Having done the UO thing way back I came to the same conclusion as the reader. Your assertion that there are limits to the stories that can be devised, is right on. Most of the MMORPG's are retreads of the same damn thing.
The only decent online RPG that has held my interest is Neverwinter Nights. The availability of countless modules (some are very good and some suck) on the internet has really helped add to the game. Atleast once or twice a month, some friends and I play a module over the net as a party. It kind of brings back the nostalgia of playing D&D in middle school without the stigma of carrying around a Crown Royale bag full of dice.:)
Well, it pretty much works well for them because the US doesn't match their tariffs. While it may sound stupid that we would allow ourselves to trade like this the fact is any threat by the US to raise a tariff has always resulted in a counter-threat for them to raise theirs even more.
From what I've heard, trade negotiations with China are extremely frustrating. They flat out refuse to make any concessions because they know we need them more than they need us and unless something changes here, nothing is going to change.
The truth is raising tariffs here would be a disaster, because everyone from the EU to China views tariff increases by the US as a hostile act (in the context of a trade war). We need to fix a lot of our trade practices before we can even think about raising any tariffs.
You are completely correct, but I will add one wrinkle. In many software companies, development is a profit maker and IT is a cost center. As a result, what the developers want they get and the IT guys are told to go pound sand.
One BIG problem here. This type of case doesn't always go to a jury. Often you will have to submit a motion for a jury trial and without a lawyer, good luck on getting one.
Also, ignoring a summons, C&D, and settlement offer usually pisses off the judges. They tend to frown heavily on people who refuse to negotiate, it demonstrates bad faith.
(IANALBIWAP) I am not a lawyer, but I was a paralegal and that is the worst legal advice I have ever seen. Then again anyone who takes legal advice on Slashdot deserves what they get.
You have every right to be outraged, but what SCO is doing isn't exactly on par with what PG&E did in regards to illegal dumping a ways back. (See Erin Brockovich for the cliff notes version or just do a google.) Look I sympathize with you, I'm not an open source developer, just a user and I'm mighty pissed off about it, but lets be realistic they aren't exactly torturing puppies.
Funny, I thought suborning one's ideals to keep receiving that paycheck was the choice indicative of the lack of cojones.
I'm talking about balance. You must know when to suck it up and when to walk. Walking just because you don't like what your employer is doing without weighing the consequences and examining your priorities is foolhardy. I can tell from your tone in other statements you know what I'm talking about here. I really don't know why you chose to argue this as black and white. I'm not saying people should stay and I'm not saying they should go; just that they should be allowed to weigh their own situation and react accordingly. Judge them for why they made the decision they did.
I'm not going to say there's anything wrong about Damage's stand, though -- besides that it unnecessarily prevents them from potentially being able to hire what few talented and yet non-morally-bankrupt employees SCO has left. That's their loss, though, and if they think that they'd rather make a political point (and not need to sift through the resumes from folks at SCO *without* said extenuating circumstances), such is their choice to make.
That is exactly my point. I think Damage is doing themselves and their prospective SCO employees a huge disservice. I will go so far as to say its wrong though. Granted not in the same kind of wrong as torturing puppies, just a wrong decision, the wrong way to treat prospective employees, plus what they are doing is technically illegal in the State of California. In CA (and many other states) you must retain all resumes received.
I suppose I should have added "in a timely manner" to that statement, but regardless
30+ IT positions, in my department alone, is ALWAYS difficult to fill on short notice. 5,000+ company-wide is even harder. I'm not saying that there aren't people out there who could possibly step in, but the initial pain would be excruciating.
Its not easy for a programmer to just step in and take over for another programmer without a significant ramp up and sdjustment period. Its not easy to replace a DBA who is both extremely talented and knows anything and everything about the environment; with or without documentation. The same goes for network and system admins. Could we find a body to fill all vacancies, possibly, but the fact is the interim would be very painful to our customers.
Having to pay two car payments (rather than buying a $500 used commute vehicle or two) or substantial consumer debt is indicative of bad choices;
You are no doubt correct, the last stat I heard was more than 70% of Americans are carrying too much debt.
I'll say it again so everyone can hear me. I am not saying these people should be getting any sympathy. My heart is not bleeding for IT workers like myself. I'm merely stating that there are a number of reasons why somebody cannot just up and quit their job and assuming that just because they make a good salary means they are rich is lunacy. Good Salary != Wealthy.
