Such "work smarter" bullspeak might make the speaker feel better and like he has some control over the situation, but it's got little to do with economic reality in this marketplace.
I love how every reply to pro-free trade posts on this subject have some sort of ad-hominem attack within. It speaks loudly about what most people feel about this topic: Gimmie mine and fuck every one else.
You think that working smarter and more efficient means competing on price? This is why your jobs are going overseas. You have no clue how to respond to the challenge. You have no imagination or creativity and your ability only extends to what you've done a thousand times before.
It's pretty simple: No-one want's to buy what you're offering "in this market place". You have to offer something different or qualitatively better. This "bullspeak" is called "logic" and is pretty inescapable.
The one thing you don't want is for consumers to settle these things themselves, or you'll see a Post WWII attitude, where the public will completely refuse to buy anything not made in America.
Typical American. Have you considered that the rest of the world will get along fine without you? If Americans don't buy cheap overseas products, the cost of their own products will go up making them less competitive and the rest of the world will buy less.
The fact is most countries have open economies. The US has a deficit because they consume more than they produce. And the whole of the rest of the world doesn't exploit it's workers. The fact is that IT products and services had be produced more cheaply elsewhere.
The fact is that most Americans would rather keep their overpaid jobs than see poor countries get ahead. Just because it affects you you don't like it. But you probably didn't complain when you got high quality, cheap computer hardware on the same basis. And those countries (now successful and quite affluent) who produce that cheap hardware used to be in the same position that the underpaid, un-uniounised, low health/safety standard countries you're referring to are now. The only way things will get better is if they have a chance to compete.
"Get a job that is available." Right. You're a fool.
So your strategy is to get a job that isn't available. Who's the fool again?
If you're so good, get a job. You're obviously not because you don't have one. Otherwise you're lazy or too proud if you won't try something different.
You're just another one of these whiners who want the government to wipe your arse. Rember, the US is not a socialist state. You should move somewhere where someone gives a damn.
You've missed my point. Maybe I should have said: get a job that is available. If programming jobs are scarce, look for something else. retrain yourself or do some (people) networking and find out what the next big thing is. If you're bright, your success is in entirely in your hands.
The IT industry for near on 20 years.. quite a claim.
Uh-ha. So you're insinuating I'm telling a lie? Why is it so challenging to accept that I've worked for 20 years in IT? They did have computers in 1983, you know.
You obviously haven't worked for very long in the industry, becuase it's obvious things go in and out of fashion. In the local industry database work is plentiful. Within that various front ends have come and gone and are being replaced by Java. Same with databases and report generators. I've taught myself any number of these as well as other programming languages. If you can do network security or network admin, doesn't mean that these jobs will be replaced or be changed by fashion and technology. And other people can do the same job just as well. You're not the only one who can learn some cryptic commands and get your head around some convoluted system. New participants push wages down.
But you're saying that you have a right to whinge about this. Fine. But it does you little good. The fact is no-one cares when a corporation dies, except maybe the employees, shareholders and creditors. Same with individuals jobs. I'm sure the average factory worker or janitor is crying his eyes our for the loss of fat IT paychecks.
I'm not saying anyone is lazy or inflexible, I'm making the point that if no-one wants to hire you that is your tough luck and that if you want money, get yourself a job that is available to you and pays. All your crapping on about poor destitue network administrators is entirely pointless.
You mean those ho "have" SUVs and those that do not? I know that you wrote "slavery" in bold and in capitals letters, and that makes your argument more right, but I have to ask: how did the US get into the position of being #1 in the first place? Slavery was abolished long ago but the process of commoditisation and downward pressure on prices and wages has gone on continuously. I mean, weren't transistors and computers an innovation? Didn't that innovation create the jobs in the first place and push down prices of manufactured and other goods? Those people didn't becomes slaves, they just got jobs that were more productive and better paid while their jobs went to poorer people.
Americans used to be real get-on-with-the-job, can-do people. Now they're just a bunch of whiners like you. You're a sad indictment of today's America.
(a) Why are you so sure that I'm a resident of Australia? (b) What has that got to do with the subject at hand? (c) Did you know that a non-US resident can hold a.us domain if they do business in the US?
Nice theory, except that jobs can also be created. I'm not sure where you got the idea that there is a fixed number of jobs in your economy. And here's another little known secret: jobs are created by overseas markets. That's right! Those evil foreigners who take your jobs suddenly have money to buy US products and services (if they're attractively priced and of good quality) creating more US jobs! Amazing, this global economy thing.
The fact is that overseas cheap labour has the capacity to make the US more productive and more successful. But, just like when computers and automation took jobs from previous generations, there is some pain before the gain.
