I have a 2015 F-150 Lariat. The rest of the truck is awesome. Truly I really love the rest of the truck. Engineering masterpiece and so many details right plus great gas mileage. I would give it 5 out of 5 stars....except the &$-)1#^!! My Ford Touch! I hate it! I am not a person to get too upset over things, but I had to pay $1,500 extra for something that doesn't work well and never will because Ford and MSFT stopped development on it. Also according to Ford there is no upgrade path except to buy a new truck some year in the future. When I turn my truck on it automatically connects via Bluetooth and plays something random....it grabs anything up on iCloud. I've had rap music, kid pop, French language lessons, metal,....it's always a surprise. The navigation system is comical and pathetic circa late 1990's or early 2000's tech. I will just stop writing right here on this because I am already getting mad thinking about it.
I will never buy another Ford (or other make) without fully testing the infotainment system. Mobile device integration is too important in this day and age. It has to fully support Apple CarPlay and/or Andriod Auto or won't be considered.
I really dislike Ford for also not taking care of recent customers. $1,500 for something flawed and dead ended while my iPhone is half the cost and infinitely better plus getting updated all the time.
Buyer beware! Test it yourself fully before buying. Don't get a Ford until Apple Car Play comes standard (and not by a software update which may never come).
-Andy
Why don't you remove it and put a third party infotainment system in there? The only way it is connected to the vehicle is for the random bell dings it does for low fuel. I'm sure third party would support that and back camera.
Have you used other company's offerings? The Mercedes Benz I tried was super terrible. The GPS was more interested in telling me if there was a Subway restaurant in the every exit I drove through than actually doing proper navigation.
- "Ethical training" of people in A.I. fields, particularly as the technology is used to control more real-world objects that could lead to concerns about safety and security.
Doctors & lawyers receive ethical training, yet we still have a lot of unethical doctors & lawyers. If we created a "sentient" A.I., what's to say that it wouldn't find some way to get around its ethical programming by the people ethically trained to create it? Don't forget about Microsoft's recent venture.
The problem is that these sorts of companies don't really lift anyone out of poverty over there. They don't have the same labor standards, they exploit their workers while paying the minimum they can get away with. Many "IT workers" moved from the farm to live in city slums while destroying the environment doing so.
Sure people over there need to eat there too but they're barely eating and corporate colonization is not a good solution. This is akin to saying "hey, don't worry about us outsourcing the cotton picking, those Africans need to eat too, they were dying in Africa to snake bites and lions, as slaves they get steady meals and a house to live in"
India has one of the largest growing middle class and is seeing economic growth in all economic strata. Link
Probably because it is a country's duty to first support its own citizens. Otherwise, what is a country?
Then in that regard, it's the company or department's duty to minimize costs and maximize returns.
Also the country is to support all the citizens, not just some. The lower IT cost will be enjoyed by students with lower tuition bills or more infrastructure with the saved funds.
When China produces cheap iPhones and laptops, we all buy it without regard to the cost to the American manufacturing worker. All of a sudden, when India produces products that affects us, we all start complaining.
H-1B abuse like this is one of many reasons why some people feel that their only choice is to vote for Trump's insanity. Desperate people do desperate things.
Trump is not against H1B, he's just against the non-white immigrants who use H1B. Right now most of it is India.
I think Trump would be OK with H1B abuse if it was done by Russia and Eastern Europe countries.
Instead of training an Indian replacement, you'd be training a Russian or Czech replacement.
I'm 58, last three years have be learning and developing in NodeJS, CouchDB, JQuery, Lodash, Async, etc. Right now am prototyping an architecture using Swagger and a127.
There are exceptions to every categorization. If you dismiss somebody as unable to learn because they are older, then you are prejudging them. That's age discrimination.
I always think it's a young developer's thing to name drop technologies they are learning.
The great older developers are past that phase and actually have created or worked on creating or improving the modern software technologies, not just merely learning them.
From the article, this is not an estimate of upper max based on species capability, biological understanding of the aging process, or knowledge and subsequent realistic & accepted explanation of the limitations. They just graphed the current max age on a year by year basis and noticed that the last 20 years or so, there seems to be a plateau. At least in the countries that keep good track of age of citizens over the last 150 years or so.