What if Joe Engineer gets a job making $60K at SCO and his wife is staying home with the kids. Things are going good and they end up buying two new cars over the span of a couple years, thus they have two car payments. Now lets suppose that Joe hasn't been out of school very long and still has a mound of student loans. Now let's assume that Joe finally buys a nice home for his family for $275 just outside the city. (I don't know about the rest of the country, but in the Boston area thats a modest home.)
Now whamo, the Darl reality distortion field sets in at SCO and Joe Engineer can't believe what is going on now. He wants out, started canvassing the internet, networking, and cold calling all to no avail he hasn't found anything comparable. Now he starts looking at paycut jobs and what it would take financially. Joe quickly learns that he's still inside out on the cars, so he can't just up and sell them for something cheaper. Maybe he tries to get a deferment on his student loans, but he's got a decent job and gets denied. Joe isn't dumb enough to quit his job and try because he'd probably still get denied. Now he starts thinking, maybe my wife can get a job and then he's reminded why she's staying home with the kids anyways. $500 to $600 a month is too much for childcare, he can't afford to take on another financial obligation. Now Joe thinks, what about my house? I could take out a second mortgage, payoff some debts or use the money to float us, but what happens if I don't find a job before that money runs out. I can't collect unemployment because I quit, so its either bankruptcy or lose my house. I could try selling it and moving, but we really like it here. The school is good, we have friends and family in the area.
Likewise, student loans are avoidable -- I paid my own way through college without a single loan, as did my father.
So did I, but the vast majority of people don't. Again, you are applying your life to that of others. Just because circumstances were different in your case, doesn't mean everybody else should have made the same choices. This is exactly the problem I have with Chrisd's position. Just because he may have been fortunate enough to have the money to make just such a move doesn't mean he should judge people without that luxury. He should judge them on their personality and skill. Find out why they stuck it out at SCO rather than just persecute them for thinking about their family.
One student I know just made $15K over the last summer selling books door-to-door -- more than enough to finance a year of studenthood
Good for him/her, I'm sure they are the kind of exceptional person that will excel in this world. Now how many students were at your school? How many went door to door selling books and making $15K in a year? Now, you probably wouldn't know, but how many single parents were there collecting on student loans because they were working to support a family and put themselves through school? How many students were working full-time jobs and going to school full-time as well as supporting a family? I know my school had a startling large number of this group. I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that some people do not have the same opportunities you did and its unfair to judge them on that sole basis.
That is exactly my point. I never said that people should stay there, just that people should cut the grunts some slack. Finding another job isn't always easy. Besides, if you really wanted to punish SCO, you'd start recruiting their engineers like mad.
Don't you think that the single parents working at Starbuck's have to support kids, too? You think they're making $50,000 a year? What about the immigrant families - esp. the illegal aliens - living on $15,000 a year?
I never said that you couldn't make it on less. I've been there I know. My point was a counter to the parent post's insistence that just because they were IT workers they were rolling in dough. I realize fully that people make due with less, but in my experience just because you make 50K doesn't mean you're pocketing that money. The mortgage payment is a little higher and so is your car payment, maybe you charged a family vacation or something like that. You went to a decent school and now have a mountain of student loans. Do these IT people have it better off, most likely, but that doesn't mean they aren't in danger of losing it. Quiting a high paying IT job to work at McDonald's isnt going to pay that mortgage payment and you would have to be an egotistical asshole to possibly land your family in bankruptcy, marriage in divorce, and compromise your child's future over something as trivial as "My Employer is an unethical bastard." Seriously, how many people say that already? I mean cmon people who in their right mind would do such a thing, and expect someone (not independently wealthy) to do the same thing. Its sheer stupidity.
I'll be honest - I'm picking on you partially based on guilt-by-association: I'm assuming that you're part of the Republican/Libertarian wing of the IT scene that was oh-so-happy to have labor costs go down in other industries, and all too glad to cut welfare benefits and prevent a single-payer health plan from being enacted. If you're not one of these, then I'm being unfair with my tone.
I have never been more insulted on Slashdot before.:-) Seriously, I am an independent, but more inclined towards the democrats (as clueless as they are) of late. In my honest opinion, I think all three haven't got a clue. It takes a little bit of all of them to make any sense. Looking at life from a single point of view causes you to miss a lot of details.
