them.
Keeping something confidential does not imply wrongdoing. There are many scenarios where a perfectly legitimate government activity needs to be kept confidential.
Never said there weren't; I merely pointed out that up to now, nothing that has been leaked has proven to put our forces at a disadvantage, so the claims that information leaks are somehow dangerous to troops on the ground are nothing more than bullshit propaganda.
Private citizens also need privacy. Say for example I want to build a new addition onto my house and I solicit bids from three local building contractors. I may justifiably not want to tell each of those contractors who else is being considered for the job, to make it harder for them to conspire in a price-fixing scheme. Say for example my doctor finds a benign tumor during a physical exam. I might not want my boss to know for fear of employment discrimination.
You're ignoring a major difference in scenarios: You, as a private citizen, are not funded with tax dollars; you are not a representative of the American people as a whole; we have (or at least, had) very strong personal privacy laws in this country to protect private citizens. Also, since you're paying for the aforementioned services out of your own pocket, myself and the rest of Joe Public have no reason to care how you go about your business, so long as you're not violating our rights in the process.
The military is wholly funded by taxpayer monies, is seen as a representative of the American people abroad, and is tasked with protecting and upholding our Constitution - excellent reasons why their actions and expenses belong under the public microscope.
Now, apply an ounce of imagination and think about the complex plans a government might need to make, where premature public disclosure would screw things up.
Yea, if they ever wanted to enact Martial Law, or commit genocide, or literally throw out the rest of the Constitution, I can understand how public knowledge of the plan would cause issues. Considering this is supposed to be an open, democratically-represented republic of the People, for the People, and by the People, I can think of no legitimate reason for the state to keep the People in the dark about... well, anything.
false.
Of course you seem to think there is no association of the troops from politics. When documents where released that showed the US's role in maintaining peace in the mid-east, it put several countries into a corner and forced their hand.; which led to an extending campaign in which soldiers died.
Before posting that, I was thinking about how recording for personal use is legal, and distribution of a personal recording again for personal use is a bit of a legal grey area... but then, I'm going off my own experience and not taking into account the results of the ongoing copyright/patent wars, but now that I think about it (and take recent legal proceedings into account), best to err on the safe side and presume that's not allowed... I suppose one could try and argue that the recording I made is original art, and thus I have a right to distribute it as I please... but for the sake of avoiding bullshit, it's safer to assume that you're right.
Of course, one major advantage of distributing a burned CD by hand is the lack of paper trail, thus lowering one's chance of capture/prosecution.
Slashdot Mirror
"Don't grammar matter no more"
Fixed.
Knock that off, or I'll stab you with an exclamation point!
I am 30 now and I'm like your co-workers.
I used to be just like you when I was your age.
Yea; me too.
That's why I'm almost 30 and still stuck in bullshit, entry-level type positions: not because I lack the qualifications or knowhow to do more complex work, but rather that having such an exhuberantly curious personality and powerful urge to get shit done tends to alienate management types, who subsequently take it out on you by making sure you go nowhere in that company (management types are usually threatened by intellect and strong work ethic, as they often lack both qualities themselves).
The best advice I can give you: If you're looking for financial success, keep your smarts and curiosity to yourself. Do just good enough work to be better than the guy next to you, but not good enough to draw the attention (and subsequent ire) of the less-intelligent Philistines who decide your fate. If you do end up coming up with something quite clever, work on it on your own time so the company can't try and lay claim to your work, and get yourself out of the corporate wage-enslavement loop.
Yes, Virginia, the business world really is that fucked up.
Old age is a protected status in the US.
FTFY.
As someone who has, many times, been told I was turned down for a position because I was "just too young," I can promise you that people under 65 enjoy no such protection.
FTR, I'm still under 30.
This smells like a for-profit diploma mill.
There are other kinds?
For-the-Lulz?
Actually, that would be kinda awesome...
The walled garden isn't what's bad - what's bad is the assumption, on the part of the 'gardners,' that they can and should have completely unfettered access to your data, regardless of whether or not you've given them permission.
"But but but, you're in our garden, permission is implied!"
Bullshit; When I take a cab, the drivers do not magically gain the right to go through my personal effects, merely because I'm "using their service."
It never ceases to amaze me the kind of abuse people won't take from brick-and-mortars, but will line up in droves to take it from a toy maker.
Because being able to ensure the OS hasn't been tampered with by the hardware owner is vital for any attempt to make effective DRM schemes.
This, millions of times over, cannot be repeated enough.
Everyone knows the Free Software Foundation cannot be trusted, but Microsoft can.
I just got back from vacation...did the universe invert while I was away?
Oh yea, that - we sent you an email, but since everything inverted it must have gone to your outbox instead of your inbox, so you must have thought you sent it to yourself...
