This may be slightly OT but the above brings up a great point. Documentation for desktop Linux sucks. I know I will get flamed for stating so but it does. IMHO that is the single biggest reason more people are not using it on their desktop. I know people will start screaming RTFM! but that is my point, the "FM" consists of a shit load of HTML pages and "man" pages that you must sift through to find the smallest amount of information. From a user's perspective, if they want to get their PC on a network, they want to turn to the page that steps them through getting their PC on a network. They do not want to waste time reading half a dozen How-To's explaining the theory behind TCP/IP. Anyway, that is my opinion. Anyone that wants to help Linux become mainstream needs to spend just as much time documenting and they do coding.
Thanks VERY much for posting that! I almost clicked that link. The last thing I need today is HR stopping by my little cube wondering why I went to that site! Close call.
From the article:
"After Windows XP is launched in October, users will be directed to download a plug-in from Microsoft's Web site (www.microsoft.com) to make Java-based programs work."
I've been at a union job for just over a year now
on
Dial U for Union
·
· Score: 1
and as much as I'd like to bitch about the union and the way it screws me over I have little reason to.
Sure, there are the typical problems every/.er complains about. Some of my coworkers are lazy because they know it would be difficult for the company to fire them. I also do not have as much control over my career (I cannot negotiayte my own contract). And yes, there is a bit more bureaucracy crap.
After a year here though, I am noticing some real positives. When I compared my job to my non unionized friends & family I found a few interesting things out. I get 12 more days off a year then my wife who does development for a non union shop. I also work less hours, unless of course I am working a deadline. In which case I will most likely get paid overtime. My contract states I get a certain amount of training every year. So, even if the company is doing poorly they still have to supply that training to me. Since a new contract was just ratified a couple months ago I am guaranteed a raise for the next 3 years. I know some people who had to go without even standard of living raises this year, not because their employer was doing poorly but because their employer thought next year might be tough. My raises aren't big and fat by any means, but they are nice and definately help to raise my standard of living. My medical benefits are better than anyone I know. I pay less than one third of what my friends pay or what we would pay if we went through my wife's employer for insurance.
I know many people will still scream bloody murder when the topic of an IT union comes up. In my opinion though, as this new generation of IT workers gets a little older and starts to tire of 60+ hour work weeks, and they get families they will welcome some sort of entity to help bargain for them. I'm not saying you typical union but perhaps a guild of some sort. A worldwide body of IT proffesionals that sets guidelines for employment of it's members may be the way to go. A company that employees only 10 programmers probably would not interest a union much anyway.
I would bet that most of the people reading/. learned about computers because they wanted to play games. At least that's how I got started. Dad brought home the the blazing fat PC with 640K of memory and said "If you want to play games you figure it out yourself." I grabbed the DOS manual and started skimming. Show them a few simple games and throw in the web and you have their interest. From there they will learn the basics. If they want to get more out of it they will have that basic knowledge to figure most things out for themselves. Of course having a resource (you) on hand to answer questions would certainly help things.
No, because it is not reasonable or normal for CDR copying software to look inside the files that it copies. They have worked blindly for many many years. Thus, the bit cannot conceivable be said to "effectively control access".
It's bascially way too late (by more than a decade) to establish a brand new convention for writing CDs.
Its scary, but if folks like the RIAA can get a few of the more popular CD burning software people to implement something it would become the new convention.
Read the article and you would notice it is commenting specifically on IT unions, which are markedly different from the unions standard unions (ie. AFL-CIO).
It unions focus on the things IT workers want, which in your case appears to be money.
When I first started working with my current employer I looked at the union as a necessary evil. I was going to work for a very well respected company in my city and should get some good experience out of it so I figured I would stick with it for at least a while.
Then the realization hit me. No matter how hard I worked I was not going to get much based on merit. Every year every employee gets the same percentage raise and the same perks. It made me start thinking why should I work hard? It doesn't pay off.
Like the article states, it's not all about money with a union. In IT we hear so much about switching jobs and making the Big Bucks. Yes, with a union you don't get the Big Bucks. But, I work 40 hours a week, I am guaranteed training, I have great benefits, I get paid overtime, and most importantly, I see my family much more than at previous jobs.