Even with poor or missing data, we can see that if we used this same technique in say, 1700, the expected max age would look a bit different. At one time, our expected max age was 30!
Using a study like this to claim knowledge about the limits of age is like using a crime statistics study in the us to prove that certain minority groups are *genetically* prone to be criminals, and about exactly as useful.
As mankind progresses and continues to innovate in the fields of medicine, biology, sociology, psychology, and technology, we'll keep pushing this limit, perhaps in fits and starts, but it'll continue to advance. That is, unless there's some difficult-to-impossible ACTUAL limitation that we hit. A study of statistics like this might hint at *a* current barrier, but this doesn't identify, describe, or explain it. It certainly can't claim it's the *final* barrier.
The study is saying we have billions of data points and out of the billions of data points, there must be some people who by sheer chance avoided accidents, infectious diseases and diseases like cancer that occur by chance. If the best we can do is 120 years now, then it probably is the humanity's limit to age.
If we have innovations like brain transplant or brain copying then there is no limit. Or with gene therapy or something like we can extend it. But, we can't extend it further living healthy or avoiding disease.
The vast majority of things that are worth knowing will always be remembered and preserved. If the few that forgotten become necessary, they will be reinvented.
The world will continue spinning. No need for alarm.
The best way to preserved knowledge is to disseminate it widely. Or, to paraphrase Linus Torvalds, someone somewhere will mirror all the really important stuff.
Things will only be reinvented if there is a financial incentive to do it. If a complex mathematical proof is lost, who is going to recreate it? There is neither glory or money in it.
The linux kernel is used by billions of devices. An important theorem which would only be useful decades down the road might not be preserved. I've seen very useful math textbooks written by professors go out of print and then the only copies are poor xerox copies floating around with grad students. Scanning and put it somewhere also fails since it keeps disappearing as accounts are removed after the student moves on.
I don't see anything wrong with it. You're making a huge mountain out of one quote that makes perfect sense in the larger context of the legal framework.
They're literally having whole seminars on how to craft job requirements such that you cannot fill them, specifically so that you can hire a H1B and treat them like a slave. That's not one quote. That's systemic abuse.
That is not what the seminar is remotely about. It i about PERM and not even H1B.
The people in the HR "profession" actually have seminars in how to avoid hiring American workers.
You might be right about the program design itself, but the program is gamed in a HUGE way and the US Government knows it and turns a blind eye. If they would simply do some audits and enforce the law this could be partially curbed, but they don't. Corporatist administrations do not care.
I don't see anything wrong with it. You're making a huge mountain out of one quote that makes perfect sense in the larger context of the legal framework.
It's not the HR department/ immigration lawyer's job to fill the position. As far as they are concerned that position is filled. The law requires them to advertise the position and they do advertise the position. It is the responsibility of the local worker seeking job opportunity to find the advertisement and apply for it.
He is talking about something called the PERM process. It is excruciatingly stacked up against the foreign worker. You're asking the foreign worker to put up their job on the line to apply for the green card where she is not allowed to use any experience she has on the job to qualify for her job, and anyone with the bare minimum qualifications can take it away.
There is absolutely no mention of how to avoid American workers. They put the job on the newspaper, job/school job website and their own website. What else are they supposed to do?
Also, the US government puts these application under the microscope. They take 4-6 months to analyze the application and if anything feels out of place (like a strange requirement in the job duties) they will reject the application. Each and every approved application is published on the DOL website for everyone to see.
no one listens to 'workers'. the execs are full of ego and can do no wrong.
what they all have gotton used to: hiring a bunch of chair-warmers who are almost universally from south east asia, h1b mostly, and all are young. the exact formula for 'dont make waves, dont challenge the boss'.
the bosses are not used to hearing anyone voice opinions! we have the worst engineering now, walking the hallways of cisco, intel, you name it. they hire 'to a price' and you get monkeys if you pay peanuts.
they go out of their way to hire 'diversity' but that means NOT hiring the real minority, the US-born person who is over 35 and HAS the experience.
