While you can't easily prove your phone ISN'T sending data, you can certainly prove when it IS sending data.
Simply take out the SIM card, turn on WiFi, and monitor the connections. I'd imagine many apps/hacks/vulnerabilities aren't designed to automatically disable if the cellular radio is off. So that'd logically leave you with ones that are, and ones that depend specifically on a cellular modem. (Fun fact: Cellular modems can actually have root file access to your phone, an "Red Flag!"-level vulnerability.)
Lastly, come to think of it. I wonder if you could design a "Communication LED" like modems and ethernet hubs/cards have. A blinking LED any time the PHY layer is sending data. However, I don't know enough about the GSM/CDMA protocol to know how often a cellphone "actively" sends data (announcement to look for potential cell towers), or if it's passive in nature.
A quick Google seems to favor the passive route (and battery conservation sure sounds like the right idea for a protocol.)
This would certainly be outside of "most" people's abilities. Cellphones are a pain-in-the-ass to open without damaging, and you'd have to identify the PHY layer and I would imagine you can't simply attach an LED to a GSM antenna. But the point remains. For a donor phone and a (hardware) hacker with a free weekend, one could likely build a phone that lights up an LED whenever it sends data. And logically, you've then made a phone that will tell you if entire ranges of apps and Android features "call home."
Perhaps I'm overthinking it. An even better method (if you had the cash) would be to create a fake cellphone tower ("base station") that forwards back to the internet and gives you a packet log. OpenBTS (open base station) exists already. Then you'd be able to see many layers of the stack and not just a transmit LED, to help identify what is talking and where it's going.
- Deny it's an issue until absolutely possible.
- Detract from anyone who might be right and calling attention to the issue. Call them nerds, neckbeards. Imply they're "not holding the phone right."
- Only when the PR storm STILL hasn't faded and sales continue to decline:
- STILL don't admit there's a problem and "work with" whoever did the study/comment to try and attack their clarity. (Say they "did the test wrong.")
And then... MAYBE just then... if they admit any blame?
- PUSH BLAME onto a few scapegoat engineers and never admit it's a result of a manager being an asshole. (The GM method.)
The sad thing is, I probably missed a few more strategies on the top. It's amazing how "Hard" it is for a company to just admit when something doesn't meet their own specifications.
I guess if I'm splitting hairs, peer-to-peer likely predated any games too. I should have worded that better to point out that a major, well-known product was running peer-to-peer a LONG time ago.
"Peer-to-peer technology" has existed since like... some of the first network games.
DOOM ran peer-to-peer.
Fun fact: As soon as they launched it they went "Oh shit, that means anyone who hacks their... can cheat? What have we done?!" (John Romero on a GDC talk) Quake would be client-server after that. Quakeworld was the first (or one of the first) major game to support latency compensation. Quake was completely tested "in house" on LANs and their dedicated T1/T3 or whatever and when people tried to play on their crappy 28.8K modems it was a disaster. People forget that not only have modems gotten better, but the infrastructure of the internet itself has gotten WORLDS more reliable and fast.
Is that just because something is edited the most, doesn't mean the article is of high quality, or importance. It seems far more likely that Donald Trump's wiki is more of a proxy war for people's frustrations with politics, and the "Weapons" are cleverly twisting Wikipedia's rules to get what you want.
I'll be surprising nobody but the most staunch biased people, that Wikipedia has plenty of great articles but you NEVER go to the "dark side" of Wikipedia... which is anything hardcore liberals might find interesting and worthy of "parking"--sitting on an article, watching any changes, and ferociously fighting any changes you don't like. As long as the parking-person is more willing to fight than you are to see the truth (almost always), then they win. And Wikipedia becomes this world of dicks fighting turf wars over control of mere words.
I'll never forget reading the article on "Political Correctness." It was horrific. Like entering a completely different (hence "dark") Wikipedia. It called PC a "pejorative" word (you know, like a hate word used to hurt someone). It argued that PC didn't actually exist AND that it was actually a good thing at the same time. It didn't even try to be rational and in the the talk pages? They "ruled" that any professor, article, or idea they didn't like was "violating Wikipedia's rules". Rules they didn't apply to their own links to radical blogs with readers in the dozens.
I'm no fan of that conservative wikipedia (ew...) but man, it sure would be nice if people were as fair and rational as they claimed to be. It doesn't help when the heads of the project at Wikimedia don't call them out and try to stop it. You know, "it's only 'wrong' if the dicks are saying things you don't agree with." Which strikes me, as an adult, and an outsider, as rather sad. A willful corruption of a wonderful idea "for the greater good."
And I say all of this AS A LIBERAL. But I'm honest first, and political second. I honestly don't understand why people are so willing to obscure facts, and twist Wikipedia guidelines to push their agenda. It's like trying to put my head into that of a serial killer, or an alien. I can't even begin to figure out why people do it. Isn't the truth a noble goal in, and of, itself? And wouldn't you want to be on the side of the truth, even if it goes against your preconceived ideas about the world? Oh well...
I played and beat Trespassor. I still loved it. Imagine it today with an Oculus Rift.
Sure, it didn't live up to it's potential AT ALL. But it had more gameplay than many games I never enjoyed enough to beat. It had basic physics puzzles long before most (all?) FPS games did.
You incidentally described my experience with VLC. Much of the UI and many features are broken and never get fixed on Windows and the developers will straight up say they don't care. VLC ignores the standard which says a disabled audio track should not be the first one played even if it comes first in the steam order. (So you get files with Russian audio playing even though the spec says the first non-disabled track should be English.) VLC ignores color profiles. (GAMMA? WHAT GAMMA?) It loads directories wrong and just won't "see" any files.