I could go on about the pros and cons here but what it comes down to is preference. With a union you tend to have more job security and more guaranteed perks and benefits. You may get paid more at a non-union shop but you don't have much solidarity if management mandates forced overtime (which would probably be unpaid if you are salaried) or other similar negative policies.
From what I have read in the past it appears many/. readers seem to be the single male variety so they would probably prefer the Big Bucks, more hours, more pay option over a union. To each his own I guess, but I love being home by 5:00 every day.
to be honest I am kind of scared. Even though MS has problems with the government right now they still have a huge amount of influence. If they seriously want to get some legislation going to hurt open source they can take it much farther than I think most/.ers give them credit. It seems like they are gearing up for some technological cleansing of some sort. Hell, who do you think the American people would believe if MS started running adds talking about how they were trying to protect the American Way from the evil H4ck3rs! There was a post earlier that talked about how the US has given corporations so much power. I would have to agree with that. If a corporation like MS wants the government to do something they can make it happen. I would think this is something the open source movement should keep an eye on. If they don't you may get your box confiscated by the Secret Police because of its OS. I may sound a little conspiracy theory happy, but I bet there are a lot of people in Europe who thought Hitler was just some psycho who would go away before he did any harm.
Phone calls are different altogether. Your employer can listen to business related calls you make, but anything personal is off limits. Yes, even if you use your work phone during work hours. If they monitor your phone line they are required to stop any monitoring if the call is personal. So if you start looking for another job and your employer catches wind of it because they listen to your phone conversations, call your lawyer. You just retired.
For example (and I am pulling numbers out of the air here, I forget what they actually are):
If I normally pay $25 a month for health care, and my employer would normally pay $175 a month, but I opt out, not only would I receive the $25 I don't have to pay, but I would have an additional $125 a month.
Thats great that your employer does that. Unfortunately, not all employers do. Even the ones that do, like yours, do not reimburse you the full amount they would pay. So you are still subsidizing other employees' health care. Unless you are really bad at math that is...
If I already have health insurance, I'm free to cancel it and take advantage of the employer-subsidized one. An investment opportunity is by definition open to all; I don't even have to cancel my existing brokerage account in order to take advantage of a 401(k).
I agree with your point about the investment opportunity, touche (or whatever). But with health insurance (as with a child care option) you would have a choice. If you do not want health care ou do not take it. You are still in essence helping to subsidize it for other employees. The same thing applies for child care. Your employer makes the decision to subsidize it so every employee pitches in so to speak. Those who wish to take advantage of it do. If you do not ave children you do not take advantage of it, just like if you do not want health insurance you do not take advantage of that.
Consequently, the benefits you mention available to all employees regardless of lifestyle choice. This does not apply to day care. Employers should not be in the business of subsidizing lifestyle choices.
So what you are saing is my employer should not provide a gym or subsidize a gym membership. I may have made a lifestyle choice to work out every day but why should that fat guy down the hall have to subsidize my membership? Employers are in the business of subsidizing lifestyle choices because that is what attracts employees. We could go so far as to say that even health maintenance is a lifestyle choice. So employers should stop offering health insurance?
Let me put it another way: Forgive me for putting words in your mouth, but I'd bet that if your employer said "we're gonna give all the childfrees, singles, and gay employees a $5000/year bonus because they don't jack up our group health premiums with pregnancy expenses and they never take [m|p]aternity leave", you'd be screaming blue murder that it was blatant discrimination based on a lifestyle choice.
First, I don't know where you live but child care is a hell of alot more than $5,000/yr.:-). I think your argument here is flawed. I pay more for my health insurance because I have family coverage. More than twice as much as a single employee. Also, I do not get paid paternity leave if I choose to take it. I must use vacation, then it becomes unpaid. I understand your point, but I pay more because I get more, so there is no point to give others a kickback. Unless we paid the same amount.
So why do you consider it OK to discriminate against people who choose not to have kids?
Understand that I'm not arguing against provision of day care per se. I'm arguing against a company that provides day care to its breeding employees, but nothing to its non-breeding employees.
