> Samsung isn't necessarily friendly to AOSP, but they do make their own SoC (Exynos) so at least > Samsung isn't hamstrung by another manufacturer when making drivers. They also have a pretty > good history for long-term updates.
You're fucking joking. Samsung made noises about "the community" but then did nothing to help Cyanogenmod, to the extent that pretty much all the developers gave up on porting CM to the Exynos versions of the S3. The Exynos is a case in point - Samsung refuse point blank in handing over any docs/source, which means the Exynos version of CM sucks compared to the Qualcomm version.
In terms of updates - it's now August 2013; Android 4.2 source was released last October, 4.3 recently, so guess which version of Android this "flagship" product is running? That's right - 4.1. They've promised 4.2 several times and each time they miss it. As soon as it turns up people are going to go "Huh? 4.2?".
How do you know it was not Qualcomm who did this?
Remember the hoopla about getting Java GPL with a classpoint excpetion? Adobe were the assholes with some of its graphics rendering and fonts which made up a full.6% of the source code held the rest hostage.
Qualcomm and ARM have patents and part of the agreement is you have to make it closed source so competitors do not steal our ideas BS or whatever Samsung had to sign in order to make its own chip.
We do not know. But what I do know this problem is dramatic in the hardware world and why we can't have great drivers for things like ATI cards. ATI wants to help but they outsourced and contracted some of the work to others who are being assholes when it comes to copyright.
Why aren't Nvidia drivers opensourced? You can thank the MPAA and h.264 consortium for that! You want hardware accelerated video? You make em closed source etc.
The whole idea to charge money is to be inconvenient for someone has to loose something in order to gain a limited resource whether service or a product.
It exists because with finite resources those who really need it are willing to sacrifice to get it. Our brains are wired to be greedy too in order to get ahead by forcing people to give up everything for you means you make more money. Money is a form and way to keep track.
However, realistically this is not a bad thing per say as we would all starve. No farmer is going to get up at 4am and bust his butt for your egg mcmuffin you ate this morning from the goodness of his heart right? No other humans demand he sacrifice to pay his mortgage, bills, and healthcare and you too get breakfast but had to give something up for it as well.
Copyright though is artificial. Unlike food, it is created a limited resource by default so you can sacrifice more of your lives for the few who own it so they can stroke their egos by getting it in the form of money from other people.
Thank God for Mozilla. You are right but I like corporate competition to opensource too. I know people love bashing Firefox on here recently, but Chrome has made Firefox much lighter and faster.
Have you tried Firefox 3.6 on an older system. Wow does it suck and I never realized how bloated it was and how slow its javascript is compared to modern Firefox and Chrome.
PCs in 1999 crashed all the fucking time too if you were not blessed with a Windows 2000 RC build. Windows 98 and ME were shit and needed to be reinstalled each year if you did not want to wait 4 minutes for each boot. Remember?
Apple computers would not crash as often with macos classic and were more reliable, and with MacOSX (almost finished in beta) was solid and had Linux reliability!
Apple supported Apache, Samba, posix utils, and eventually even X, and other opensource and common standards in its day.
I am not a mac fan at all. I am using a PC typing this but MS in comparison did IIS, powershell, their own remote access RDP system, and so on. They reinvented standard things to their own liking when making Windows 2000 and XP.
When Apple became powerful then they started to resemble more of old microsoft. But at least they were higher quality. Both both MS and Apple being powerful are bad. MS was cheaper and terrible quality when they were king. Apple was better quality, but very expensive when they were king so to speak. Both had terrible customer lockin systems in the end. MS was more business lockin and to this day why we have IE 6 and IE 8 stuck on corporate systems holding HTML 5 back. Apple used Itunes to lock their users in.
Google might be next but I hope Windows Phone, Mozilla, and even the next generation of Apple products keep them in their place. Lets hope.
Yeah, back in the day is a warning. You're just too interested in fanboyism to notice what I was saying. Failure to support backwards compatibility and the miserable way their devices are locked down are my #1 complaints, although others might not agree with that. His 'war on Android' with patent battles continues even after his death. There's more.
