But she deals with a bunch of garbage that I don't have to care about because she insolates me from it so I can get my work done. I see some of the E-mails about the issues she's keeping off my plate and I shudder to think what my life would be like if she didn't do what she does. She takes the stress so I don't have to and I owe her both my loyalty and thanks.
But I can assure you, my current manager isn't typical.... No sir. In my 25 years of having all sorts of managers, she's in the top 5% and I will be sad when she retires. My previous manager was totally opposite, visited his scorn for failure to meet real and imagined (by him) requirements when he demanded (regardless of if they'd been communicated or not). I'm sure he was stressed too, given all his direct and indirect reports generally didn't care one bit about keeping him out of trouble given the likelihood of getting your head handed to you when you raised an issue. He was a moron of a manager and I am lucky I escaped with my self respect from that place. I find this kind of manager much more common....
So, Yes, my managers ARE more stressed than I am.... I'm guessing the good managers are LESS stressed though than the ones who should have never taken the job in the first place.
The exit path is bloody revolution and re-instatement of a capitalist based economy... The problem though as this flows through a couple of nasty phases after the current government goes bankrupt usually including dictatorship and/or communism (See North Korea) before you get the final bloody upheaval.
It's funny how "Everybody else does it" is considered a logical argument FOR doing something, when the exact opposite is usually the better argument... Examples?
I hate to break the news to you and your so called "libertarian" friends, but you are not what the label you want claim if you think UBI is consistent with a traditional libertarian stance. Progressive? Socialist? Communist? Marxist? perhaps one of those is a better label to claim.
It won't even work then... UBI is basically going to make it profitable enough to not work and will require taxing the fruits of those who happened to have a job so much that they won't want to work anymore because the only clear what the UBI is (or less) anyway.. Who will work under those conditions? Few...Certainly not enough people to pay the bill for the poor who don't work.
How do I know? History.... Or if you prefer current events, Venezuela, where this idea had the best chance of working with all that oil money the government gets...
Comon... Really you don't see how these things where the products of intense lobbying efforts and designed to line specific pockets? Are you blind or is there lots of sand between your eyes and daylight?
In the spirit of bipartisanship, can we not agree that BOTH sides engage in this mutual back scratching behavior to varying degrees? I won't quibble about which side is worse at such behavior as long as you admit it's happening no matter who's in power...
My biggest complaint about this is it eats spectrum space, high data rates require very large bandwidths. I'm trying to imagine how you can do this spectrum wise and it's starting to look pretty difficult to me. Even if you think of the satellites as mini-Cell towers that move around on you, you are going to need some pretty complicated phased array things on the satellites to keep all this in any kind of reasonable amount of spectrum space and still be able to keep data flowing to any reasonable number of paying users.
Musk has surprised me before, but I think he's going to be hitting a really hard place between physics and the FCC's spectrum management rules...Maybe this works outside the USA, but I don't think he can afford the spectrum space necessary to do this here...
But MAYBE he's got a better cost model that makes this financially viable? Iridium didn't work out too well.
I suppose his launch costs will be lower, but I have a feeling that this won't work out as cheaply as he thinks. It will be viable in places where there are no providers now, but usually those are the same places that don't have the 2 things this scheme needs... 1. People who need/want internet access and 2. People who have money to pay for it. You got to have all that to make this work out, unless running w/o profits for a decade like Tesla is OK with you.
Said the CEO of Oracle: what ya need there is a collection of giant databases...and cloud, let there be cloud
Said the CEO of Microsoft: what ya need there is a PC or MS compatible computing thing on every desk...and cloud, let there be cloud
Said the CEO of Apple: what ya need there is a collection of iThings for instant communication...errr..with the cloud, let there be cloud
Said the CEO of IBM: what ya need there is a Watson AI Cloudy Thingy in every agency...more cloud for every one
etc.
etc.
etc.