I'm currently unemployed and directly due to off-shoring.
You're unemployed because you don't have skills that are in demand. Just because you have a skill doesn't mean that someone will give you a job. No-one owes you a job. Why don't you get some training in something that people want?
I've worked in the IT industry for near on 20 years and I've had lots of work when my skill has been in demand. Inevitably it drops off after a few years, so I learnt something else and got lots of work in that. It had nothing to do with off-shoring, it's just that the job market becomes saturated. Just because the saturation comes from overseas makes no difference, except that it gives people who want to blame others for their problems a readily identifiable group of people to point their finger at.
Now, how to stop it? I favor use of tariffs to force up the price of offshore workers
Nice idea, except that the US economy's success is predicated on open trade and open enterprise. Your attitude doesn't surprise me much. Free enterprise and trade is great until it effects you, and the average American has no qualms about being hypocritical when it serves.
The fact is that introducing tariffs will make the situation worse, not better. More industry will move offshore because the cost of doing business in the US will rise. Countries will retaliate with their own tariffs and the amount of business going to the US will fall.
The fact is that most IT jobs are commodities: system administration, building web pages, support, most programming (visual basic, etc) and the like can be done by anyone. The only solution is to innovate, become more efficient and smarter in how you do things.
I live in a country with a relatively small, export oriented economy. Reform and increasing exposure to international competition has made the economy more robust and efficient.
Warning, there are a few instances of adult language in the discussion
Wow. You're warning readers of Slashdot of bad language? You are obviously new around here. Your average reader has survived enough goatse.cx links and wayward postings to make them inpervious to almost any form of degengenrate behaviour, dehumanising abuse, sexual perversion and SCO legal claim.
Your idea is good, but it needs a unit since "days of porn" clumsy. I propose the "ejac" which is one days worth of porn. Larger units are derived using the usual base 10 system:
decaejac kiloejac megaejac gigaejac... and so on
This is a handy unit since it can be converted into time (1 ejac = 20 minutes), liquid volume (1 ejac = 10cc), sound volume (1 ejac = 90dB) and distance (1 ejac = 75cm).
If we all pull together, with this as our common goal, we can make the ejac a truly universal unit.
This is a great argument utill some idiot teenager starts echoing your IP showing that you are sharing thousands of copyrighted files and you get a subpoena. If it's possible, someone will get around to eventually for a laugh. What do you do then? Plead your innocence siting your slashdot posting as proof? Well, you don't get a chance because you can't afford to fight the case because you haven't got a lazy 10-20K. So you pay up. And you're innocent, or so you say.
Let's face, if it happened to you you'd bee bawling endlessly about the injustice instead of condeming possibly innocent people.
You obviously haven't used Bearshare. it's very friendly, fast and effective. I found it eaiser to use than Kazza. It also has a wider (more eclectic) selection and most songs are quite available due to less congestion (ie freeloaders).
You'd be a fool to sell it short now, since it's guaranteed to go up more.
When you have people telling you this sort of thing, it's a good indicator that you should go short! How you trade is dependent on the style you use, but, to use a common approach, just as buying a good stock for the long term when it's going down is a good idea, selling a bad stock for the long term when it's going up is a good idea. Even though you think it 'guaranteed' to keep on going up, know one knows when it will turn. But it is almost certain to return to 66 cents or less in the long term.
It would have been nice if you'd just said why you thought it's not possible to short SCO instead of the condescending pointer to the book.
Let me say that normally you can short any stock, but only (a) if there is someone willing to lend you the stock to short it and (b) the statutory requirements for shorting are met - I'm not familiar with the exact rules, but there a maximum percentage (15%?) of the issued stock that may be shorted, also individual limits apply. At as of 3 September it was running at about 11%, so it's probably too late now.
Hi! It looks like you're posting a sarcastic comment to Slashdot! Would you like me to make fun of the humorless and daft who take your posting posting literally?
In a settlement with the authorities, I agreed not to bait the dumb, fearful and self-censoring morons on Slashdot. In return they agreed to do the cavity search twice.
This is very true. I have an idea which I'm not too fussed about discussing with most people, mostly because I know they have little chance of understanding it in detail. With people who are in a position to understand, no matter how many detailed explanations I provide, they just don't believe that it will work. It's technically possible, just runs contrary to common approaches.
Slashdot Mirror
Such "work smarter" bullspeak might make the speaker feel better and like he has some control over the situation, but it's got little to do with economic reality in this marketplace.
I love how every reply to pro-free trade posts on this subject have some sort of ad-hominem attack within. It speaks loudly about what most people feel about this topic: Gimmie mine and fuck every one else.