silicon valley is a sweatshop, becoming more like what we had 100 years ago when the US finally got fed up and 'did the union thing'. that changed history. things got better for a while.
now, they're back to being company-owned - the world, that is. people don't matter. companies do. and you just better do what you are told. there are 1000 more indians waiting to take your job, here or elsewhere, if you dare say 'no' to a boss.
similarly, raise issues of safety or product design and you won't be continuing there much longer (personal experience on that one).
fuck sillicon valley. it stopped being a place of innovation when it became a place to concentrate chair-sitters from across the world. quantity is all that matters. do we have 'body count'? did we save a lot on it? then we're good (that's how they think).
if you are young, sure, come here. but you won't be able to stay long-term. just be aware of that. and be aware of the fact that companies laugh behind your back when you are gullible enough to believe this 'loyalty' shit they want you to swallow. don't believe it, though. eventually YOU will be replace by someone even cheaper. my years are numbered, but then again, so are yours.
no one is safe in the bay area, job-wise. it stinks here.
love the weather and the culture (well, the old culture, that some people still remember). but the days of the 'hp garage' is long gone. now, its stupid social bullshit, twits and disgracebook lead the pack. ie, no product at all, just hot air and advertising.
The young complain that everyone wants experience. The old complain they only hire the young.
The execs says nobody tells them anything and the workers say nobody listens to them.
US workers say H1Bs are undercutting them. H1Bs says the enormous cost and complications of the H1Bs gets them stuck in undesirable low-paying jobs.
The white guys say minorities and women are being preferred for diversity. Minorities and women complain that they have no connections and no way to even get into jobs.
My point is that it's hard for everyone and everyone faces unique challenges. Nobody has it easy. Let's figure out how to get what we want out of life rather than blaming everyone else for why we are not getting what we want.
... dearth of inspiration or even otherwise useful things to say. It's all transparently self-serving but so conspicuously lacking in substance and foundation.
If you really wanted to ensure a solid influx of STEM university students a few years down the line, you wouldn't be bothering with "learning to code" today. You'd make sure they get a solid grounding in the basics. You know, spelling, grammar, thinking, coming up with things to say. And, of course, math. Not "new math", but actual real math taught in a way that is maybe not huggy-feely, but certainly imparts the skill without putting off. Mathematicians have known for years that the math grounding is awful (along with the rest of highschool), and that it only gets interesting once you "catch the bug" and dive in, later, much later. Do something about that and raise the expected literacy and math proficiency floor from "typically functionally illiterate" to, well, somewhat higher at least.
But that isn't sexy. That's boring and hard work. Companies and politicians don't want to sponsor that.
"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."
Please stop. It doesn't work the way you're ranting it does.
I will hire a woman over a man for a tech role, even if the man is marginally better. If it's drastic, I'll hire the man - but if it's close, the woman wins out on one very simple factor: male dominated offices/teams/companies have a higher probability of disfunction. Having a female perspective, presence, and balance is actually worth the hit on pure skill.
In other words, a boys club is bad for life balance, moral, and eventually product quality and employee retention.
So this doesn't really surprise me. Hiring managers WANT women in the office. Yeah, this is sexist. But I've worked on teams where there have been zero women, and it's not a good balance.
You and every other hiring manager.
It's a well known fact that female graduates get more offers of higher quality than her male classmates. While a new male graduate in engineering is fighting to find his first job, the female graduate is choosing among the offers from the top companies.
I agree that smooth team functioning is most of the time more important than individual skill. However, is the dysfunction that you quote a justification or a real reason? Would a gay hiring manager have the same opinion?
But, gender isn't the only thing you can discriminate on to improve the team. What about age, race, nationality? Those also have some effect on the team.
C++ aficionados, your vexing problem has been solved! That is to say, your complex language has added a new "if" structure with more side-effects to enhance the impenetrability and opportunity for obscurantism that we all value so much.
Not a big deal. A simple code analysis tool should easily identify the problem.
C++ is still my favorite language, but I gave up on many features long ago.
Even on templates ! Why ? Because just one stupid mistake can produce hundreds of compile errors.
And also, I don't want my code to become Perl like : a write only language.