Hey, to be fair here, that Obama Care website filled up a bunch of pigs too, much like the stimulus plan of 2008 that Sherriff Joe was supposed to keep track of every dollar.....
There is a reason why Mars doesn't have much of an atmosphere and the bulk of the water is gone, until you can fix that issue, no possible amount of generating atmosphere gasses will fix this.
The issue is Mars has a very weak magnetic field to shield it from the solar wind which is stripping the atmosphere from the planet faster than it's generated. Now if you come up with a solution to that issue, you will go a long way to making the place habitable.
As soon as we didn't meet their proposed schedule and milestones (driven by revenue realization and not technical possibility) mandatory overtime became the rule for the entire team. Of course this was only mildly effective in pulling the schedule back to the left and that effect was only temporary. I believe that we would have been a lot more efficient and likely finished sooner had they allowed the schedule to slip. But the schedule was about revenue and not much else.
We did a lot of stuff stupidly... We shipped hardware before we had the application written (or even prototypes working). We didn't know if we had enough disk space, processing power or network though put to make this beast work. It turned out we needed an additional 20 servers to handle the load we had 5 servers to cover. Tell a Telco that you need another 3 racks, power and wiring in their switch room... Wow what a mess. We integrated and tested our system in front of the customer so they saw it not work for months while we rang out all the software and configuration problems. Why? Because program management advertised that once the hardware was installed, we'd be ready for live traffic, so once it took a phone call, they claimed success (In order to realize revenue of course). Of course it didn't work in production and the customer was upset. During this time I was in a foreign country, working 18 hour days, 7 days a week for months at a time.
As I understand it, once I left they lost that customer who ripped out the system about a year later. I was surprised it lasted that long.
You are right, I think we could have finished with a lot less fuss and cost had we been sensible about things and up front with the customer about what we could and couldn't do. Of course, I'm guessing we would have lost the sale had we been totally honest up front, but we could have delivered a working system had we not shipped the hardware from the factory before we had the software actually functional and we could have integrated things with all hands present in the factory instead of spending hours on conference calls sitting in a switch room with the customer breathing down my neck....
In my 25 years of doing this, I can tell you that the most often used way to estimate a project basically boils down to "How much can we get the customer to pay?" Time and time again I've sat though meetings where the sales person kept saying "we won't ever win the contract with that bid" followed by an order from the executives to bid lower. One time the executives took our estimate, subtracted 2/3rds of it and submitted that as the bid over our objections. We won and I quit as soon as I could get another job lined up. They obviously failed and the customer dropped the contract.
Another time, I was asked when we could deliver said project to the customer.... I answered that it would take 12 months and we'd have a high probability 50% of being late. They wanted it 6 months sooner and the sales folks started yelling about how uncooperative engineering was... (really it was about yearly bonuses because they wanted a December delivery) I insisted that they where asking the impossible, but the executives insisted we try. We tried, worked 18 hour days for months, and failed to meet their deadlines. We did, however, almost exactly meet my original estimate (we beat it by 2 weeks). Of course I got blamed so I quit that place too, as soon as I could.
So the moral of these stories is "Don't estimate by what the sales people want or agree to schedules just to meet the numbers the executives want" Because you will fail and you will be blamed...
Slashdot Mirror
But she deals with a bunch of garbage that I don't have to care about because she insolates me from it so I can get my work done. I see some of the E-mails about the issues she's keeping off my plate and I shudder to think what my life would be like if she didn't do what she does. She takes the stress so I don't have to and I owe her both my loyalty and thanks.
But I can assure you, my current manager isn't typical.... No sir. In my 25 years of having all sorts of managers, she's in the top 5% and I will be sad when she retires. My previous manager was totally opposite, visited his scorn for failure to meet real and imagined (by him) requirements when he demanded (regardless of if they'd been communicated or not). I'm sure he was stressed too, given all his direct and indirect reports generally didn't care one bit about keeping him out of trouble given the likelihood of getting your head handed to you when you raised an issue. He was a moron of a manager and I am lucky I escaped with my self respect from that place. I find this kind of manager much more common....
