I'm not fine with them harassing other people on facebook during that downtime, specially because, if they do that with the company computer, I'M LEGALLY LIABLE for it.
Let them go grab a deck of cards and go play by the water cooler.
If your employees are so highly motivated that you need to watch over their shoulders to check they do their job, you've got a whole other set of problems that no surveillance in the world will solve for you.
All it takes is 1 employee. Even if 99.99% of them are highly motivated and don't need monitoring, all it takes is 1 to leak some sensitive data that a client entrusted my company with to make all the other employees had their jobs put at risk (not to mention the company itself).
Agreed, and this is not at all what the law proposes; it just sets limits to what, where and how the employer can check. E.g. no video camera's on the toilets, only medical exams pertaining to strictly work related stuff, no reading of personal emails etc.
Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
As a last note: you can spy on your employees all you want but that'll never be a replacement for trust and mutual benefit
Which is a completely different issue than the one posted by the moron slashdot editor. Yes, you are right, and I agree with you.
I read TFA in the original language, not the crappy translation. We are talking about things like cameras in the toilets here. Yes, you definitely can't check on me there.
And, quite frankly, it says a lot about the control freaks in management that they need to have it spelt out in a law that what I do in my private life after hours is something we used to call "private". Yes, even if I post it on Facebook for all to see. It is private in the sense that as long as my work is according to contract, it is none of your fucking business. I sold myself to you for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, if you want to have anything to do with the other 16 hours and the other 2 days, we need to renegotiate my contract including pay.
That is a completely different deal. Sorry, I can't read the original article. And looks like the slashdot editor should be working for The Sun, which really shouldn't surprise me.
Yes, I agree that kind of monitoring is abusive and should not exist.
So why are you paying for the internet connection if you don't want them to use it? Just so you can spy on them like a little perv? There's no law stating you need to provide them internet. You can simply disconnect it or, if they need certain sites/mail to perform their job, allow those sites only. (This is all assuming you fail to set your trust issues aside. IMHO maintaining a good relationship with your staff gets you much more than any monitoring or blocking solution.)
Ok, this is actually a good reply to my post, since you address issues directly. Thank you.
The average turnover for people in my industry is 2 years. In my company (yeah, I own it), it is 5 years. I would say I have a good relationship with my employees. Although I don't pay (salary) much higher than market average, I pay twice what the other companies pay for overtime. I'm not nice. I want them to be available for overtime, and their like it (some people more than double their salaries that way). I find it a fair exchange, and so do they. We take care of them, up to a point where I had my wife once going to the pharmacy to buy medicine for an employee's wife who was sick, and taking it to his home. We had people refuse other job who actually payed more than I do, because they like working here.
Before they sign their contract, they are informed all activities can be monitored. Internet use. E-mail, even their desktop can be monitored. They need internet for their work. They also deal with extremely confidential and sensitive data from other companies (clients). On top of that, local law states that the company and its owners are legally liable for anything illegal the employee does with the company computers. There is no such thing as "expectation of privacy". It gets shot down before their sign their contracts. They know it, and they know the reasons for it.
So they have some slack time. I expect them to be improving themselves during that time. I'm fine with them accessing Slashdot, or even some alternative meditation site. I'm not ok with them spend that time browsing porn, or chatting mindlessly with brain-damaged people on Facebook. If they do, and their unwise activity is something that didn't damage the company, I will talk to them. After that, they will improve, and not do that again.
All in the open. No "stealthy" things they were unaware.
My employees make some nice money, they are happy, want to continue working for me, even with all the monitoring I do.
What you're saying is that you are employing people you have to babysit. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys. Trying to solve your problem by firing one monkey and replace with another monkey is just idiotic. Try hiring decent people and offering them training, personal development and advancement opportunities. They'll be motivated to do good work 90% of the time. Trying to push that to 92% by spying will only put you right back at no one decent wanting to work for you and again you're stuck with monkeys and babies..
You are obviously not a manager or company owner.
Doesn't matter what the pay scale is. There are high payed people who will slack every chance they have, and do stupid stuff. There is low payed people who will do their best to shine.