The cut-off date for Chrisd's SCO clause is September of this year - I think that's very fair. Anyone who is still with SCO at this point is pretty sad. I wouldn't print a clause like chrisd's on a public site, but let's just say that I would use the fact that someone was still working at a place like SCO as information, and not encouraging information.
I don't disagree with it being a factor, but I think it only fair to get the prospective employee's perspective. I'd want to ask them, "Why did you stay with SCO so long?" If they say, "Well it used to be a good company to work for until this whole mess with IBM. Once that began, I started looking, but I'm sure you know that there aren't many positions for a UNIX kernel engineer in Lindon, Utah so I had to start looking for jobs in other parts of the country, planning my family's relocation and such." Then I think they deserve a fair shot. Shooting them down for a variant of "The Sins of the Father" is just plain immoral in and of itself. I just don't see how anyone can disagree with that logic and screw the guy because he was looking out for his family.
Unless you are posting under multiple accounts, its not your intellect I am calling in to question.
I had always thought NY suburbs were a little more than that. I can tell you that $48,000 would be pretty tight in the Boston area with a mortgage on a small house, two car payments, and childcare. Add to that student loans and some consumer debt and many IT pros would be hard pressed to live off a household income of $50K.
Given your numbers, would you willingly drop that income to about $25K by quiting your job or going to work slinging hamburgers because your employer decided to be a bunch of litigous dicks? I highly doubt anyone would be so foolish to jeopardize their home, children's future, and the rest of their career for something as insignificant as this whole fiasco.
if they haven't been looking for a new job and preparing to quit
Its not 1994 anymore. Finding a decent IT job isn't like falling out of a boat and hitting water anymore. There are thousands of people out of jobs for more than six months and STILL looking for something comparable. (I pulled this stat out of my ass, but I feel real confident that I understated.) Finding a decent IT job in CA is tough, finding one in Utah, I can imagine is significantly more difficult.
Many *FAMILIES* can live on social assistance and as laborers. If these 'poor IT folk' are unwilling to give up their 4 bedroom 2 bathroom house with fireplace and pool, then too bad for them. Fuck 'em.
Your ignorance astounds me. Do you know how much it costs to support a family? Do you realize that just because you work in IT doesn't mean you make six figures?
I know a lot of people toiling in shitty IT jobs just barely paying the bills because they are still paying off student loans, a mortgage on a "modest" house or condo, childcare and two car payments because both parents HAVE to work. Not to mention, how many high paying IT jobs do you think their are in Lindon, Utah that these people can just up and quit their job? Nevermind, that the job market sucks right now anyways.
Frankly, I'd rather work in a morally bankrupt software company and collect a decent paycheck while I look for another job than stand in line at the supermarket holding a bunch of WIC coupons and worrying if I'm allowed to buy the Tropicana orange juice or if I have to get the Florida's Pride this month. Why should my children have to suffer because my company decided to do something that was morally objectionable to less than 1% of the global population. Now if they were dumping chemical waste in the town's water supply that is one thing, but a couple frivolous lawsuits and a bunch of assinine open letters that pissed off a bunch of geeks hardly seems like a good reason to make my family suffer needlessly.
You obviously have no concept of sacrifice, humility, and honor if you would willingly put your pride before the well being of your own family. Your priorities are completely out of whack.
Why Chrisd thinks he is punishing SCO with this is beyond me. All that is going to happen here is some poor engineer who is making the best of a bad situation and looking out for priority number one, his or her family. Are these the people Damage should be punishing? Not all of us were lucky enough to get in on the linux IPO's. Not everybody has had the good fortune Chris has. And to think I used to admire this man. Sorry Chris, in my opinion, you are a traitor to your fellow geeks by punishing them for the actions of a few suits at SCO. I wish we were all as fortunate as you.
Honestly, I am very sorry that this whole situation has come to this.
I think the answer is a little bit of all of the above. In general, I am a proponent of the H1B program, but I do have some serious reservations. Most of the H1B's I work with are very intelligent people that would be difficult to replace even in the current job market. I believe the root of this problem is our educational system in the states, but thats a whole other debate.
I've been looking for a good Oracle DBA job for a while now and its been difficult. I'm not very happy where I am. In this situation, the H1B program definitely hinders my search, but I really don't think by all that much. Most people who oppose the H1B program talk about just this kind of scenario and their argument has merit. However, the biggest problem I have with the H1B program is the way some employers abuse the hell out of the process. My division has been undergoing constant layoffs for over two years and during this process our managment has really been treating us very poorly, but it pales in comparison to the way the H1B's are treated. More than a few have received veiled threats that they will do what they are asked or they could be laid off and promptly kicked out of the country. They've forced people in to very long hours, constantly cut benefits, in general become hostile. The consensus among most of the H1B's is to keep their mouth shut and do what is asked. It is in this regard that I think the system needs an overhaul. I do not, however, know the solution.