I understand what you are saying but it seems to me you are assuming day care would be a completely free perk to employees with children. I doubt many companies do that. I do not want to assume too much from your words but in most situations day care is like health care. It is subsidized by the company to help defer the costs to employees who wish to use it. If you choose not to use it then you do not pay for. However, since the company subsidizes things like day care and health care, all employees are, in a sense, paying for it. Why is it OK with you if you help subsidize your co workers' health care but not OK to help subsidize child care? Simple, you do not use the child care. I wonder if you would feel the same way about health care or subsidized gym memberships if you did not use them?
First, as a family we cannot provide for her everything we want her to experience on a single income. Thus my wife and I both work. Second, a properly run day care has professionals who are there to teach my daughter the things we cannot teach her at home. There are other children there as well. This helps her to become a social person. She learns to interact with her peers, something she cannot get at home with just her mother and I.
Take 2 children, one who stays at home with mom or dad all the time and one who interacts with their peers and you will see a major difference in how they interact.
Try to imagine what you would be like if you spent 90% of your time with 1 or 2 other people who were a full generation removed from you. Now imagine those 1 or 2 people were completely responsible for the person you are to become. Kind of scary isn't it?
Employees using day care services can pay for it with lower salaries than single workers. Don't force me to subsidize your kids.
Companies will subsidize daycare to attract and keep employees. Just like they subsidize health care and offer investment opportunities to their employees. If you do not have children you do not participate in the daycare, just like if you already have health insurance you will not participate in the company's health insurance program.
Then why are you having kids?,
I'd like to ask your parents the same question.
Re:This sounds just like the University of Wiscons
on
Disconnected
·
· Score: 1
Wresch was the chair of the CIS Dept. at UW - Stevens Point up until '96 or 97', maybe 98'. Somewhere around there. The UW system has quite a few campuses around the state. I think it is safe to assume they left out the Stevens Point part because if wouldn't sound as prestigious.
Oh yeah, not everyone at the UW is obsessed with athletics. Somebody must have gotten picked last for playground kickball quite a bit to get a chip on their shoulder that big!
Slashdot Mirror
This may be slightly OT but the above brings up a great point. Documentation for desktop Linux sucks. I know I will get flamed for stating so but it does. IMHO that is the single biggest reason more people are not using it on their desktop.
I know people will start screaming RTFM! but that is my point, the "FM" consists of a shit load of HTML pages and "man" pages that you must sift through to find the smallest amount of information.
From a user's perspective, if they want to get their PC on a network, they want to turn to the page that steps them through getting their PC on a network. They do not want to waste time reading half a dozen How-To's explaining the theory behind TCP/IP.
Anyway, that is my opinion. Anyone that wants to help Linux become mainstream needs to spend just as much time documenting and they do coding.
Thanks VERY much for posting that! I almost clicked that link. The last thing I need today is HR stopping by my little cube wondering why I went to that site!
Close call.
From the article:
"After Windows XP is launched in October, users will be directed to download a plug-in from Microsoft's Web site (www.microsoft.com) to make Java-based programs work."
and as much as I'd like to bitch about the union and the way it screws me over I have little reason to.
/.er complains about. Some of my coworkers are lazy because they know it would be difficult for the company to fire them. I also do not have as much control over my career (I cannot negotiayte my own contract). And yes, there is a bit more bureaucracy crap.
Sure, there are the typical problems every
After a year here though, I am noticing some real positives. When I compared my job to my non unionized friends & family I found a few interesting things out. I get 12 more days off a year then my wife who does development for a non union shop. I also work less hours, unless of course I am working a deadline. In which case I will most likely get paid overtime. My contract states I get a certain amount of training every year. So, even if the company is doing poorly they still have to supply that training to me. Since a new contract was just ratified a couple months ago I am guaranteed a raise for the next 3 years. I know some people who had to go without even standard of living raises this year, not because their employer was doing poorly but because their employer thought next year might be tough. My raises aren't big and fat by any means, but they are nice and definately help to raise my standard of living. My medical benefits are better than anyone I know. I pay less than one third of what my friends pay or what we would pay if we went through my wife's employer for insurance.