It is a personal thing, and has nothing to do with pay, education level or anything else. There is absolutely no way to predict it in a consistent fashion. (Yes, I own a business, so I speak from experience).
In several countries, the company is legally liable for anything illegal the employee does using company resources. So, lets say someone uses the company computer to hack a site, or to buy stuff using a stolen CC, or even sending threats by e-mail. Both that person and the company will be liable.
I trust that is not the case in Germany, but don't you agree that by itself justify the company monitoring the usage of the company resources ? What you decided to call "spying" ?
Traffic LAW states you cannot go over the limit. I really don't like the argument that "it is only illegal if they catch you at it". You don't like that law ? You have several options. You can not drive. You can try getting elected and get the law changed. You can lobby for a change, without even running for office. Just ignoring the law sets a very bad precedent, and actually invites more abusive laws (if you consider that law abusive).
Now, back to the topic in question. So I own a company. I pay for the computer. I pay for the internet connection, electricity, desk, and even for the time you are there, supposed to be working. And I can't check on you ? Does that strike anyone else as utterly ridiculous ? Ok, I will accept (not agree) having to inform the employees the company will be monitoring. But not being able to check if the person is doing the work they get payed to do, is just stupid.
(It stands to reason) that most people are morons, and most statistics are flawed (not to say faked).
Concurrency doesn't mean "causability". Or, as Frank Herbert would say: "The head of the donkey doesn't cause the tail".
People who are motivated by challenges will be drawn to any situation that offers them. Be either in the corporate industry or online gaming. People who strive to outperform everyone else are more likely to do it. Again, online or offline.
That is on way implies that his online habits are causing his real life success. Thats concurrency: both things happening at the same time.
Re:Every windows application
on
Wine 1.2 Released
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I think Wine needs a usability team. Some kind of gui/tooling to make things easier for newbies to Wine.
That is exactly why Codeweavers makes money. And it is not even that expensive...
What you are describing are people using the wrong kind of logic and algorithms to do parallelization. The only new statement you make is:
Many algorithms just can not be converted to a format that will work within the restrictions of GPGPU computing at all.
I will take your word for it, since I really don't know GPGPUs at all. Most of my experience with parallelism is with clusters (up to 30 nodes). On that scenario, 99% of the time I've heard someone say something like that was because they were using bad algorithms for parallel processing, and even with 2-3 nodes they were not ideal.
But as I said, I have no experience with GPGPU, so my experience with clusters might not be relevant.
This is just like programing for a computer cluster... after a fashion.
Anyone used to do both should have no problem with this.
I'm anything but a high end programmer (I mostly only code for myself), and I have written plenty of code that runs with 7-10 threads. Believe me, when you change the way you think about how an algorithm works, it doesn't matter if you are using 3 or 10000 processors.
That would be a bit hard to do without changing the constitution. Not impossible, but definitively not simple or easy.
The Brazilian constitution is some a short document, like the USA's. Think of how hard it would be for a corporation to actually change the constitution, and you get the picture.
You are making a very wrong reverse inference there.
Just because speech is oral communication, doesn't mean that all oral communication is a speech. Same thing for press.
If you read the first amendment carefully, you will see that "free speech" doesn't mean that people can do whatever they want with what other people created. It says that people shall not be refrained from speaking their mind. And even that is limited. Try calling a judge a "son of a bitch" inside a courtroom and see what happens to you. Do you think you free speech right will keep you out of jail from contempt ?
Several people (myself included) accuses RIAA and other of distorting the laws, trying to make them mean something they do not, specially by taking specific statements out of context. To be able to accuse them of that, however, I must first make sure I'm not doing the same thing. You should do the same. Saying that the first amendment right of free speech means that you can freely copy other people's creations is a distortion at least a gross as what RIAA does.
One of the point of WoW numbers (and this is my personal theory only) is the fact you can run it on pretty much any computer. Even with the dreaded on-board video. The game developers should take a page from THAT book.
Some people in other parts of the world might want to access it, so those address need to work anywhere. That means root dns servers, which spells ICANN.
You are wrong on your definition of "speech". Or maybe in your definition of "free".