What's more lets shine a light on the crux of the matter. Economic downturns always bring heightened nationalism, immigrant bashing, and typically self-destructive policies on trade and immigration. Given the current political climate and the significance of today's date only heightens that sense of national pride. This, in my opinion, is a dangerous position to be in. This is the kind of climate that breeds "Brown Shirts".
I think the important distinction that must be drawn is the fundamental difference between H1B type workers and immigrants. In my opinion, an immigrant is someone actively pursuing citizenship and should be considered an "American". As the descendant of Scots, Irish, and French Canadians I've heard the stories of persecution and discrimination my great grandparents underwent during the Great Depression because they were "stealing" jobs from "real" Americans.
In my opinion, the hiring policy, this man ran in to is just plain wrong regardless of legality. Does this mean that the US should adopt a similar policy? I don't think so, I believe the outcome would not impart a favorable change on the state of the economy. If my company lost all its H1B's we would be in serious trouble. I'm pretty confident we could not fill the vacant jobs with "real" americans, even in today's job market. Of course, I could be wrong.
Anyone who claims they never encountered any violence whatsoever is lying. Not only do I claim bullshit I contend that you have exhibited violent behavior.
You never got frustrated as a child and hit a playmate or sibling? (How do you know? Children as young as 6 months are quite capable and known to exhibit such behavior) You never got in a fight as a kid or even witnessed one? You never played cops & robbers or had a play sword fight? You never watched Tom & Jerry or Looney Tunes? You never got mad enough that you broke something? These are all forms of violence either exhibited by you or for you.
Violence isn't just the gruesome stuff you see on NYPD Blue or in the latest John Woo flick. Violence is a part of EVERYBODY's world. Even Ghandi recognized that violence was a basic human compulsion that had to be controlled.
It shouldn't be for a 10 year old. You obviously never had a sibling.
Seriously violence is all around us it touches everything we do and always will. It is the ultimate trump card, it shapes the world in which we live more than anything. Great passion, honor, valor, sacrifice, spirituality, artistic expression are often born from violence. Violence and blood shed move Picasso to paint Guernica.
Does this mean violence is a good thing, certainly not. Violence in all its forms is part of human nature and it always will be. A child only months old is capable of violence not because it is learned behavior, but because it is second nature. Children of all ages need to be exposed to some violence in an age appropriate manner so that they may learn what is acceptable and when.
The problem isn't teaching kids to be violent, its not teaching them restraint and control.
OK, I know what you're talking about because its happened to me, BUT its not a good excuse at all. In fact, its absolutely retarded. Sure, my raise popped me in to the next tax bracket. Sure I was technically making SLIGHTLY less. However, I bought a house and had a baby in the same year so the deductions went up significantly.
A raise is a raise and in most corporate environments they cap how much of a raise you can get. I've never heard of an employer agreeing to skip your raise this year and tack it on to next year's.
Optimally, what you would want to do is download the songs, and then mail the artists a nice crisp $2 bill (Or coin, or whatever) along with a letter explaining WHY you are mailing them money. That way you get the music, the record company gets boycotted, AND the band makes money...more money than they would if you bought the CD.
Make sure you put your real return address on the envelope so the subpoena can find you that much easier.
All we need is one slashdotter on the jury and SCO is doomed. I just hope it isn't the penis bird man, the Natalie Portman stalker, or the grits fetishist.
I can see Boies during voire dire.
Boies: "Have you ever read Slashdot?" Juror: uh.......yeah Boies: "Your honor I move to have this juror excused." Juror: "But all I ever post is hot grits and natalie portman posts." Boies: "Oh, sorry your honor. We'll keep him."
Slashdot Mirror
Having done the UO thing way back I came to the same conclusion as the reader. Your assertion that there are limits to the stories that can be devised, is right on. Most of the MMORPG's are retreads of the same damn thing.
:)
The only decent online RPG that has held my interest is Neverwinter Nights. The availability of countless modules (some are very good and some suck) on the internet has really helped add to the game. Atleast once or twice a month, some friends and I play a module over the net as a party. It kind of brings back the nostalgia of playing D&D in middle school without the stigma of carrying around a Crown Royale bag full of dice.