I remember a time when Macs outlived PCs in terms of upgrades. Shit you could run Netscape 1.0 on a 1985 mac! System 7 even ran on it if you used just a floppy.
The backwards compatibility and locked down happened later and today mac users are SOL after 3 years and I laugh when I read XP loyalists saying how dare you not support me after only 11 years!!
Apple was nicer when they were not as powerful. Yes they make expensive stuff but they at least supported the txt format properly as MS did everything possible not to follow standards on purpose to make everything on a non dos computer look like crap! Dos aint done until Lotus wont run remember?
Which means Chrome's private key needs to be stored in Chrome itself (unless you want to start shipping everything off to Google for server-side processing), and so can be plucked out of the binary for decryption purposes.
What is wrong with that? That is how any e-commerce site works. Just make sure SSL is on the process. You can actually have just the public keys generated each time after an install encrypt it. The only time the private key would be used is if someone imported the data during a re-image or a refresh.
They only get the public keys generated to unlock it. The private key is never uploaded to a users computer. Instead the data is sent to Google and comes back in a SSL datastream.
If your browser can read the passwords and use them on the web, so can a local user. No surprise. Unless you set a master password (firefox offers this, not sure about chrome), there's no way to fix this. It's just how computers work.
Sure they can.
1. Use cloud based passwords encrypted with your forms autofill in. Problem solved and use SSL to make sure it is encrypted. 2. Encrypt the damn passwords if you store it locally. During a re-install create new public keys and have a C.A. issue a masterkey. This way it still can be recovered during an import and a Mozilla or google server can then use the private key to unlock the previous password and then re-encrypt it for the newer public keys.
Viola. Easy to do. This way if an evil macro runs or malware hits the only thing they will see are encrypted jargon when they read the passwords.
Even then many corporate users on laptops have local admin rights anyway.
Fucking drives me crazy to see clients do this, but without it helpdesk gets inundated with calls saying "Help I can't install my printer or print directions to the airport from the hotel printer etc."
As a common security practice we always re-image each computer from a terminated employee before handing it back out to someone else but still the security issue is more of any macro or malware can read it without elevated privileges.
If it is run under you it has full access to appdata in your profile. Therefore no escalation tricks are needed and your AV software wont even detect it either.
The issue is not someone who is casually walking by your computer and getting your password.
The issue is anything run as "you" has full access without a UAC prompt or gksudo. A clever JS exploit can get this as you do not need to be admin to read the fucking password.
As someone else said here AnnualReport.docx from your boss who actually never sent it can run a virus/macro that can easily obtain it. Infact, I bet your AV software wont even detect it as it can get the passwords easily without any hacks whatsoever!
Yes only a local admin can read it *if* he/she is not you, but as you it is ripe for the taking.
In the coming weeks we will see this flaw in infected Javascript and flash ads as malware writers use ad servers these days in legit websites now that this knowledge is widely known. Why can't the password be cloud based?
Still less than 50% of all web visitors have a browser that is capable of reading HTML 5 because of IE.
Therefore it needs to be ignored if you do not want to drive IE users away to competitors. At this point IE 8 is tied to Windows 7 and it wont go away until 2019 when the corps finally leave. They are locked at that version for their apps.
Vista and XP users will still carry on long after support ends and will demand your site works with their older versions of IE at 8 and 9. IE 6 is still very popular too and you can't ignore them if you develop business websites.
Compared to old Microsoft he surely was a godsend at least in user quality and we were excited about having a unix that worked on the desktop that was fucking gorgeous for its time.
My point is you can't trust them once they are in absolute power. My views of MS warmed up after Windows 7, Office 2010, and IE 9 a few years ago as I saw them as their best products in a long time.... then came Windows 8:-(
But because they are no longer a gorilla in the room it is not as threatening as consumers have choice now. Apple is not cool anymore here on slashdot like they were 10 years ago.