The worst part (of Grub2, IMO) is, you can't even make configuration changes without blindingly painful, self-inflicted dental surgery, or installing a separate, non-default GUI package (startup-config-manager or some such shit) to your Ubuntu box.
I miss my grub.conf and menu.lst!
The reason you are allowed to film (some) public servants in the course of their public duty is because they are, you know, IN PUBLIC,
Communications between ANY two parties are, by default, private.
I assume you didn't realize that you contradicted yourself in those two statements... unless you're under the impression that the 'public duty' of police officers does not involve "Communications between ANY two parties?"
You don't magically lose your right to privacy just because you happen to work for the government.
When you're at work, you do. I know, because I used to be a government employee. What about you, what's your experience that makes you more an expert than someone who's actually been there?
That's not to say that diplomates and politicos don't have the right to privacy during their off hours, in their own homes (cops, too), but when in the commission of their public office, doing their public duty, funded by public monies, privacy does not exist, and for good reason.
Ah, so I'm required to be an MD who is specialized in all things seen and unseen in order to deserve to live. Nice to know.
Don't be silly; being smart enough to get medical advice from a medical professional, as opposed to an advertisement, is a basic use of common sense. I never said or implied that one had to be a medical expert themselves (nice try w/ the hyperbole, a bit over the top tho).
Seriously though, I can't possibly think of all the possible ways in which I could die and act on them.
So? What's that have to do with trusting a sales pitch as if it were valuable medical advice?
I need some way of narrowing it down for me.
Then talk to a doctor, not a damn pharma salesman! You wouldn't take engine repair advice from a used car salesman, would you (FYI, the correct answer is 'an emphatic NO')? So why trust a drug salesman when it comes to life or death decisions?
I don't think it should be the only and it doesn't need to be the primary source, but they're not entirely, 100% without value.
The majority of drug adverts I see these days spend about 10 seconds telling you why you should take it (normally to alleviate symptoms of erectile dysfunction), and the next 50 seconds listing the reasons you shouldn't. So yea, I suppose there is value in letting people know how much worse the drug will make their life than the disease it's meant to 'treat' does.
Right, because more government control = less evil and well maintained. Just look at the US's current infrastructure and areas of oversight (e.g. the FCC).
Yea, but you should have seen 'em when they were new, before the lobbyists and their pet congresspeople got ahold of them!
FWIW, our infrastructure isn't all that fucked up, it's just that it hasn't been maintained and/or expanded as necessary, mostly due to the aforementioned lobbyist/congresscritter carnal relationship.
Unless it advises a potential patient to a more effective treatment that leaves him alive instead of dead at the end.
If I never hear about Lipitor maybe I never bother getting a cholesterol screening and then die of heart disease at 37 instead of going to my doctor at 35 and saying, "Hey, I heard about this Lipitor thing and that men from age 35 should have cholesterol screenings."
IMO, a person who gets their medical advice from drug ads deserves to die at 35.
Little chlorine in the gene pool, ya know?
What's your proposal for funding drug research?
Funded via NIH and public universities... in other words, exactly the way we fund it now.
The difference would be, the public (who already pays for the research) would be the direct beneficiaries of the research, instead of pharmaceutical companies getting to claim a monopoly on what should, by all law and rights, be public domain.
Where, exactly, in the Constitution does it say anything about internal State Department documents being open?
The same place where it states that you have the right to film public servants in the course of their public duty. Or are you somehow confused into thinking American diplomats aren't public servants?
You're so fucking retarded.
Oooh, scathing retort.
Did you come up with that one yourself, or did you have to ask the rest of your third grade class for suggestions?
Better than buggered, I suppose...
I can't believe this remark gets +5 Informative!
I second that.
What kind of fucked up childhood does a person have, to make them honestly believe that securing your own shit is somehow someone else's problem?
> and not even something of real value
I'm as anti fiat money as the next libertarian but I think you are falling into a common mental trap. You are mistaking meta problems with current faith based currencies with a problem with the idea of money in general.
Nah, just a semi-random rant unrelated to the other content of the post.
What can I say, the mere concept of fractional reserve just pisses me off to no end.
Here's to the barter system!
So undercover police officers, the vast majority of the CIA, and most combat countermeasures are a no go in your book?
Actually, now that you mention it...
Diplomatic cables ARE private communication, dumbass.
No, they aren't; they are official US government documents, which, according to the U.S. Constitution, very much are not private. As a matter of fact, by definition nothing the US government engages in can be considered 'private.'
You may want to avoid throwing such epithets, considering your own quite obvious lack of understanding.
Any vacuum tube can emit ionizing radiation...
So... does that mean my old Marshall tube amp could be spitting out dangerous forms of RF?
...
That's...