You think that working smarter and more efficient means competing on price? This is why your jobs are going overseas. You have no clue how to respond to the challenge. You have no imagination or creativity and your ability only extends to what you've done a thousand times before.
It's pretty simple: No-one want's to buy what you're offering "in this market place". You have to offer something different or qualitatively better. This "bullspeak" is called "logic" and is pretty inescapable.
The one thing you don't want is for consumers to settle these things themselves, or you'll see a Post WWII attitude, where the public will completely refuse to buy anything not made in America.
Typical American. Have you considered that the rest of the world will get along fine without you? If Americans don't buy cheap overseas products, the cost of their own products will go up making them less competitive and the rest of the world will buy less.
The fact is most countries have open economies. The US has a deficit because they consume more than they produce. And the whole of the rest of the world doesn't exploit it's workers. The fact is that IT products and services had be produced more cheaply elsewhere.
The fact is that most Americans would rather keep their overpaid jobs than see poor countries get ahead. Just because it affects you you don't like it. But you probably didn't complain when you got high quality, cheap computer hardware on the same basis. And those countries (now successful and quite affluent) who produce that cheap hardware used to be in the same position that the underpaid, un-uniounised, low health/safety standard countries you're referring to are now. The only way things will get better is if they have a chance to compete.
"Get a job that is available." Right. You're a fool.
So your strategy is to get a job that isn't available. Who's the fool again?
If you're so good, get a job. You're obviously not because you don't have one. Otherwise you're lazy or too proud if you won't try something different.
You're just another one of these whiners who want the government to wipe your arse. Rember, the US is not a socialist state. You should move somewhere where someone gives a damn.
I think that it's statistically correct. A useful generalisation.
You've missed my point. Maybe I should have said: get a job that is available. If programming jobs are scarce, look for something else. retrain yourself or do some (people) networking and find out what the next big thing is. If you're bright, your success is in entirely in your hands.
The IT industry for near on 20 years.. quite a claim.
Uh-ha. So you're insinuating I'm telling a lie? Why is it so challenging to accept that I've worked for 20 years in IT? They did have computers in 1983, you know.
You obviously haven't worked for very long in the industry, becuase it's obvious things go in and out of fashion. In the local industry database work is plentiful. Within that various front ends have come and gone and are being replaced by Java. Same with databases and report generators. I've taught myself any number of these as well as other programming languages. If you can do network security or network admin, doesn't mean that these jobs will be replaced or be changed by fashion and technology. And other people can do the same job just as well. You're not the only one who can learn some cryptic commands and get your head around some convoluted system. New participants push wages down.
But you're saying that you have a right to whinge about this. Fine. But it does you little good. The fact is no-one cares when a corporation dies, except maybe the employees, shareholders and creditors. Same with individuals jobs. I'm sure the average factory worker or janitor is crying his eyes our for the loss of fat IT paychecks.
I'm not saying anyone is lazy or inflexible, I'm making the point that if no-one wants to hire you that is your tough luck and that if you want money, get yourself a job that is available to you and pays. All your crapping on about poor destitue network administrators is entirely pointless.
You mean those ho "have" SUVs and those that do not? I know that you wrote "slavery" in bold and in capitals letters, and that makes your argument more right, but I have to ask: how did the US get into the position of being #1 in the first place? Slavery was abolished long ago but the process of commoditisation and downward pressure on prices and wages has gone on continuously. I mean, weren't transistors and computers an innovation? Didn't that innovation create the jobs in the first place and push down prices of manufactured and other goods? Those people didn't becomes slaves, they just got jobs that were more productive and better paid while their jobs went to poorer people.
Americans used to be real get-on-with-the-job, can-do people. Now they're just a bunch of whiners like you. You're a sad indictment of today's America.
(a) Why are you so sure that I'm a resident of Australia? .us domain if they do business in the US?
(b) What has that got to do with the subject at hand?
(c) Did you know that a non-US resident can hold a
if you think the prices in the U.S. and Europe will fall as a result of the lower costs, you must be the most naive person on this planet
Yeah, you're right. The only way to lower prices is to increase your costs. How could I have been so stupid!
Nice theory, except that jobs can also be created. I'm not sure where you got the idea that there is a fixed number of jobs in your economy. And here's another little known secret: jobs are created by overseas markets. That's right! Those evil foreigners who take your jobs suddenly have money to buy US products and services (if they're attractively priced and of good quality) creating more US jobs! Amazing, this global economy thing.
The fact is that overseas cheap labour has the capacity to make the US more productive and more successful. But, just like when computers and automation took jobs from previous generations, there is some pain before the gain.