And after 2 years, he still hasn't. We keep hearing hype, but where's the proof? Apple should be in front of the next revolution (dismembering STBs and their fees) but no, that looks to be Roku because Apple's longstanding effort (Apple TV) is and continues to be half-hearted. This guy seems to be by the numbers type of guy, an accountant, and no Jobs. Jobs was an asshole, but he was an asshole that got things done. We already seen Apple without a ruthless asshole in the past and it's not pretty.
So don't tell me what Apple knows better, what is it doing better? Microsoft has the entrenchment of apps to rely on, Apple not so much.
He hasn't. It has been 2 years now and the only thing he has done was get rid of graphics to aplease the anti-skuemorphism crowd with a METRO clone of flat, colorless, no shininess, tile like icons for IOS 7 with cheap plastic phones knockoffs of their original.
There was a time back in 1999 in the good old days of slashdot and IT where I had a debate with someone over how evil MS and Bill Gates were.
Back then MS was unstoppable! If investors found out MS was going to compete agaisnt you then your stock would be shorted as no one could stop the all powerful Microsoft!
I mentioned if Steve Jobs won the world would be heaven. No more expensive crap. Free standards galore. No more DRM with.WMV and IE 5.5 dictating the future of computing. Apple was cheered as the good guys trying to stop the DRM madness of RealPlayer and Windows Media Player. Remember?Fastforward today and I think Steve Jobs is fucking a more greedy monster than Bill Gates ever was. True their products are better quality and more UI and consumer data is put into products before being released, but man they charge and lock you in.
What Changed? Itunes gave Apple a financial incentive for DRM and lock in. Apple monopolized the mp3 market and almost the phone before Android did a quick rescue. Their Macs are falling behind as more effort is on consumer gadgets these days.
Would I want a Google only world? Fuck no equally
Chrome's webkit is not W3C compliant compared to IE and Firefox with its extensions and some sites that only work with Chrome when you turn on HTML 5. If they owned 93% of the market ala IE 6 from 2003, you can bet javascript would go bye bye for whateverthefuck script that they invented, sites would not render properly if you used advanced features, and Google would ignore W3C and put Google Store as the master of the e-commerce universe!
I would not want just Android phones either streaming ads from Google servers 100% of the time, nor would shop owners want to pay 300% more for ad revenue as they would ahve a monopoly on this.
Business and greed is evil. We are all greedy and evil ourselves with a shade of gray. It is our human nature sadly. Competition frees us, though I do have to say I am disappointed in all web browsers recently and kind of miss Firefox when is owned just 15% of the market but maybe that is because IE sucked so bad then it seemed like heaven?
With IE 6, 7, and 8 making up the majority of web traffic it doesn't matter about the date range as these browsers will be used for a very long time. Especially in the corporate arena where the beancounters just spent millions locking their IE 6 apps to IE 8!
I'm pretty sure it has to be at a reasonable salary determined by a 'prevailing wage'.
"The prevailing wage rate is defined as the average wage paid to similarly employed workers in a specific occupation in the area of intended employment." : http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/wages.cfm
I.e. They would have to offer her the job, at the average market value wage and if she declined they could then seek H1B1 employees. That's my understanding at least.
Mod up!
That is what I am trying to say. Since no American will agree to that wage with that experience then it makes since to bring in an H1b1 visa. Not pay more money which is what every slashdotter has been saying. Business does not work that way when you have a set budget by accounting.
So the fact she is expensive means no job. That is business 101
I am surprised you were not modded to -1 like I do when I mention security improvements in Windows on slashdot:-)
Firefox ESR has the latest security fixes backported. Infact, I use Firefox ESR as I do not like plugins breaking every month or the new download manager. If the hack was in Firefox ESR then it is in Firefox 22 as well.
FYI Firefox ESR 17 is on the 7th release already and with this news I expect 8th very soon to fix this bug.
But they are never outsourced or replaced by cheaper workers. HR is also always immune since they have the power to give anyone a bad performance review.
The big 4 help with audits but rarely will a CPA outsource a fellow accountant. They are important after all... but IT fuck those cost centers they will not make more than I do!!