Template errors are fine but compilers need to do a better job at displaying the error.
Most of modern C++ has been trying to be more like Java/C# like, not Perl like. Sometimes it makes things worse because there is hidden complexity behind the simple things.
I can see an international purchase on my bank's transaction history in one hour. Why does it take US banks 3 days to discover there's no money in a cheque writer's account? Why doesn't the seller wait a week before sending the item?
Banks can take just a few hours but scammers will seek out things which take the longest.
For example, scammers use fake western union money orders which take longer for whatever reason.
This interview is full of classic self-justification;
"I like to think I am a businessman. Not a criminal."
"I like to think my victims are rich and won't miss the money I'm stealing."
"I like to think those I'm stealing from had the opportunities I didn't. This makes us even."
"I like to think that because scamming is hard and takes time, it's like a real job."
"I like to think it's my victim's own fault I'm scamming them. It's not my fault they don't follow the rules and don't know the game."
But, ultimately, he knows that what he's doing is bad. He's justifying to the interviewer but he knows deep inside that he is harming people. He's saying he does what he does to survive and he would do something else if he got the opportunity.
If he was saying that he was helping people, saving the children etc then it would be dangerous.
I used to teach a pretty decent load of Chinese students in my classes in Manhattan (I taught at both NYU and on CUNY). By the '00s, they were significantly more creative, sophisticated, well-rounded, and learned (I make no claims about "intelligence") than my American students, who were really sort of "decadent" in the worst, stereotypical ways—knew only a few things about a few things but a lot about consumer goods and fashion, and didn't seem to think they needed to work, just didn't feel the global pressure from competing workers. Very entitled.
The Chinese students tended to cluster in 'A' territory and always approached me after class to talk about class topics until I had to leave, then followed up with serious questions by email. The American students always had one or two in the 'A' group and the rest clustering around low B and high C, and it was a struggle just to learn their names, as they had nothing at all to say to me unless I called on them in class. Ironically, many of the Chinese students had better formal English as well, though there were always also about half that were clearly 'winging it' and needed ESL—but were killing it in class performance anyway, managing to learn and to get through books by relying on a dictionary, a study group, and sheer determination.
As a teacher, never ever stereotype anyone. Treat each student on their own metrics and not as a subset of some group that you deem them to be in.
There could be other explanations. In my case, I found out that Chinese students had already learned the material in their home country. This was their second go at taking the class in English.
Though the Xu was trying to sell it, I have a feeling that this is probably more of the anti-China that Slashdot has rather than really taking the time to talk about what is really going on.
And, National Health and Family Planning Commission in China? What is the link to that agency and the code?
Interesting idea that I could get behind... I'd say 2x prevailing wages for the skillset/title and a minimum of 2x average household income would be sufficient to make it unpalatable to use an H-1B for anything short of someone you legitimately cannot find or train. It'd also drive local wages up for anything in demand because they could save money by hiring local vs. hiring someone on a visa. It'd create fierce competition among the best and brightest all over the world to get in on the program because it'd give them instant high salaries, increase local salaries to what the market would actually bear for the skills, draw more people into unskilled work they consider below them (because they could live on the now-increased incomes), etc. It'd also kill a lot of crufty companies that aren't actively profitable in their space to make way for ones that will be. Everyone would win except MBAs trying to goose quarterly statements.
It would backfire badly.
They'll just hire 1 manager who will manage a team in India. So, work will move out of the country faster.
Companies will work to make their cloud software easily managed from India.
We are in a capitalistic country. The force of cheaper labor is going to circumvent any artificial barriers you put in.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a 2015 F-150 Lariat. The rest of the truck is awesome. Truly I really love the rest of the truck. Engineering masterpiece and so many details right plus great gas mileage. I would give it 5 out of 5 stars....except the &$-)1#^!! My Ford Touch! I hate it! I am not a person to get too upset over things, but I had to pay $1,500 extra for something that doesn't work well and never will because Ford and MSFT stopped development on it. Also according to Ford there is no upgrade path except to buy a new truck some year in the future. When I turn my truck on it automatically connects via Bluetooth and plays something random....it grabs anything up on iCloud. I've had rap music, kid pop, French language lessons, metal, ....it's always a surprise. The navigation system is comical and pathetic circa late 1990's or early 2000's tech. I will just stop writing right here on this because I am already getting mad thinking about it.