So, Yes, my managers ARE more stressed than I am.... I'm guessing the good managers are LESS stressed though than the ones who should have never taken the job in the first place.
The exit path is bloody revolution and re-instatement of a capitalist based economy... The problem though as this flows through a couple of nasty phases after the current government goes bankrupt usually including dictatorship and/or communism (See North Korea) before you get the final bloody upheaval.
Except nothing is free, and the rich are going to leave the country with their money.
Good luck! This sounds great on paper, but if you can't get the rich to play ball, it's doomed from the start.
Yea, this worked great in Venezuela and Greece didn't it...
It's funny how "Everybody else does it" is considered a logical argument FOR doing something, when the exact opposite is usually the better argument... Examples?
Buying stocks...
Selling Stocks..
Starting a business..
Military Tactics..
I hate to break the news to you and your so called "libertarian" friends, but you are not what the label you want claim if you think UBI is consistent with a traditional libertarian stance. Progressive? Socialist? Communist? Marxist? perhaps one of those is a better label to claim.
Except when you are paying them for it.
Until it runs out.... See Greece and Venezuela if you don't believe me.
OR...
Those who rob Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Peter....
It won't even work then... UBI is basically going to make it profitable enough to not work and will require taxing the fruits of those who happened to have a job so much that they won't want to work anymore because the only clear what the UBI is (or less) anyway.. Who will work under those conditions? Few...Certainly not enough people to pay the bill for the poor who don't work.
How do I know? History.... Or if you prefer current events, Venezuela, where this idea had the best chance of working with all that oil money the government gets...
Comon... Really you don't see how these things where the products of intense lobbying efforts and designed to line specific pockets? Are you blind or is there lots of sand between your eyes and daylight?
In the spirit of bipartisanship, can we not agree that BOTH sides engage in this mutual back scratching behavior to varying degrees? I won't quibble about which side is worse at such behavior as long as you admit it's happening no matter who's in power...
My biggest complaint about this is it eats spectrum space, high data rates require very large bandwidths. I'm trying to imagine how you can do this spectrum wise and it's starting to look pretty difficult to me. Even if you think of the satellites as mini-Cell towers that move around on you, you are going to need some pretty complicated phased array things on the satellites to keep all this in any kind of reasonable amount of spectrum space and still be able to keep data flowing to any reasonable number of paying users.
Musk has surprised me before, but I think he's going to be hitting a really hard place between physics and the FCC's spectrum management rules...Maybe this works outside the USA, but I don't think he can afford the spectrum space necessary to do this here...
But MAYBE he's got a better cost model that makes this financially viable? Iridium didn't work out too well.
I suppose his launch costs will be lower, but I have a feeling that this won't work out as cheaply as he thinks. It will be viable in places where there are no providers now, but usually those are the same places that don't have the 2 things this scheme needs... 1. People who need/want internet access and 2. People who have money to pay for it. You got to have all that to make this work out, unless running w/o profits for a decade like Tesla is OK with you.
Excellent point.... Hadn't thought of that. So the headline really is a poke in the eye to the Chinese "invention" (assuming it actually exists).
Babbage and the abacus was the original computer technology.
Vacuum tubes and stepper motors... Now THAT was a classic computer...
RTL, TTL, ECL stuff... That was the golden age....
VLSI CMOS that put a CPU on a chip is "modern" computer technology...
So, Don't feel too old.. Unless you where alive during WW2 working at Bletchley house or some other similar effort of the day.
I doubt it, but hey, let's take a look and see.
LOL, I see what you did there and it is kind of funny.... BUT, does it compute?
Single payer GPUs (Government Processing Units) for ALL!
Sorry.. You are correct... January 2009....
Obama... January 2008.
Ad hominem much there AC? Surely you have something useful to debate here, but that's not it.