You see, either you consider something else another person did as a "speech" or not. If it is not (like a music score), then "free speech" does not apply.
But lets say that music score IS "speech". Since it is free, that means that THE AUTHOR, not you, is free to do whatever he likes with it, in any way he likes (so he can say only left handed people can read it, for example).
Understanding the law is no simple thing. People study it for years to be able to do correctly. As if real lawyers were not annoying enough, the internet provides us with an unlimited supply of armchair lawyers to make matters even worse.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope. I INFORM them BEFORE they get hired. If they are not fine with it, they can simply refuse working for me.
I don't change policies AFTER they get hired. In that case you would be right, I would have to ASK.
Considering I'm legally liable for anything done with my own equipment, I would say it is definitively worthwhile monitoring them.
Oh, I'm fine with them relaxing during downtime.
I'm not fine with them harassing other people on facebook during that downtime, specially because, if they do that with the company computer, I'M LEGALLY LIABLE for it.
Let them go grab a deck of cards and go play by the water cooler.
All it takes is 1 employee. Even if 99.99% of them are highly motivated and don't need monitoring, all it takes is 1 to leak some sensitive data that a client entrusted my company with to make all the other employees had their jobs put at risk (not to mention the company itself).
Which is a completely different issue than the one posted by the moron slashdot editor. Yes, you are right, and I agree with you.
That is a completely different deal. Sorry, I can't read the original article. And looks like the slashdot editor should be working for The Sun, which really shouldn't surprise me.
Yes, I agree that kind of monitoring is abusive and should not exist.
Ok, this is actually a good reply to my post, since you address issues directly. Thank you.
The average turnover for people in my industry is 2 years. In my company (yeah, I own it), it is 5 years. I would say I have a good relationship with my employees. Although I don't pay (salary) much higher than market average, I pay twice what the other companies pay for overtime. I'm not nice. I want them to be available for overtime, and their like it (some people more than double their salaries that way). I find it a fair exchange, and so do they. We take care of them, up to a point where I had my wife once going to the pharmacy to buy medicine for an employee's wife who was sick, and taking it to his home. We had people refuse other job who actually payed more than I do, because they like working here.
Before they sign their contract, they are informed all activities can be monitored. Internet use. E-mail, even their desktop can be monitored. They need internet for their work. They also deal with extremely confidential and sensitive data from other companies (clients). On top of that, local law states that the company and its owners are legally liable for anything illegal the employee does with the company computers. There is no such thing as "expectation of privacy". It gets shot down before their sign their contracts. They know it, and they know the reasons for it.
So they have some slack time. I expect them to be improving themselves during that time. I'm fine with them accessing Slashdot, or even some alternative meditation site. I'm not ok with them spend that time browsing porn, or chatting mindlessly with brain-damaged people on Facebook. If they do, and their unwise activity is something that didn't damage the company, I will talk to them. After that, they will improve, and not do that again.
All in the open. No "stealthy" things they were unaware.
My employees make some nice money, they are happy, want to continue working for me, even with all the monitoring I do.
What is the problem, exactly ?
You are obviously not a manager or company owner.
Doesn't matter what the pay scale is. There are high payed people who will slack every chance they have, and do stupid stuff. There is low payed people who will do their best to shine.
It is a personal thing, and has nothing to do with pay, education level or anything else. There is absolutely no way to predict it in a consistent fashion. (Yes, I own a business, so I speak from experience).
In several countries, the company is legally liable for anything illegal the employee does using company resources. So, lets say someone uses the company computer to hack a site, or to buy stuff using a stolen CC, or even sending threats by e-mail. Both that person and the company will be liable.
I trust that is not the case in Germany, but don't you agree that by itself justify the company monitoring the usage of the company resources ? What you decided to call "spying" ?
You see, I think this is a really poor example.
Traffic LAW states you cannot go over the limit. I really don't like the argument that "it is only illegal if they catch you at it". You don't like that law ? You have several options. You can not drive. You can try getting elected and get the law changed. You can lobby for a change, without even running for office. Just ignoring the law sets a very bad precedent, and actually invites more abusive laws (if you consider that law abusive).