I will never buy another Ford (or other make) without fully testing the infotainment system. Mobile device integration is too important in this day and age. It has to fully support Apple CarPlay and/or Andriod Auto or won't be considered.
I really dislike Ford for also not taking care of recent customers. $1,500 for something flawed and dead ended while my iPhone is half the cost and infinitely better plus getting updated all the time.
Buyer beware! Test it yourself fully before buying. Don't get a Ford until Apple Car Play comes standard (and not by a software update which may never come).
-Andy
Why don't you remove it and put a third party infotainment system in there? The only way it is connected to the vehicle is for the random bell dings it does for low fuel. I'm sure third party would support that and back camera.
Have you used other company's offerings? The Mercedes Benz I tried was super terrible. The GPS was more interested in telling me if there was a Subway restaurant in the every exit I drove through than actually doing proper navigation.
- "Ethical training" of people in A.I. fields, particularly as the technology is used to control more real-world objects that could lead to concerns about safety and security.
Doctors & lawyers receive ethical training, yet we still have a lot of unethical doctors & lawyers. If we created a "sentient" A.I., what's to say that it wouldn't find some way to get around its ethical programming by the people ethically trained to create it? Don't forget about Microsoft's recent venture.
Ethical training of people in A.I.
Not ethical training of A.I.
The problem is that these sorts of companies don't really lift anyone out of poverty over there. They don't have the same labor standards, they exploit their workers while paying the minimum they can get away with. Many "IT workers" moved from the farm to live in city slums while destroying the environment doing so.
Sure people over there need to eat there too but they're barely eating and corporate colonization is not a good solution. This is akin to saying "hey, don't worry about us outsourcing the cotton picking, those Africans need to eat too, they were dying in Africa to snake bites and lions, as slaves they get steady meals and a house to live in"
India has one of the largest growing middle class and is seeing economic growth in all economic strata. Link
Probably because it is a country's duty to first support its own citizens. Otherwise, what is a country?
Then in that regard, it's the company or department's duty to minimize costs and maximize returns.
Also the country is to support all the citizens, not just some. The lower IT cost will be enjoyed by students with lower tuition bills or more infrastructure with the saved funds.
When China produces cheap iPhones and laptops, we all buy it without regard to the cost to the American manufacturing worker. All of a sudden, when India produces products that affects us, we all start complaining.
H-1B abuse like this is one of many reasons why some people feel that their only choice is to vote for Trump's insanity. Desperate people do desperate things.
Trump is not against H1B, he's just against the non-white immigrants who use H1B. Right now most of it is India.
I think Trump would be OK with H1B abuse if it was done by Russia and Eastern Europe countries.
Instead of training an Indian replacement, you'd be training a Russian or Czech replacement.
I'm 58, last three years have be learning and developing in NodeJS, CouchDB, JQuery, Lodash, Async, etc. Right now am prototyping an architecture using Swagger and a127.
There are exceptions to every categorization. If you dismiss somebody as unable to learn because they are older, then you are prejudging them. That's age discrimination.
I always think it's a young developer's thing to name drop technologies they are learning.
The great older developers are past that phase and actually have created or worked on creating or improving the modern software technologies, not just merely learning them.
From the article, this is not an estimate of upper max based on species capability, biological understanding of the aging process, or knowledge and subsequent realistic & accepted explanation of the limitations. They just graphed the current max age on a year by year basis and noticed that the last 20 years or so, there seems to be a plateau. At least in the countries that keep good track of age of citizens over the last 150 years or so.
Even with poor or missing data, we can see that if we used this same technique in say, 1700, the expected max age would look a bit different. At one time, our expected max age was 30!
Using a study like this to claim knowledge about the limits of age is like using a crime statistics study in the us to prove that certain minority groups are *genetically* prone to be criminals, and about exactly as useful.