Maybe IT should downgrade them to Office 2000 and get rid of all their specialized software calling it an expense and see what happens? After all IT is insulated from that position and will get a nice bonus for being so smart and saving money right?
If we put everyone under this light then would a McDonalds have to hire anyone with a college degree?
Only before they bring in an H1B employee.
The whole H1B employee thing is an "immigration loophole" where a company gets permission to import someone who otherwise couldn't immigrate because that company needs their unique skillset that can't be found in the united states.
Its not supposed to be "discount asian labor".
H1Bs are a market distortion. The solution to H1B is simple. Make them expensive, make the cost of bringing one in double or triple what the job actually pays. So if they're going to pay the H1B 25,000 make it cost another 25 to 50 k just for the priviledge of doing the end run around immigration to get them into the country.
Remember, these guys are very special, nobody in america is qualified to do their jobs -- that why we had to go abroad to find them in the first place. So I'm pretty sure anyone who really needs such rarified skills will pay up, or perhaps (more likely) discover suddenly that there are plenty of qualified americans after all, or perhaps slightly under qualfied americans who can be inexpensively trained. Either way, they didn't really need to import anyone after all.
Well then do not be surprised then when corps will close their IT shops in America and do it remotely with Windows Desktop. Only have 1 guy in the US office to do things physically for $12/hr etc.
In a global economy is it is discount Asian labor. If you can't lower your wage then I will find someone else who will. I know I made enemies with my post with these stories but from the management side of things we can't find qualified applicants! The average wage of a programmer is only $45,000 a year and yet these guys expect to make $60k a year!!
That is the H1B1 wage and if Americans were willing to work for the average $45k a year that HR gets from the state then we would not have to use such a program.Someone with 15 years experience is nto qualified because she is overqualified for the position and accounting and HR wont let me pay more.
I would like to know as every single employer does this?
My exwife is unemployable for filing a workmans comp. I told her DO NOT DO IT for this reason.
The laws in this country favor the employer heavily for the past 5 decades. I really do not think this is illegal at all sadly as the law just talks about civil rights and contract enforcement in terms of hiring.
So then the better question is does over qualification = not qualified?
I know as I.T. workers on slashdot we want to yell YES!
But in a more balanced approach with the employers eye I would say no. Remember they count too in this? A McDonald's who hires chefs would not stay in business for long as another who hires fry cooks instead.
Remember it is not about who can *do* the job, but rather to the employer one who can *do* the job *cost effectively* in order to *raise revenue*. Isn't that why we were hired? To make someone else money? If we can't do that then we all have 0 jobs.
Maybe someone who works in law or H.R. can reply as I am curious to know? Is over-qualification means the same thing as non qualified?
If she was "overqualified" then there's even more reason why the H1B shouldn't have gotten the job. In this case, it is illegal to "filter" her.
The law is quite clear - you can't bring someone in on an H1B unless an already work legal qualified candidate cannot be found. If she's overqualified, she's still qualified. Expensive or not, it would be illegal to hire an H1B over her.
Hold on there cowboy. That is a very risky slope and a disaster for anyone who needs to make a hiring decision.
If we put everyone under this light then would a McDonalds have to hire anyone with a college degree? What about a retired CEO? The turnover would be disasterous and nothing could function.
I knew someone who has a grocery store manager and they never hire college grads for non managerial positions. They have lost so much money with people quitting a week after training that is was cheaper to be short handed while they waited for a loser instead.
Over qualification is just as much as a valid reason as an under-qualification. In fact, I would argue under qualified applicants are trainable if they have a college degree and would be a better bet as in a month could start doing things for a cheaper price and would take 2 years before he or she would pack bags and give the 2 weeks.
Remember each employee is hired because they bring in more money than they cost. This is also why I.T. is being shit canned this past decade and pissing off slashdotters as much as H1B1 visa stories. IT workers do not bring in as much money as they cost according to the excel spreadsheets and is difficult to prove.
Slashdot Mirror
> Samsung isn't necessarily friendly to AOSP, but they do make their own SoC (Exynos) so at least
> Samsung isn't hamstrung by another manufacturer when making drivers. They also have a pretty
> good history for long-term updates.