Actually, I understand why the pervious poster was on a rant.... He did read the post... AND The fine article attached....
Said the CEO of Oracle: what ya need there is a collection of giant databases...and cloud, let there be cloud Said the CEO of Microsoft: what ya need there is a PC or MS compatible computing thing on every desk...and cloud, let there be cloud Said the CEO of Apple: what ya need there is a collection of iThings for instant communication...errr..with the cloud, let there be cloud Said the CEO of IBM: what ya need there is a Watson AI Cloudy Thingy in every agency...more cloud for every one etc. etc. etc.
Hey, to be fair here, that Obama Care website filled up a bunch of pigs too, much like the stimulus plan of 2008 that Sherriff Joe was supposed to keep track of every dollar.....
THAT Jared, Jared Fogel (sp?) IS in jail..... The Jared being discussed is Trump's son-in-law, who is not (at least at this point) in jail.....
There is a reason why Mars doesn't have much of an atmosphere and the bulk of the water is gone, until you can fix that issue, no possible amount of generating atmosphere gasses will fix this.
The issue is Mars has a very weak magnetic field to shield it from the solar wind which is stripping the atmosphere from the planet faster than it's generated. Now if you come up with a solution to that issue, you will go a long way to making the place habitable.
Exactly correct..
As soon as we didn't meet their proposed schedule and milestones (driven by revenue realization and not technical possibility) mandatory overtime became the rule for the entire team. Of course this was only mildly effective in pulling the schedule back to the left and that effect was only temporary. I believe that we would have been a lot more efficient and likely finished sooner had they allowed the schedule to slip. But the schedule was about revenue and not much else.
We did a lot of stuff stupidly... We shipped hardware before we had the application written (or even prototypes working). We didn't know if we had enough disk space, processing power or network though put to make this beast work. It turned out we needed an additional 20 servers to handle the load we had 5 servers to cover. Tell a Telco that you need another 3 racks, power and wiring in their switch room... Wow what a mess. We integrated and tested our system in front of the customer so they saw it not work for months while we rang out all the software and configuration problems. Why? Because program management advertised that once the hardware was installed, we'd be ready for live traffic, so once it took a phone call, they claimed success (In order to realize revenue of course). Of course it didn't work in production and the customer was upset. During this time I was in a foreign country, working 18 hour days, 7 days a week for months at a time.
As I understand it, once I left they lost that customer who ripped out the system about a year later. I was surprised it lasted that long.
You are right, I think we could have finished with a lot less fuss and cost had we been sensible about things and up front with the customer about what we could and couldn't do. Of course, I'm guessing we would have lost the sale had we been totally honest up front, but we could have delivered a working system had we not shipped the hardware from the factory before we had the software actually functional and we could have integrated things with all hands present in the factory instead of spending hours on conference calls sitting in a switch room with the customer breathing down my neck....
Good point...
In my 25 years of doing this, I can tell you that the most often used way to estimate a project basically boils down to "How much can we get the customer to pay?" Time and time again I've sat though meetings where the sales person kept saying "we won't ever win the contract with that bid" followed by an order from the executives to bid lower. One time the executives took our estimate, subtracted 2/3rds of it and submitted that as the bid over our objections. We won and I quit as soon as I could get another job lined up. They obviously failed and the customer dropped the contract.
Another time, I was asked when we could deliver said project to the customer.... I answered that it would take 12 months and we'd have a high probability 50% of being late. They wanted it 6 months sooner and the sales folks started yelling about how uncooperative engineering was... (really it was about yearly bonuses because they wanted a December delivery) I insisted that they where asking the impossible, but the executives insisted we try. We tried, worked 18 hour days for months, and failed to meet their deadlines. We did, however, almost exactly meet my original estimate (we beat it by 2 weeks). Of course I got blamed so I quit that place too, as soon as I could.
So the moral of these stories is "Don't estimate by what the sales people want or agree to schedules just to meet the numbers the executives want" Because you will fail and you will be blamed...