Yeah, the truth hurts, don't it.
I'm currently unemployed and directly due to off-shoring.
You're unemployed because you don't have skills that are in demand. Just because you have a skill doesn't mean that someone will give you a job. No-one owes you a job. Why don't you get some training in something that people want?
I've worked in the IT industry for near on 20 years and I've had lots of work when my skill has been in demand. Inevitably it drops off after a few years, so I learnt something else and got lots of work in that. It had nothing to do with off-shoring, it's just that the job market becomes saturated. Just because the saturation comes from overseas makes no difference, except that it gives people who want to blame others for their problems a readily identifiable group of people to point their finger at.
Now, how to stop it? I favor use of tariffs to force up the price of offshore workers
Nice idea, except that the US economy's success is predicated on open trade and open enterprise. Your attitude doesn't surprise me much. Free enterprise and trade is great until it effects you, and the average American has no qualms about being hypocritical when it serves.
The fact is that introducing tariffs will make the situation worse, not better. More industry will move offshore because the cost of doing business in the US will rise. Countries will retaliate with their own tariffs and the amount of business going to the US will fall.
The fact is that most IT jobs are commodities: system administration, building web pages, support, most programming (visual basic, etc) and the like can be done by anyone. The only solution is to innovate, become more efficient and smarter in how you do things.
I live in a country with a relatively small, export oriented economy. Reform and increasing exposure to international competition has made the economy more robust and efficient.
Warning, there are a few instances of adult language in the discussion
Wow. You're warning readers of Slashdot of bad language? You are obviously new around here. Your average reader has survived enough goatse.cx links and wayward postings to make them inpervious to almost any form of degengenrate behaviour, dehumanising abuse, sexual perversion and SCO legal claim.
The poster should have included this link (pdf) - much more interesting.
Hmmm. We could use a neutral term like "wanker" in this case.
Your idea is good, but it needs a unit since "days of porn" clumsy. I propose the "ejac" which is one days worth of porn. Larger units are derived using the usual base 10 system:
... and so on
decaejac
kiloejac
megaejac
gigaejac
This is a handy unit since it can be converted into time (1 ejac = 20 minutes), liquid volume (1 ejac = 10cc), sound volume (1 ejac = 90dB) and distance (1 ejac = 75cm).
If we all pull together, with this as our common goal, we can make the ejac a truly universal unit.
This is a great argument utill some idiot teenager starts echoing your IP showing that you are sharing thousands of copyrighted files and you get a subpoena. If it's possible, someone will get around to eventually for a laugh. What do you do then? Plead your innocence siting your slashdot posting as proof? Well, you don't get a chance because you can't afford to fight the case because you haven't got a lazy 10-20K. So you pay up. And you're innocent, or so you say.
Let's face, if it happened to you you'd bee bawling endlessly about the injustice instead of condeming possibly innocent people.
You obviously haven't used Bearshare. it's very friendly, fast and effective. I found it eaiser to use than Kazza. It also has a wider (more eclectic) selection and most songs are quite available due to less congestion (ie freeloaders).
You'd be a fool to sell it short now, since it's guaranteed to go up more.
When you have people telling you this sort of thing, it's a good indicator that you should go short! How you trade is dependent on the style you use, but, to use a common approach, just as buying a good stock for the long term when it's going down is a good idea, selling a bad stock for the long term when it's going up is a good idea. Even though you think it 'guaranteed' to keep on going up, know one knows when it will turn. But it is almost certain to return to 66 cents or less in the long term.
It would have been nice if you'd just said why you thought it's not possible to short SCO instead of the condescending pointer to the book.
Let me say that normally you can short any stock, but only (a) if there is someone willing to lend you the stock to short it and (b) the statutory requirements for shorting are met - I'm not familiar with the exact rules, but there a maximum percentage (15%?) of the issued stock that may be shorted, also individual limits apply. At as of 3 September it was running at about 11%, so it's probably too late now.
Hi! It looks like you're posting a sarcastic comment to Slashdot! Would you like me to make fun of the humorless and daft who take your posting posting literally?
In a settlement with the authorities, I agreed not to bait the dumb, fearful and self-censoring morons on Slashdot. In return they agreed to do the cavity search twice.
This is very true. I have an idea which I'm not too fussed about discussing with most people, mostly because I know they have little chance of understanding it in detail. With people who are in a position to understand, no matter how many detailed explanations I provide, they just don't believe that it will work. It's technically possible, just runs contrary to common approaches.
Is it possible to have a first round of reviews after an earlier story about Athlon 64 reviews?
fp