Well, it pretty much works well for them because the US doesn't match their tariffs. While it may sound stupid that we would allow ourselves to trade like this the fact is any threat by the US to raise a tariff has always resulted in a counter-threat for them to raise theirs even more.
From what I've heard, trade negotiations with China are extremely frustrating. They flat out refuse to make any concessions because they know we need them more than they need us and unless something changes here, nothing is going to change.
The truth is raising tariffs here would be a disaster, because everyone from the EU to China views tariff increases by the US as a hostile act (in the context of a trade war). We need to fix a lot of our trade practices before we can even think about raising any tariffs.
You are completely correct, but I will add one wrinkle. In many software companies, development is a profit maker and IT is a cost center. As a result, what the developers want they get and the IT guys are told to go pound sand.
One BIG problem here. This type of case doesn't always go to a jury. Often you will have to submit a motion for a jury trial and without a lawyer, good luck on getting one.
Also, ignoring a summons, C&D, and settlement offer usually pisses off the judges. They tend to frown heavily on people who refuse to negotiate, it demonstrates bad faith.
(IANALBIWAP) I am not a lawyer, but I was a paralegal and that is the worst legal advice I have ever seen. Then again anyone who takes legal advice on Slashdot deserves what they get.
LOL
;)
Any other Americans relieved that for once it isn't our courts making asses of themselves.
You have every right to be outraged, but what SCO is doing isn't exactly on par with what PG&E did in regards to illegal dumping a ways back. (See Erin Brockovich for the cliff notes version or just do a google.) Look I sympathize with you, I'm not an open source developer, just a user and I'm mighty pissed off about it, but lets be realistic they aren't exactly torturing puppies.
Funny, I thought suborning one's ideals to keep receiving that paycheck was the choice indicative of the lack of cojones.
I'm talking about balance. You must know when to suck it up and when to walk. Walking just because you don't like what your employer is doing without weighing the consequences and examining your priorities is foolhardy. I can tell from your tone in other statements you know what I'm talking about here. I really don't know why you chose to argue this as black and white. I'm not saying people should stay and I'm not saying they should go; just that they should be allowed to weigh their own situation and react accordingly. Judge them for why they made the decision they did.
I'm not going to say there's anything wrong about Damage's stand, though -- besides that it unnecessarily prevents them from potentially being able to hire what few talented and yet non-morally-bankrupt employees SCO has left. That's their loss, though, and if they think that they'd rather make a political point (and not need to sift through the resumes from folks at SCO *without* said extenuating circumstances), such is their choice to make.
That is exactly my point. I think Damage is doing themselves and their prospective SCO employees a huge disservice. I will go so far as to say its wrong though. Granted not in the same kind of wrong as torturing puppies, just a wrong decision, the wrong way to treat prospective employees, plus what they are doing is technically illegal in the State of California. In CA (and many other states) you must retain all resumes received.
I suppose I should have added "in a timely manner" to that statement, but regardless
30+ IT positions, in my department alone, is ALWAYS difficult to fill on short notice. 5,000+ company-wide is even harder. I'm not saying that there aren't people out there who could possibly step in, but the initial pain would be excruciating.
Its not easy for a programmer to just step in and take over for another programmer without a significant ramp up and sdjustment period. Its not easy to replace a DBA who is both extremely talented and knows anything and everything about the environment; with or without documentation. The same goes for network and system admins. Could we find a body to fill all vacancies, possibly, but the fact is the interim would be very painful to our customers.
Having to pay two car payments (rather than buying a $500 used commute vehicle or two) or substantial consumer debt is indicative of bad choices;
You are no doubt correct, the last stat I heard was more than 70% of Americans are carrying too much debt.
I'll say it again so everyone can hear me. I am not saying these people should be getting any sympathy. My heart is not bleeding for IT workers like myself. I'm merely stating that there are a number of reasons why somebody cannot just up and quit their job and assuming that just because they make a good salary means they are rich is lunacy. Good Salary != Wealthy.
What if Joe Engineer gets a job making $60K at SCO and his wife is staying home with the kids. Things are going good and they end up buying two new cars over the span of a couple years, thus they have two car payments. Now lets suppose that Joe hasn't been out of school very long and still has a mound of student loans. Now let's assume that Joe finally buys a nice home for his family for $275 just outside the city. (I don't know about the rest of the country, but in the Boston area thats a modest home.)