You're fucking joking. Samsung made noises about "the community" but then did nothing to help Cyanogenmod, to the extent that pretty much all the developers gave up on porting CM to the Exynos versions of the S3. The Exynos is a case in point - Samsung refuse point blank in handing over any docs/source, which means the Exynos version of CM sucks compared to the Qualcomm version.
In terms of updates - it's now August 2013; Android 4.2 source was released last October, 4.3 recently, so guess which version of Android this "flagship" product is running? That's right - 4.1. They've promised 4.2 several times and each time they miss it. As soon as it turns up people are going to go "Huh? 4.2?".
How do you know it was not Qualcomm who did this?
Remember the hoopla about getting Java GPL with a classpoint excpetion? Adobe were the assholes with some of its graphics rendering and fonts which made up a full .6% of the source code held the rest hostage.
Qualcomm and ARM have patents and part of the agreement is you have to make it closed source so competitors do not steal our ideas BS or whatever Samsung had to sign in order to make its own chip.
We do not know. But what I do know this problem is dramatic in the hardware world and why we can't have great drivers for things like ATI cards. ATI wants to help but they outsourced and contracted some of the work to others who are being assholes when it comes to copyright.
Why aren't Nvidia drivers opensourced? You can thank the MPAA and h.264 consortium for that! You want hardware accelerated video? You make em closed source etc.
The whole idea to charge money is to be inconvenient for someone has to loose something in order to gain a limited resource whether service or a product.
It exists because with finite resources those who really need it are willing to sacrifice to get it. Our brains are wired to be greedy too in order to get ahead by forcing people to give up everything for you means you make more money. Money is a form and way to keep track.
However, realistically this is not a bad thing per say as we would all starve. No farmer is going to get up at 4am and bust his butt for your egg mcmuffin you ate this morning from the goodness of his heart right? No other humans demand he sacrifice to pay his mortgage, bills, and healthcare and you too get breakfast but had to give something up for it as well.
Copyright though is artificial. Unlike food, it is created a limited resource by default so you can sacrifice more of your lives for the few who own it so they can stroke their egos by getting it in the form of money from other people.
Thank God for Mozilla. You are right but I like corporate competition to opensource too. I know people love bashing Firefox on here recently, but Chrome has made Firefox much lighter and faster.
Have you tried Firefox 3.6 on an older system. Wow does it suck and I never realized how bloated it was and how slow its javascript is compared to modern Firefox and Chrome.
That all happened in just 2 years too.
PCs in 1999 crashed all the fucking time too if you were not blessed with a Windows 2000 RC build. Windows 98 and ME were shit and needed to be reinstalled each year if you did not want to wait 4 minutes for each boot. Remember?
Apple computers would not crash as often with macos classic and were more reliable, and with MacOSX (almost finished in beta) was solid and had Linux reliability!
Apple supported Apache, Samba, posix utils, and eventually even X, and other opensource and common standards in its day.
I am not a mac fan at all. I am using a PC typing this but MS in comparison did IIS, powershell, their own remote access RDP system, and so on. They reinvented standard things to their own liking when making Windows 2000 and XP.
When Apple became powerful then they started to resemble more of old microsoft. But at least they were higher quality. Both both MS and Apple being powerful are bad. MS was cheaper and terrible quality when they were king. Apple was better quality, but very expensive when they were king so to speak. Both had terrible customer lockin systems in the end. MS was more business lockin and to this day why we have IE 6 and IE 8 stuck on corporate systems holding HTML 5 back. Apple used Itunes to lock their users in.
Google might be next but I hope Windows Phone, Mozilla, and even the next generation of Apple products keep them in their place. Lets hope.
So is Unix, Posix utilities, Apache, cups, Samba, PDF, HTML 5, and other technologies.
Stop being so proprietary Apple with your own standards!
Yeah, back in the day is a warning. You're just too interested in fanboyism to notice what I was saying. Failure to support backwards compatibility and the miserable way their devices are locked down are my #1 complaints, although others might not agree with that. His 'war on Android' with patent battles continues even after his death. There's more.