That's kind of awesome, dude.
Non-ionizing RF radiation can indeed be biologically harmful due to thermal effects, but that takes a certain amount of power at a given frequency. We are all familiar with the microwave oven... Wi-Fi transmitters also operate at microwave frequencies, very close to the frequency used by the ovens, and they can also excite water molecules the same way... Wi-Fi (and smart meters and cell phones) emit less than 1 watt, while microwave ovens emit hundreds of watts.
So, *theoretically* a wifi antennae could cause damage to lifeforms, but only if cranked up to a ridiculous amount of voltage? I see a very poorly thought out experiment in my near future...
Radiation isn't a boolean:
Truth time: I almost fell out of my chair laughing when I read that. Good show, man, good show.
A friend of mine once worked in a nuclear power plant, and he tells a story of long ago, when during some maintenance they had a "problem". As you might imagine, nuclear plant mechanics are in short supply, because they can only be exposed to so much radiation before their annual limits are used up. They needed to get a number of tools and parts to a hot spot where they had to make the repairs. So they had different people from the plant take turns hauling parts to the repair area. My friend was an office worker, but as he wasn't near his limit they asked him to push a couple carts full of tools to the zone and then retreat. The mechanics were lined up, each one taking a carefully rehearsed task, such as lifting a part into place and turning a wrench for a total of 60 seconds, and then retreating. They burned through a large number of employees recovering from that problem.
I must say, if I were your friend I would have thought it pretty cool to get the chance to help out. Sounds rather awesome.
Except that most of the leaked stuff wasn't about anybody DOING anything. It was about people THINKING things.
Expressing a thought to another person, especially via official channels, is DOING something.
If, for example, a diplomat is asked what his opinion of someone he is negotiating with is, he better be able to privately and honestly say 'I don't really trust the guy - I think he is lying'.
Again, there's a difference between a private conversation, and OFFICIAL DIPLOMATIC CABLES. One doesn't leave the room; the other is a reflection upon our nation as a whole.
Make all the excuses you want to try and justify your incorrect thinking, but the fact remains that sunshine really is the best disinfectant, and right now our government can use as much sunshine as we can force upon them.
Keeping something confidential does not imply wrongdoing. There are many scenarios where a perfectly legitimate government activity needs to be kept confidential.
Never said there weren't; I merely pointed out that up to now, nothing that has been leaked has proven to put our forces at a disadvantage, so the claims that information leaks are somehow dangerous to troops on the ground are nothing more than bullshit propaganda.
Private citizens also need privacy. Say for example I want to build a new addition onto my house and I solicit bids from three local building contractors. I may justifiably not want to tell each of those contractors who else is being considered for the job, to make it harder for them to conspire in a price-fixing scheme. Say for example my doctor finds a benign tumor during a physical exam. I might not want my boss to know for fear of employment discrimination.
You're ignoring a major difference in scenarios: You, as a private citizen, are not funded with tax dollars; you are not a representative of the American people as a whole; we have (or at least, had) very strong personal privacy laws in this country to protect private citizens. Also, since you're paying for the aforementioned services out of your own pocket, myself and the rest of Joe Public have no reason to care how you go about your business, so long as you're not violating our rights in the process.
The military is wholly funded by taxpayer monies, is seen as a representative of the American people abroad, and is tasked with protecting and upholding our Constitution - excellent reasons why their actions and expenses belong under the public microscope.
Now, apply an ounce of imagination and think about the complex plans a government might need to make, where premature public disclosure would screw things up.
Yea, if they ever wanted to enact Martial Law, or commit genocide, or literally throw out the rest of the Constitution, I can understand how public knowledge of the plan would cause issues. Considering this is supposed to be an open, democratically-represented republic of the People, for the People, and by the People, I can think of no legitimate reason for the state to keep the People in the dark about... well, anything.
"and in no way put any of our troops at risk."
false. Of course you seem to think there is no association of the troops from politics. When documents where released that showed the US's role in maintaining peace in the mid-east, it put several countries into a corner and forced their hand.; which led to an extending campaign in which soldiers died.
Bull.
Shit.
If not, produce some examples. Otherwise, STFU.
Before posting that, I was thinking about how recording for personal use is legal, and distribution of a personal recording again for personal use is a bit of a legal grey area... but then, I'm going off my own experience and not taking into account the results of the ongoing copyright/patent wars, but now that I think about it (and take recent legal proceedings into account), best to err on the safe side and presume that's not allowed... I suppose one could try and argue that the recording I made is original art, and thus I have a right to distribute it as I please... but for the sake of avoiding bullshit, it's safer to assume that you're right.
Of course, one major advantage of distributing a burned CD by hand is the lack of paper trail, thus lowering one's chance of capture/prosecution.