As mankind progresses and continues to innovate in the fields of medicine, biology, sociology, psychology, and technology, we'll keep pushing this limit, perhaps in fits and starts, but it'll continue to advance. That is, unless there's some difficult-to-impossible ACTUAL limitation that we hit. A study of statistics like this might hint at *a* current barrier, but this doesn't identify, describe, or explain it. It certainly can't claim it's the *final* barrier.
The study is saying we have billions of data points and out of the billions of data points, there must be some people who by sheer chance avoided accidents, infectious diseases and diseases like cancer that occur by chance. If the best we can do is 120 years now, then it probably is the humanity's limit to age.
If we have innovations like brain transplant or brain copying then there is no limit. Or with gene therapy or something like we can extend it. But, we can't extend it further living healthy or avoiding disease.
The vast majority of things that are worth knowing will always be remembered and preserved. If the few that forgotten become necessary, they will be reinvented.
The world will continue spinning. No need for alarm.
The best way to preserved knowledge is to disseminate it widely. Or, to paraphrase Linus Torvalds, someone somewhere will mirror all the really important stuff.
Things will only be reinvented if there is a financial incentive to do it. If a complex mathematical proof is lost, who is going to recreate it? There is neither glory or money in it.
The linux kernel is used by billions of devices. An important theorem which would only be useful decades down the road might not be preserved. I've seen very useful math textbooks written by professors go out of print and then the only copies are poor xerox copies floating around with grad students. Scanning and put it somewhere also fails since it keeps disappearing as accounts are removed after the student moves on.
I don't see anything wrong with it. You're making a huge mountain out of one quote that makes perfect sense in the larger context of the legal framework.
They're literally having whole seminars on how to craft job requirements such that you cannot fill them, specifically so that you can hire a H1B and treat them like a slave. That's not one quote. That's systemic abuse.
That is not what the seminar is remotely about. It i about PERM and not even H1B.
Which brings us to this famous bit of evidence...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The people in the HR "profession" actually have seminars in how to avoid hiring American workers.
You might be right about the program design itself, but the program is gamed in a HUGE way and the US Government knows it and turns a blind eye. If they would simply do some audits and enforce the law this could be partially curbed, but they don't. Corporatist administrations do not care.
I don't see anything wrong with it. You're making a huge mountain out of one quote that makes perfect sense in the larger context of the legal framework.
It's not the HR department/ immigration lawyer's job to fill the position. As far as they are concerned that position is filled. The law requires them to advertise the position and they do advertise the position. It is the responsibility of the local worker seeking job opportunity to find the advertisement and apply for it.
He is talking about something called the PERM process. It is excruciatingly stacked up against the foreign worker. You're asking the foreign worker to put up their job on the line to apply for the green card where she is not allowed to use any experience she has on the job to qualify for her job, and anyone with the bare minimum qualifications can take it away.
There is absolutely no mention of how to avoid American workers. They put the job on the newspaper, job/school job website and their own website. What else are they supposed to do?
Also, the US government puts these application under the microscope. They take 4-6 months to analyze the application and if anything feels out of place (like a strange requirement in the job duties) they will reject the application. Each and every approved application is published on the DOL website for everyone to see.
You're incorrect. Using lots of bogus accounts to tell lies that make your crappy books look cool is a crime.
It's against the terms of service but not a crime.
no one listens to 'workers'. the execs are full of ego and can do no wrong.
what they all have gotton used to: hiring a bunch of chair-warmers who are almost universally from south east asia, h1b mostly, and all are young. the exact formula for 'dont make waves, dont challenge the boss'.
the bosses are not used to hearing anyone voice opinions! we have the worst engineering now, walking the hallways of cisco, intel, you name it. they hire 'to a price' and you get monkeys if you pay peanuts.
they go out of their way to hire 'diversity' but that means NOT hiring the real minority, the US-born person who is over 35 and HAS the experience.
silicon valley is a sweatshop, becoming more like what we had 100 years ago when the US finally got fed up and 'did the union thing'. that changed history. things got better for a while.
now, they're back to being company-owned - the world, that is. people don't matter. companies do. and you just better do what you are told. there are 1000 more indians waiting to take your job, here or elsewhere, if you dare say 'no' to a boss.
similarly, raise issues of safety or product design and you won't be continuing there much longer (personal experience on that one).