I remember a time when Macs outlived PCs in terms of upgrades. Shit you could run Netscape 1.0 on a 1985 mac! System 7 even ran on it if you used just a floppy.
The backwards compatibility and locked down happened later and today mac users are SOL after 3 years and I laugh when I read XP loyalists saying how dare you not support me after only 11 years!!
Apple was nicer when they were not as powerful. Yes they make expensive stuff but they at least supported the txt format properly as MS did everything possible not to follow standards on purpose to make everything on a non dos computer look like crap! Dos aint done until Lotus wont run remember?
Which means Chrome's private key needs to be stored in Chrome itself (unless you want to start shipping everything off to Google for server-side processing), and so can be plucked out of the binary for decryption purposes.
What is wrong with that? That is how any e-commerce site works. Just make sure SSL is on the process. You can actually have just the public keys generated each time after an install encrypt it. The only time the private key would be used is if someone imported the data during a re-image or a refresh.
The users do not need it.
They only get the public keys generated to unlock it. The private key is never uploaded to a users computer. Instead the data is sent to Google and comes back in a SSL datastream.
If your browser can read the passwords and use them on the web, so can a local user. No surprise. Unless you set a master password (firefox offers this, not sure about chrome), there's no way to fix this. It's just how computers work.
Sure they can.
1. Use cloud based passwords encrypted with your forms autofill in. Problem solved and use SSL to make sure it is encrypted.
2. Encrypt the damn passwords if you store it locally. During a re-install create new public keys and have a C.A. issue a masterkey. This way it still can be recovered during an import and a Mozilla or google server can then use the private key to unlock the previous password and then re-encrypt it for the newer public keys.
Viola. Easy to do.
This way if an evil macro runs or malware hits the only thing they will see are encrypted jargon when they read the passwords.
Even then many corporate users on laptops have local admin rights anyway.
Fucking drives me crazy to see clients do this, but without it helpdesk gets inundated with calls saying "Help I can't install my printer or print directions to the airport from the hotel printer etc."
As a common security practice we always re-image each computer from a terminated employee before handing it back out to someone else but still the security issue is more of any macro or malware can read it without elevated privileges.
If it is run under you it has full access to appdata in your profile. Therefore no escalation tricks are needed and your AV software wont even detect it either.
The issue is not someone who is casually walking by your computer and getting your password.
The issue is anything run as "you" has full access without a UAC prompt or gksudo. A clever JS exploit can get this as you do not need to be admin to read the fucking password.
As someone else said here AnnualReport.docx from your boss who actually never sent it can run a virus/macro that can easily obtain it. Infact, I bet your AV software wont even detect it as it can get the passwords easily without any hacks whatsoever!
Yes only a local admin can read it *if* he/she is not you, but as you it is ripe for the taking.
In the coming weeks we will see this flaw in infected Javascript and flash ads as malware writers use ad servers these days in legit websites now that this knowledge is widely known. Why can't the password be cloud based?
Still less than 50% of all web visitors have a browser that is capable of reading HTML 5 because of IE.
Therefore it needs to be ignored if you do not want to drive IE users away to competitors. At this point IE 8 is tied to Windows 7 and it wont go away until 2019 when the corps finally leave. They are locked at that version for their apps.
Vista and XP users will still carry on long after support ends and will demand your site works with their older versions of IE at 8 and 9. IE 6 is still very popular too and you can't ignore them if you develop business websites.
Compared to old Microsoft he surely was a godsend at least in user quality and we were excited about having a unix that worked on the desktop that was fucking gorgeous for its time.
My point is you can't trust them once they are in absolute power. My views of MS warmed up after Windows 7, Office 2010, and IE 9 a few years ago as I saw them as their best products in a long time. ... then came Windows 8 :-(
But because they are no longer a gorilla in the room it is not as threatening as consumers have choice now. Apple is not cool anymore here on slashdot like they were 10 years ago.