Now, back to the topic in question. So I own a company. I pay for the computer. I pay for the internet connection, electricity, desk, and even for the time you are there, supposed to be working. And I can't check on you ? Does that strike anyone else as utterly ridiculous ? Ok, I will accept (not agree) having to inform the employees the company will be monitoring. But not being able to check if the person is doing the work they get payed to do, is just stupid.
(It stands to reason) that most people are morons, and most statistics are flawed (not to say faked).
Concurrency doesn't mean "causability". Or, as Frank Herbert would say: "The head of the donkey doesn't cause the tail".
People who are motivated by challenges will be drawn to any situation that offers them. Be either in the corporate industry or online gaming. People who strive to outperform everyone else are more likely to do it. Again, online or offline.
That is on way implies that his online habits are causing his real life success. Thats concurrency: both things happening at the same time.
That is exactly why Codeweavers makes money. And it is not even that expensive ...
I wish they would just allow us to use regular expressions and be done with it ...
Nadaka, you are just proving my statement there.
What you are describing are people using the wrong kind of logic and algorithms to do parallelization.
The only new statement you make is:
I will take your word for it, since I really don't know GPGPUs at all. Most of my experience with parallelism is with clusters (up to 30 nodes). On that scenario, 99% of the time I've heard someone say something like that was because they were using bad algorithms for parallel processing, and even with 2-3 nodes they were not ideal.
But as I said, I have no experience with GPGPU, so my experience with clusters might not be relevant.
What regular basis ? This is a one-time fee.
This is just like programing for a computer cluster ... after a fashion.
Anyone used to do both should have no problem with this.
I'm anything but a high end programmer (I mostly only code for myself), and I have written plenty of code that runs with 7-10 threads. Believe me, when you change the way you think about how an algorithm works, it doesn't matter if you are using 3 or 10000 processors.
Is it ? From the specification, you can read:
So, the standard range is less than 10 meters ? This is anything but awe inspiring.
Maybe the text is misleading, and it is not a standard 10m range. But that is the impression I get ...
Yup, it was a typo. You've got it right.
Sorry about that.
If you mean that Brazil don't have Hollywood paying off politicians, you are right on spot there.
Music labels, on the other hand, are pretty strong (ie: giving politicians money) here, tho.
That would be a bit hard to do without changing the constitution. Not impossible, but definitively not simple or easy.
The Brazilian constitution is some a short document, like the USA's. Think of how hard it would be for a corporation to actually change the constitution, and you get the picture.
You are making a very wrong reverse inference there.
Just because speech is oral communication, doesn't mean that all oral communication is a speech. Same thing for press.
If you read the first amendment carefully, you will see that "free speech" doesn't mean that people can do whatever they want with what other people created. It says that people shall not be refrained from speaking their mind. And even that is limited. Try calling a judge a "son of a bitch" inside a courtroom and see what happens to you. Do you think you free speech right will keep you out of jail from contempt ?
Several people (myself included) accuses RIAA and other of distorting the laws, trying to make them mean something they do not, specially by taking specific statements out of context. To be able to accuse them of that, however, I must first make sure I'm not doing the same thing. You should do the same. Saying that the first amendment right of free speech means that you can freely copy other people's creations is a distortion at least a gross as what RIAA does.
One of the point of WoW numbers (and this is my personal theory only) is the fact you can run it on pretty much any computer. Even with the dreaded on-board video. The game developers should take a page from THAT book.
Seriously. Blizzard will also agree.
Isn't Blizzard like ... making more money than all the console companies put together ?
Some people in other parts of the world might want to access it, so those address need to work anywhere. That means root dns servers, which spells ICANN.
You are wrong on your definition of "speech". Or maybe in your definition of "free".
You see, either you consider something else another person did as a "speech" or not. If it is not (like a music score), then "free speech" does not apply.
But lets say that music score IS "speech". Since it is free, that means that THE AUTHOR, not you, is free to do whatever he likes with it, in any way he likes (so he can say only left handed people can read it, for example).
Understanding the law is no simple thing. People study it for years to be able to do correctly. As if real lawyers were not annoying enough, the internet provides us with an unlimited supply of armchair lawyers to make matters even worse.