Now whamo, the Darl reality distortion field sets in at SCO and Joe Engineer can't believe what is going on now. He wants out, started canvassing the internet, networking, and cold calling all to no avail he hasn't found anything comparable. Now he starts looking at paycut jobs and what it would take financially. Joe quickly learns that he's still inside out on the cars, so he can't just up and sell them for something cheaper. Maybe he tries to get a deferment on his student loans, but he's got a decent job and gets denied. Joe isn't dumb enough to quit his job and try because he'd probably still get denied. Now he starts thinking, maybe my wife can get a job and then he's reminded why she's staying home with the kids anyways. $500 to $600 a month is too much for childcare, he can't afford to take on another financial obligation. Now Joe thinks, what about my house? I could take out a second mortgage, payoff some debts or use the money to float us, but what happens if I don't find a job before that money runs out. I can't collect unemployment because I quit, so its either bankruptcy or lose my house. I could try selling it and moving, but we really like it here. The school is good, we have friends and family in the area.
Likewise, student loans are avoidable -- I paid my own way through college without a single loan, as did my father.
So did I, but the vast majority of people don't. Again, you are applying your life to that of others. Just because circumstances were different in your case, doesn't mean everybody else should have made the same choices. This is exactly the problem I have with Chrisd's position. Just because he may have been fortunate enough to have the money to make just such a move doesn't mean he should judge people without that luxury. He should judge them on their personality and skill. Find out why they stuck it out at SCO rather than just persecute them for thinking about their family.
One student I know just made $15K over the last summer selling books door-to-door -- more than enough to finance a year of studenthood
Good for him/her, I'm sure they are the kind of exceptional person that will excel in this world. Now how many students were at your school? How many went door to door selling books and making $15K in a year? Now, you probably wouldn't know, but how many single parents were there collecting on student loans because they were working to support a family and put themselves through school? How many students were working full-time jobs and going to school full-time as well as supporting a family? I know my school had a startling large number of this group. I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that some people do not have the same opportunities you did and its unfair to judge them on that sole basis.
Being unwilling to move around the country as
That is exactly my point. I never said that people should stay there, just that people should cut the grunts some slack. Finding another job isn't always easy. Besides, if you really wanted to punish SCO, you'd start recruiting their engineers like mad.
Don't you think that the single parents working at Starbuck's have to support kids, too? You think they're making $50,000 a year? What about the immigrant families - esp. the illegal aliens - living on $15,000 a year?
:-) Seriously, I am an independent, but more inclined towards the democrats (as clueless as they are) of late. In my honest opinion, I think all three haven't got a clue. It takes a little bit of all of them to make any sense. Looking at life from a single point of view causes you to miss a lot of details.
I never said that you couldn't make it on less. I've been there I know. My point was a counter to the parent post's insistence that just because they were IT workers they were rolling in dough. I realize fully that people make due with less, but in my experience just because you make 50K doesn't mean you're pocketing that money. The mortgage payment is a little higher and so is your car payment, maybe you charged a family vacation or something like that. You went to a decent school and now have a mountain of student loans. Do these IT people have it better off, most likely, but that doesn't mean they aren't in danger of losing it. Quiting a high paying IT job to work at McDonald's isnt going to pay that mortgage payment and you would have to be an egotistical asshole to possibly land your family in bankruptcy, marriage in divorce, and compromise your child's future over something as trivial as "My Employer is an unethical bastard." Seriously, how many people say that already? I mean cmon people who in their right mind would do such a thing, and expect someone (not independently wealthy) to do the same thing. Its sheer stupidity.
I'll be honest - I'm picking on you partially based on guilt-by-association: I'm assuming that you're part of the Republican/Libertarian wing of the IT scene that was oh-so-happy to have labor costs go down in other industries, and all too glad to cut welfare benefits and prevent a single-payer health plan from being enacted. If you're not one of these, then I'm being unfair with my tone.
I have never been more insulted on Slashdot before.
The cut-off date for Chrisd's SCO clause is September of this year - I think that's very fair. Anyone who is still with SCO at this point is pretty sad. I wouldn't print a clause like chrisd's on a public site, but let's just say that I would use the fact that someone was still working at a place like SCO as information, and not encouraging information.