Well if you browse without javascript as some in slashdot are advocating you will have the same crappy experience anyway :-)
And after 2 years, he still hasn't. We keep hearing hype, but where's the proof? Apple should be in front of the next revolution (dismembering STBs and their fees) but no, that looks to be Roku because Apple's longstanding effort (Apple TV) is and continues to be half-hearted. This guy seems to be by the numbers type of guy, an accountant, and no Jobs. Jobs was an asshole, but he was an asshole that got things done. We already seen Apple without a ruthless asshole in the past and it's not pretty.
So don't tell me what Apple knows better, what is it doing better? Microsoft has the entrenchment of apps to rely on, Apple not so much.
He hasn't. It has been 2 years now and the only thing he has done was get rid of graphics to aplease the anti-skuemorphism crowd with a METRO clone of flat, colorless, no shininess, tile like icons for IOS 7 with cheap plastic phones knockoffs of their original.
There was a time back in 1999 in the good old days of slashdot and IT where I had a debate with someone over how evil MS and Bill Gates were.
Back then MS was unstoppable! If investors found out MS was going to compete agaisnt you then your stock would be shorted as no one could stop the all powerful Microsoft!
I mentioned if Steve Jobs won the world would be heaven. No more expensive crap. Free standards galore. No more DRM with .WMV and IE 5.5 dictating the future of computing. Apple was cheered as the good guys trying to stop the DRM madness of RealPlayer and Windows Media Player. Remember?Fastforward today and I think Steve Jobs is fucking a more greedy monster than Bill Gates ever was. True their products are better quality and more UI and consumer data is put into products before being released, but man they charge and lock you in.
What Changed?
Itunes gave Apple a financial incentive for DRM and lock in. Apple monopolized the mp3 market and almost the phone before Android did a quick rescue. Their Macs are falling behind as more effort is on consumer gadgets these days.
Would I want a Google only world? Fuck no equally
Chrome's webkit is not W3C compliant compared to IE and Firefox with its extensions and some sites that only work with Chrome when you turn on HTML 5. If they owned 93% of the market ala IE 6 from 2003, you can bet javascript would go bye bye for whateverthefuck script that they invented, sites would not render properly if you used advanced features, and Google would ignore W3C and put Google Store as the master of the e-commerce universe!
I would not want just Android phones either streaming ads from Google servers 100% of the time, nor would shop owners want to pay 300% more for ad revenue as they would ahve a monopoly on this.
Business and greed is evil. We are all greedy and evil ourselves with a shade of gray. It is our human nature sadly. Competition frees us, though I do have to say I am disappointed in all web browsers recently and kind of miss Firefox when is owned just 15% of the market but maybe that is because IE sucked so bad then it seemed like heaven?
With IE 6, 7, and 8 making up the majority of web traffic it doesn't matter about the date range as these browsers will be used for a very long time. Especially in the corporate arena where the beancounters just spent millions locking their IE 6 apps to IE 8!
IE 6 only uses 40 megs of ram ... just saying
I'm pretty sure it has to be at a reasonable salary determined by a 'prevailing wage'.
"The prevailing wage rate is defined as the average wage paid to similarly employed workers in a specific occupation in the area of intended employment." : http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/wages.cfm
I.e. They would have to offer her the job, at the average market value wage and if she declined they could then seek H1B1 employees. That's my understanding at least.
Mod up!
That is what I am trying to say. Since no American will agree to that wage with that experience then it makes since to bring in an H1b1 visa. Not pay more money which is what every slashdotter has been saying. Business does not work that way when you have a set budget by accounting.
So the fact she is expensive means no job. That is business 101
I am surprised you were not modded to -1 like I do when I mention security improvements in Windows on slashdot :-)
Firefox ESR has the latest security fixes backported. Infact, I use Firefox ESR as I do not like plugins breaking every month or the new download manager. If the hack was in Firefox ESR then it is in Firefox 22 as well.
FYI Firefox ESR 17 is on the 7th release already and with this news I expect 8th very soon to fix this bug.
But they are never outsourced or replaced by cheaper workers. HR is also always immune since they have the power to give anyone a bad performance review.