I know many people will still scream bloody murder when the topic of an IT union comes up. In my opinion though, as this new generation of IT workers gets a little older and starts to tire of 60+ hour work weeks, and they get families they will welcome some sort of entity to help bargain for them. I'm not saying you typical union but perhaps a guild of some sort. A worldwide body of IT proffesionals that sets guidelines for employment of it's members may be the way to go. A company that employees only 10 programmers probably would not interest a union much anyway.
I would bet that most of the people reading /. learned about computers because they wanted to play games.
At least that's how I got started. Dad brought home the the blazing fat PC with 640K of memory and said "If you want to play games you figure it out yourself." I grabbed the DOS manual and started skimming.
Show them a few simple games and throw in the web and you have their interest. From there they will learn the basics. If they want to get more out of it they will have that basic knowledge to figure most things out for themselves. Of course having a resource (you) on hand to answer questions would certainly help things.
No, because it is not reasonable or normal for CDR copying software to look inside the files that it copies. They have worked blindly for many many years. Thus, the bit cannot conceivable be said to "effectively control access".
It's bascially way too late (by more than a decade) to establish a brand new convention for writing CDs.
Its scary, but if folks like the RIAA can get a few of the more popular CD burning software people to implement something it would become the new convention.
(I'm pretty sure I'm not making this up)
You are not.
Read the article and you would notice it is commenting specifically on IT unions, which are markedly different from the unions standard unions (ie. AFL-CIO).
It unions focus on the things IT workers want, which in your case appears to be money.
When I first started working with my current employer I looked at the union as a necessary evil. I was going to work for a very well respected company in my city and should get some good experience out of it so I figured I would stick with it for at least a while. Then the realization hit me. No matter how hard I worked I was not going to get much based on merit. Every year every employee gets the same percentage raise and the same perks. It made me start thinking why should I work hard? It doesn't pay off. /. readers seem to be the single male variety so they would probably prefer the Big Bucks, more hours, more pay option over a union. To each his own I guess, but I love being home by 5:00 every day.
Like the article states, it's not all about money with a union. In IT we hear so much about switching jobs and making the Big Bucks. Yes, with a union you don't get the Big Bucks. But, I work 40 hours a week, I am guaranteed training, I have great benefits, I get paid overtime, and most importantly, I see my family much more than at previous jobs.
I could go on about the pros and cons here but what it comes down to is preference. With a union you tend to have more job security and more guaranteed perks and benefits. You may get paid more at a non-union shop but you don't have much solidarity if management mandates forced overtime (which would probably be unpaid if you are salaried) or other similar negative policies.
From what I have read in the past it appears many
to be honest I am kind of scared. /.ers give them credit.
Even though MS has problems with the government right now they still have a huge amount of influence. If they seriously want to get some legislation going to hurt open source they can take it much farther than I think most
It seems like they are gearing up for some technological cleansing of some sort. Hell, who do you think the American people would believe if MS started running adds talking about how they were trying to protect the American Way from the evil H4ck3rs!
There was a post earlier that talked about how the US has given corporations so much power. I would have to agree with that. If a corporation like MS wants the government to do something they can make it happen.
I would think this is something the open source movement should keep an eye on. If they don't you may get your box confiscated by the Secret Police because of its OS.
I may sound a little conspiracy theory happy, but I bet there are a lot of people in Europe who thought Hitler was just some psycho who would go away before he did any harm.
Phone calls are different altogether.
Your employer can listen to business related calls you make, but anything personal is off limits.
Yes, even if you use your work phone during work hours. If they monitor your phone line they are required to stop any monitoring if the call is personal.
So if you start looking for another job and your employer catches wind of it because they listen to your phone conversations, call your lawyer. You just retired.
isn't a trilogy by definition only 3?
For example (and I am pulling numbers out of the air here, I forget what they actually are): If I normally pay $25 a month for health care, and my employer would normally pay $175 a month, but I opt out, not only would I receive the $25 I don't have to pay, but I would have an additional $125 a month.
Thats great that your employer does that. Unfortunately, not all employers do. Even the ones that do, like yours, do not reimburse you the full amount they would pay. So you are still subsidizing other employees' health care. Unless you are really bad at math that is...
If I already have health insurance, I'm free to cancel it and take advantage of the employer-subsidized one. An investment opportunity is by definition open to all; I don't even have to cancel my existing brokerage account in order to take advantage of a 401(k).