I don't disagree with it being a factor, but I think it only fair to get the prospective employee's perspective. I'd want to ask them, "Why did you stay with SCO so long?" If they say, "Well it used to be a good company to work for until this whole mess with IBM. Once that began, I started looking, but I'm sure you know that there aren't many positions for a UNIX kernel engineer in Lindon, Utah so I had to start looking for jobs in other parts of the country, planning my family's relocation and such." Then I think they deserve a fair shot. Shooting them down for a variant of "The Sins of the Father" is just plain immoral in and of itself. I just don't see how anyone can disagree with that logic and screw the guy because he was looking out for his family.
Unless you are posting under multiple accounts, its not your intellect I am calling in to question.
I had always thought NY suburbs were a little more than that. I can tell you that $48,000 would be pretty tight in the Boston area with a mortgage on a small house, two car payments, and childcare. Add to that student loans and some consumer debt and many IT pros would be hard pressed to live off a household income of $50K.
Given your numbers, would you willingly drop that income to about $25K by quiting your job or going to work slinging hamburgers because your employer decided to be a bunch of litigous dicks? I highly doubt anyone would be so foolish to jeopardize their home, children's future, and the rest of their career for something as insignificant as this whole fiasco.
if they haven't been looking for a new job and preparing to quit
Its not 1994 anymore. Finding a decent IT job isn't like falling out of a boat and hitting water anymore. There are thousands of people out of jobs for more than six months and STILL looking for something comparable. (I pulled this stat out of my ass, but I feel real confident that I understated.) Finding a decent IT job in CA is tough, finding one in Utah, I can imagine is significantly more difficult.
Many *FAMILIES* can live on social assistance and as laborers. If these 'poor IT folk' are unwilling to give up their 4 bedroom 2 bathroom house with fireplace and pool, then too bad for them. Fuck 'em.
Your ignorance astounds me. Do you know how much it costs to support a family? Do you realize that just because you work in IT doesn't mean you make six figures?
I know a lot of people toiling in shitty IT jobs just barely paying the bills because they are still paying off student loans, a mortgage on a "modest" house or condo, childcare and two car payments because both parents HAVE to work. Not to mention, how many high paying IT jobs do you think their are in Lindon, Utah that these people can just up and quit their job? Nevermind, that the job market sucks right now anyways.
Frankly, I'd rather work in a morally bankrupt software company and collect a decent paycheck while I look for another job than stand in line at the supermarket holding a bunch of WIC coupons and worrying if I'm allowed to buy the Tropicana orange juice or if I have to get the Florida's Pride this month. Why should my children have to suffer because my company decided to do something that was morally objectionable to less than 1% of the global population. Now if they were dumping chemical waste in the town's water supply that is one thing, but a couple frivolous lawsuits and a bunch of assinine open letters that pissed off a bunch of geeks hardly seems like a good reason to make my family suffer needlessly.
You obviously have no concept of sacrifice, humility, and honor if you would willingly put your pride before the well being of your own family. Your priorities are completely out of whack.
Why Chrisd thinks he is punishing SCO with this is beyond me. All that is going to happen here is some poor engineer who is making the best of a bad situation and looking out for priority number one, his or her family. Are these the people Damage should be punishing? Not all of us were lucky enough to get in on the linux IPO's. Not everybody has had the good fortune Chris has. And to think I used to admire this man. Sorry Chris, in my opinion, you are a traitor to your fellow geeks by punishing them for the actions of a few suits at SCO. I wish we were all as fortunate as you.
Honestly, I am very sorry that this whole situation has come to this.
I think the answer is a little bit of all of the above. In general, I am a proponent of the H1B program, but I do have some serious reservations. Most of the H1B's I work with are very intelligent people that would be difficult to replace even in the current job market. I believe the root of this problem is our educational system in the states, but thats a whole other debate.
I've been looking for a good Oracle DBA job for a while now and its been difficult. I'm not very happy where I am. In this situation, the H1B program definitely hinders my search, but I really don't think by all that much. Most people who oppose the H1B program talk about just this kind of scenario and their argument has merit. However, the biggest problem I have with the H1B program is the way some employers abuse the hell out of the process. My division has been undergoing constant layoffs for over two years and during this process our managment has really been treating us very poorly, but it pales in comparison to the way the H1B's are treated. More than a few have received veiled threats that they will do what they are asked or they could be laid off and promptly kicked out of the country. They've forced people in to very long hours, constantly cut benefits, in general become hostile. The consensus among most of the H1B's is to keep their mouth shut and do what is asked. It is in this regard that I think the system needs an overhaul. I do not, however, know the solution.