The big 4 help with audits but rarely will a CPA outsource a fellow accountant. They are important after all ... but IT fuck those cost centers they will not make more than I do!!
Maybe IT should downgrade them to Office 2000 and get rid of all their specialized software calling it an expense and see what happens? After all IT is insulated from that position and will get a nice bonus for being so smart and saving money right?
If we put everyone under this light then would a McDonalds have to hire anyone with a college degree?
Only before they bring in an H1B employee.
The whole H1B employee thing is an "immigration loophole" where a company gets permission to import someone who otherwise couldn't immigrate because that company needs their unique skillset that can't be found in the united states.
Its not supposed to be "discount asian labor".
H1Bs are a market distortion. The solution to H1B is simple. Make them expensive, make the cost of bringing one in double or triple what the job actually pays. So if they're going to pay the H1B 25,000 make it cost another 25 to 50 k just for the priviledge of doing the end run around immigration to get them into the country.
Remember, these guys are very special, nobody in america is qualified to do their jobs -- that why we had to go abroad to find them in the first place. So I'm pretty sure anyone who really needs such rarified skills will pay up, or perhaps (more likely) discover suddenly that there are plenty of qualified americans after all, or perhaps slightly under qualfied americans who can be inexpensively trained. Either way, they didn't really need to import anyone after all.
Well then do not be surprised then when corps will close their IT shops in America and do it remotely with Windows Desktop. Only have 1 guy in the US office to do things physically for $12/hr etc.
In a global economy is it is discount Asian labor. If you can't lower your wage then I will find someone else who will. I know I made enemies with my post with these stories but from the management side of things we can't find qualified applicants! The average wage of a programmer is only $45,000 a year and yet these guys expect to make $60k a year!!
That is the H1B1 wage and if Americans were willing to work for the average $45k a year that HR gets from the state then we would not have to use such a program.Someone with 15 years experience is nto qualified because she is overqualified for the position and accounting and HR wont let me pay more.
I would like to know as every single employer does this?
My exwife is unemployable for filing a workmans comp. I told her DO NOT DO IT for this reason.
The laws in this country favor the employer heavily for the past 5 decades. I really do not think this is illegal at all sadly as the law just talks about civil rights and contract enforcement in terms of hiring.
So then the better question is does over qualification = not qualified?
I know as I.T. workers on slashdot we want to yell YES!
But in a more balanced approach with the employers eye I would say no. Remember they count too in this? A McDonald's who hires chefs would not stay in business for long as another who hires fry cooks instead.
Remember it is not about who can *do* the job, but rather to the employer one who can *do* the job *cost effectively* in order to *raise revenue*. Isn't that why we were hired? To make someone else money? If we can't do that then we all have 0 jobs.
Maybe someone who works in law or H.R. can reply as I am curious to know? Is over-qualification means the same thing as non qualified?
If she was "overqualified" then there's even more reason why the H1B shouldn't have gotten the job. In this case, it is illegal to "filter" her.
The law is quite clear - you can't bring someone in on an H1B unless an already work legal qualified candidate cannot be found. If she's overqualified, she's still qualified. Expensive or not, it would be illegal to hire an H1B over her.
Hold on there cowboy. That is a very risky slope and a disaster for anyone who needs to make a hiring decision.
If we put everyone under this light then would a McDonalds have to hire anyone with a college degree? What about a retired CEO? The turnover would be disasterous and nothing could function.
I knew someone who has a grocery store manager and they never hire college grads for non managerial positions. They have lost so much money with people quitting a week after training that is was cheaper to be short handed while they waited for a loser instead.
Over qualification is just as much as a valid reason as an under-qualification. In fact, I would argue under qualified applicants are trainable if they have a college degree and would be a better bet as in a month could start doing things for a cheaper price and would take 2 years before he or she would pack bags and give the 2 weeks.
Remember each employee is hired because they bring in more money than they cost. This is also why I.T. is being shit canned this past decade and pissing off slashdotters as much as H1B1 visa stories. IT workers do not bring in as much money as they cost according to the excel spreadsheets and is difficult to prove.