:-). I think your argument here is flawed. I pay more for my health insurance because I have family coverage. More than twice as much as a single employee. Also, I do not get paid paternity leave if I choose to take it. I must use vacation, then it becomes unpaid. I understand your point, but I pay more because I get more, so there is no point to give others a kickback. Unless we paid the same amount.
I agree with your point about the investment opportunity, touche (or whatever). But with health insurance (as with a child care option) you would have a choice. If you do not want health care ou do not take it. You are still in essence helping to subsidize it for other employees. The same thing applies for child care. Your employer makes the decision to subsidize it so every employee pitches in so to speak. Those who wish to take advantage of it do. If you do not ave children you do not take advantage of it, just like if you do not want health insurance you do not take advantage of that.
Consequently, the benefits you mention available to all employees regardless of lifestyle choice. This does not apply to day care. Employers should not be in the business of subsidizing lifestyle choices.
So what you are saing is my employer should not provide a gym or subsidize a gym membership. I may have made a lifestyle choice to work out every day but why should that fat guy down the hall have to subsidize my membership? Employers are in the business of subsidizing lifestyle choices because that is what attracts employees. We could go so far as to say that even health maintenance is a lifestyle choice. So employers should stop offering health insurance?
Let me put it another way: Forgive me for putting words in your mouth, but I'd bet that if your employer said "we're gonna give all the childfrees, singles, and gay employees a $5000/year bonus because they don't jack up our group health premiums with pregnancy expenses and they never take [m|p]aternity leave", you'd be screaming blue murder that it was blatant discrimination based on a lifestyle choice.
First, I don't know where you live but child care is a hell of alot more than $5,000/yr.
So why do you consider it OK to discriminate against people who choose not to have kids? Understand that I'm not arguing against provision of day care per se. I'm arguing against a company that provides day care to its breeding employees, but nothing to its non-breeding employees.
I understand what you are saying but it seems to me you are assuming day care would be a completely free perk to employees with children. I doubt many companies do that. I do not want to assume too much from your words but in most situations day care is like health care. It is subsidized by the company to help defer the costs to employees who wish to use it. If you choose not to use it then you do not pay for. However, since the company subsidizes things like day care and health care, all employees are, in a sense, paying for it.
Why is it OK with you if you help subsidize your co workers' health care but not OK to help subsidize child care? Simple, you do not use the child care. I wonder if you would feel the same way about health care or subsidized gym memberships if you did not use them?
I find it funny that most people who make statements like that assume their spouse will be the one staying home with the kids.
It also seems most people who make these statements like to post anonymously; afraid your future spouse might be reading here as well?
I always get a kick out pepole with your outlook.
Have you ever been to a "good" day care?
My daughter goes to day care for 2 main reasons:
First, as a family we cannot provide for her everything we want her to experience on a single income. Thus my wife and I both work.
Second, a properly run day care has professionals who are there to teach my daughter the things we cannot teach her at home. There are other children there as well. This helps her to become a social person. She learns to interact with her peers, something she cannot get at home with just her mother and I.
Take 2 children, one who stays at home with mom or dad all the time and one who interacts with their peers and you will see a major difference in how they interact. Try to imagine what you would be like if you spent 90% of your time with 1 or 2 other people who were a full generation removed from you. Now imagine those 1 or 2 people were completely responsible for the person you are to become. Kind of scary isn't it?
First let me just say you are an idiot.
Employees using day care services can pay for it with lower salaries than single workers. Don't force me to subsidize your kids.
Companies will subsidize daycare to attract and keep employees. Just like they subsidize health care and offer investment opportunities to their employees. If you do not have children you do not participate in the daycare, just like if you already have health insurance you will not participate in the company's health insurance program.
Then why are you having kids?,
I'd like to ask your parents the same question.
Wresch was the chair of the CIS Dept. at UW - Stevens Point up until '96 or 97', maybe 98'. Somewhere around there. The UW system has quite a few campuses around the state. I think it is safe to assume they left out the Stevens Point part because if wouldn't sound as prestigious.
Oh yeah, not everyone at the UW is obsessed with athletics. Somebody must have gotten picked last for playground kickball quite a bit to get a chip on their shoulder that big!