Yeah, I was aware of that. We have a few H1B's that have been working on getting citizenship for what seems like an eternity to them.
What's more lets shine a light on the crux of the matter. Economic downturns always bring heightened nationalism, immigrant bashing, and typically self-destructive policies on trade and immigration. Given the current political climate and the significance of today's date only heightens that sense of national pride. This, in my opinion, is a dangerous position to be in. This is the kind of climate that breeds "Brown Shirts".
I think the important distinction that must be drawn is the fundamental difference between H1B type workers and immigrants. In my opinion, an immigrant is someone actively pursuing citizenship and should be considered an "American". As the descendant of Scots, Irish, and French Canadians I've heard the stories of persecution and discrimination my great grandparents underwent during the Great Depression because they were "stealing" jobs from "real" Americans.
In my opinion, the hiring policy, this man ran in to is just plain wrong regardless of legality. Does this mean that the US should adopt a similar policy? I don't think so, I believe the outcome would not impart a favorable change on the state of the economy. If my company lost all its H1B's we would be in serious trouble. I'm pretty confident we could not fill the vacant jobs with "real" americans, even in today's job market. Of course, I could be wrong.
Anyone who claims they never encountered any violence whatsoever is lying. Not only do I claim bullshit I contend that you have exhibited violent behavior.
You never got frustrated as a child and hit a playmate or sibling? (How do you know? Children as young as 6 months are quite capable and known to exhibit such behavior) You never got in a fight as a kid or even witnessed one? You never played cops & robbers or had a play sword fight? You never watched Tom & Jerry or Looney Tunes? You never got mad enough that you broke something? These are all forms of violence either exhibited by you or for you.
Violence isn't just the gruesome stuff you see on NYPD Blue or in the latest John Woo flick. Violence is a part of EVERYBODY's world. Even Ghandi recognized that violence was a basic human compulsion that had to be controlled.
I think your entire post is complete bullshit.
It shouldn't be for a 10 year old.
You obviously never had a sibling.
Seriously violence is all around us it touches everything we do and always will. It is the ultimate trump card, it shapes the world in which we live more than anything. Great passion, honor, valor, sacrifice, spirituality, artistic expression are often born from violence. Violence and blood shed move Picasso to paint Guernica.
Does this mean violence is a good thing, certainly not. Violence in all its forms is part of human nature and it always will be. A child only months old is capable of violence not because it is learned behavior, but because it is second nature.
Children of all ages need to be exposed to some violence in an age appropriate manner so that they may learn what is acceptable and when.
The problem isn't teaching kids to be violent, its not teaching them restraint and control.
OK, I know what you're talking about because its happened to me, BUT its not a good excuse at all. In fact, its absolutely retarded. Sure, my raise popped me in to the next tax bracket. Sure I was technically making SLIGHTLY less. However, I bought a house and had a baby in the same year so the deductions went up significantly.
A raise is a raise and in most corporate environments they cap how much of a raise you can get. I've never heard of an employer agreeing to skip your raise this year and tack it on to next year's.
Optimally, what you would want to do is download the songs, and then mail the artists a nice crisp $2 bill (Or coin, or whatever) along with a letter explaining WHY you are mailing them money. That way you get the music, the record company gets boycotted, AND the band makes money...more money than they would if you bought the CD.
Make sure you put your real return address on the envelope so the subpoena can find you that much easier.
Oh thats easy. P - H - B
LOL!
Don't forget the Cube and the iMacs, Lots of wasted space in those bad boys.
Time to meta-moderate. I can't understand how this is off-topic.
;) I was kind of hoping you'd have some MP3's or Oggs or something.
Anyways, Ernie Balls are good strings. What a great site.
I was joking. And yes you are correct.
Well, he could always convince the others with his finely tuned debating skills.
Shit, we're screwed.
All we need is one slashdotter on the jury and SCO is doomed. I just hope it isn't the penis bird man, the Natalie Portman stalker, or the grits fetishist.
I can see Boies during voire dire.
Boies: "Have you ever read Slashdot?"
Juror: uh.......yeah
Boies: "Your honor I move to have this juror excused."
Juror: "But all I ever post is hot grits and natalie portman posts."
Boies: "Oh, sorry your honor. We'll keep him."