fuck sillicon valley. it stopped being a place of innovation when it became a place to concentrate chair-sitters from across the world. quantity is all that matters. do we have 'body count'? did we save a lot on it? then we're good (that's how they think).
if you are young, sure, come here. but you won't be able to stay long-term. just be aware of that. and be aware of the fact that companies laugh behind your back when you are gullible enough to believe this 'loyalty' shit they want you to swallow. don't believe it, though. eventually YOU will be replace by someone even cheaper. my years are numbered, but then again, so are yours.
no one is safe in the bay area, job-wise. it stinks here.
love the weather and the culture (well, the old culture, that some people still remember). but the days of the 'hp garage' is long gone. now, its stupid social bullshit, twits and disgracebook lead the pack. ie, no product at all, just hot air and advertising.
The young complain that everyone wants experience. The old complain they only hire the young.
The execs says nobody tells them anything and the workers say nobody listens to them.
US workers say H1Bs are undercutting them. H1Bs says the enormous cost and complications of the H1Bs gets them stuck in undesirable low-paying jobs.
The white guys say minorities and women are being preferred for diversity. Minorities and women complain that they have no connections and no way to even get into jobs.
My point is that it's hard for everyone and everyone faces unique challenges. Nobody has it easy. Let's figure out how to get what we want out of life rather than blaming everyone else for why we are not getting what we want.
"If a shooter is holed up and alone, can they be qualified as an imminent threat to life?"
In this case, definitely yes. Obviously a blanket judgement cannot be made for all cases. Each situation is entirely different.
So what's the difference in each situation?
The race of the suspect?
Obviously race plays a part in imminent threat to a cop's life during a routine traffic stop. Let's also add drone controlled execution as another.
... dearth of inspiration or even otherwise useful things to say. It's all transparently self-serving but so conspicuously lacking in substance and foundation.
If you really wanted to ensure a solid influx of STEM university students a few years down the line, you wouldn't be bothering with "learning to code" today. You'd make sure they get a solid grounding in the basics. You know, spelling, grammar, thinking, coming up with things to say. And, of course, math. Not "new math", but actual real math taught in a way that is maybe not huggy-feely, but certainly imparts the skill without putting off. Mathematicians have known for years that the math grounding is awful (along with the rest of highschool), and that it only gets interesting once you "catch the bug" and dive in, later, much later. Do something about that and raise the expected literacy and math proficiency floor from "typically functionally illiterate" to, well, somewhat higher at least.
But that isn't sexy. That's boring and hard work. Companies and politicians don't want to sponsor that.
"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."
Please stop. It doesn't work the way you're ranting it does.
Anon for obvious reasons.
I will hire a woman over a man for a tech role, even if the man is marginally better. If it's drastic, I'll hire the man - but if it's close, the woman wins out on one very simple factor: male dominated offices/teams/companies have a higher probability of disfunction. Having a female perspective, presence, and balance is actually worth the hit on pure skill.
In other words, a boys club is bad for life balance, moral, and eventually product quality and employee retention.
So this doesn't really surprise me. Hiring managers WANT women in the office. Yeah, this is sexist. But I've worked on teams where there have been zero women, and it's not a good balance.
You and every other hiring manager.
It's a well known fact that female graduates get more offers of higher quality than her male classmates. While a new male graduate in engineering is fighting to find his first job, the female graduate is choosing among the offers from the top companies.
I agree that smooth team functioning is most of the time more important than individual skill. However, is the dysfunction that you quote a justification or a real reason? Would a gay hiring manager have the same opinion?
But, gender isn't the only thing you can discriminate on to improve the team. What about age, race, nationality? Those also have some effect on the team.
There's still no std::string split() method.
It's in boost. http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/...
I look back fondly at "c with objects". At least I could decipher the error messages.
Well, C++ is fully backwards compatible.
But, please use STL. That WeirdCollection class is annoying to figure out.
Unmanaged code is inherently unsafe. C++ may be necessary in places but it doesn't belong in a line of business application
You can write managed code with C++.
Examples, Microsoft's C++ CLI and Clang LLVM.
C++ aficionados, your vexing problem has been solved! That is to say, your complex language has added a new "if" structure with more side-effects to enhance the impenetrability and opportunity for obscurantism that we all value so much.
Not a big deal. A simple code analysis tool should easily identify the problem.
C++ is still my favorite language, but I gave up on many features long ago. Even on templates ! Why ? Because just one stupid mistake can produce hundreds of compile errors. And also, I don't want my code to become Perl like : a write only language.
Template errors are fine but compilers need to do a better job at displaying the error.
Most of modern C++ has been trying to be more like Java/C# like, not Perl like. Sometimes it makes things worse because there is hidden complexity behind the simple things.
I can see an international purchase on my bank's transaction history in one hour. Why does it take US banks 3 days to discover there's no money in a cheque writer's account? Why doesn't the seller wait a week before sending the item?
Banks can take just a few hours but scammers will seek out things which take the longest.
For example, scammers use fake western union money orders which take longer for whatever reason.
This interview is full of classic self-justification;
"I like to think I am a businessman. Not a criminal."
"I like to think my victims are rich and won't miss the money I'm stealing."
"I like to think those I'm stealing from had the opportunities I didn't. This makes us even."
"I like to think that because scamming is hard and takes time, it's like a real job."
"I like to think it's my victim's own fault I'm scamming them. It's not my fault they don't follow the rules and don't know the game."
But, ultimately, he knows that what he's doing is bad. He's justifying to the interviewer but he knows deep inside that he is harming people. He's saying he does what he does to survive and he would do something else if he got the opportunity.
If he was saying that he was helping people, saving the children etc then it would be dangerous.
I used to teach a pretty decent load of Chinese students in my classes in Manhattan (I taught at both NYU and on CUNY). By the '00s, they were significantly more creative, sophisticated, well-rounded, and learned (I make no claims about "intelligence") than my American students, who were really sort of "decadent" in the worst, stereotypical ways—knew only a few things about a few things but a lot about consumer goods and fashion, and didn't seem to think they needed to work, just didn't feel the global pressure from competing workers. Very entitled.
The Chinese students tended to cluster in 'A' territory and always approached me after class to talk about class topics until I had to leave, then followed up with serious questions by email. The American students always had one or two in the 'A' group and the rest clustering around low B and high C, and it was a struggle just to learn their names, as they had nothing at all to say to me unless I called on them in class. Ironically, many of the Chinese students had better formal English as well, though there were always also about half that were clearly 'winging it' and needed ESL—but were killing it in class performance anyway, managing to learn and to get through books by relying on a dictionary, a study group, and sheer determination.
As a teacher, never ever stereotype anyone. Treat each student on their own metrics and not as a subset of some group that you deem them to be in.
There could be other explanations. In my case, I found out that Chinese students had already learned the material in their home country. This was their second go at taking the class in English.
Remember the story where a Russian immigrant stole trade secrets from Goldman Sacs? Turned out it was open source code and it was uploaded to work on it from home?
Though the Xu was trying to sell it, I have a feeling that this is probably more of the anti-China that Slashdot has rather than really taking the time to talk about what is really going on.
And, National Health and Family Planning Commission in China? What is the link to that agency and the code?
Interesting idea that I could get behind... I'd say 2x prevailing wages for the skillset/title and a minimum of 2x average household income would be sufficient to make it unpalatable to use an H-1B for anything short of someone you legitimately cannot find or train. It'd also drive local wages up for anything in demand because they could save money by hiring local vs. hiring someone on a visa. It'd create fierce competition among the best and brightest all over the world to get in on the program because it'd give them instant high salaries, increase local salaries to what the market would actually bear for the skills, draw more people into unskilled work they consider below them (because they could live on the now-increased incomes), etc. It'd also kill a lot of crufty companies that aren't actively profitable in their space to make way for ones that will be. Everyone would win except MBAs trying to goose quarterly statements.
It would backfire badly.
They'll just hire 1 manager who will manage a team in India. So, work will move out of the country faster.
Companies will work to make their cloud software easily managed from India.
We are in a capitalistic country. The force of cheaper labor is going to circumvent any artificial barriers you put in.