Here's a quote from a bug report about gamma:
>Noone seems to care about this feature, noone has been working on it.
Wow. Great guys.
Now, before some asshole chimes in. I "get it." It's a privately, free program and they don't HAVE TO do anything they don't want. That's not the problem. The problem is too many large projects throw away "usability for their users" just so they can follow features they enjoy as the rest of the code base rots away.
You're welcome to do that all you want, but you can't also advertise to people that they're getting a sound, maintained software package. You can pretend all you care about is random git commits, but people care about the complete package. Who cares if you added an awesome (stupid) dancing light effect to VLC, if you also broke the file loading routines and no one can use the whole thing?
You can't release something to the public (for them to use) and then pretend people's complaints don't exist. If VLC (and projects like it) want to be "private" repos for coders to test out silly effects, then great. But don't advertise it anymore like it's a real project for everyone to use.
And what I "think" happens is that the core, senior programmers leave or become "very part-time" and lots of new programmers come in and either 1) miss out on their core knowledge and are afraid to touch anything, and/or 2) don't care about the project in the same way and only care about their little tweaks. Nobody steps up to become a core maintainer for general bug fixes.
When I was trying to mod the Dolphin Project, the only people who knew anything about the shader generation routines I wanted to touch were in Germany and only frequented IRC at certain German hours. It was hard as hell to get any information from anyone. Everyone just said, "Only X and Y might know anything about that, sorry." Now I'm NOT saying Dolphin guys are bad guys or the project is an upcoming failure--they're very active and great guys. What I am saying is that I ran into an area where the project had been experiencing Knowledge Loss. When people left or became "almost left", their knowledge of why code existed a certain way went them.
Watch how magically fast the animated GIF backgrounds display. How magically instantaneous the text renders. Why? NO CSS. NO JAVASCRIPT. No 5 MB app being downloaded.
And even then CSS and JS don't have to be slow. But people designing these websites simply don't give a shit about speed. Have you ever tried to load a Google Document on a Netbook with an Atom processor? Apparently a dual-core CPU with 2 GB of RAM isn't enough TO DISPLAY TEXT and if you try and multi-task it'll bring your computer to a complete halt. I've literally had to panic close tabs in Linux with my netbook with Google Docs open with other tabs, because if it starts getting laggy, it'll quickly get to the point it freezes the whole computer (>15 seconds between mouse moving) and it's actually faster to reboot the entire thing. (SSD ftw.)
I'm searching for X programming topic. I enter it into Google.
Because I'm not a moron, I hold control-click and load all top-ten results in tabs. I then quickly compare-and-contrast them to make sure I getting the complete picture and not a heavily biased, tunnel-vision answer.
TADA.
Also, I open windows for separate "tasks" and tabs for related information to those tasks. (For example, one window is personal tabs like YouTube music and Gmail.) By time I end a work day, I've had over 180 tabs open. I use OneTab to store blocks of interesting tabs for later. Great for saving RAM on a netbook too.
And what happens if Chrome crashes, OR, I accidentally hit Control-Shift-Q (kill ALL CHROME TABS) instead of Control-Shift-W (kill all tabs in a single window.) Well, now I've got to RELOAD EVERYTHING holding control-shift-T until all the tabs I need come back.
I'm not arguing that Chrome should cache everything you do. But the idea that this use case never shows up is just plain silly. Maybe you should learn to multitask more before claiming other people never do.
Don't get me wrong, we all know those results should be "correct."
But remember, and this is the core discussion to be had, how do you know:
1 - If any of your top results are correct? Should you really take Google's top position over your own critical thinking and compare-and-contrast of other articles?
2 - If Google can "choose" what's correct, even with the most noble of intentions, then what's to say they won't do it for other--less noble--purposes? Now this is slightly moot of a point, because they're already choosing using their search algorithm. The question becomes a finer one of, should algorithm's be designed specifically for morality? Maybe?
You apparently care more about feelings than pages of criticism. (Since you neglected to refute any of the glass door reviews.)
Now you know why people hate it there.
And "last few months"? Good lord. If your only saving grace for a 15-year old company is "last few months it got better" you ain't got much.
You also didn't address my core issue. That the majority of people there are non-essential. Wikipedia doesn't even create content, they only serve other people's hard work. At the very least, since it's their only "real" mission, serving wiki pages, they should reflect that understanding and hire more engineers as a percentage than any other profession. Doing the opposite is a clear indicator of a "fat company."
If I ran restaurants and I wasn't hiring more chefs, dish washers, and waiters/waitresses than administrators, I'd be a failure.
That's kind of stupid. Windows 8 and 10 offer "almost" no useful features over Windows 7 and have a much less power-user friendly GUI. Every GUI dialog takes twice as long to display, and twice as many clicks to accomplish.
The ONLY feature of Windows 8/10 that I've noticed I'm missing? Desktop Duplication API which allows fast, user-mode, desktop capture. Why isn't it in Windows 7? Because Microsoft arbitrarily decided to remove it from that version of DirectX/DXGI for Windows 7.
And I work in IT and software development, supporting hundreds of Microsoft desktops and servers from XP (and Win server 2003, ugh.) to Windows 10 and use them all regularly. So I'm talking from a position of experience, and not willful blindness.
They used to have ONE or two full-time engineers running the entire site till like... 2008 or so. Then they started hiring TONS of people running the "Foundation" including marketing, events, charity shit, "diversity consultant" hires. Basically, an army of losers who don't do anything productive and spend their time justifying their existence and partying.
Basically, Wikipedia has become the US college system. A few productive teachers, surrounded by an army of "administrators" and their assistants... and their assistants... and their assistants.
Hell, check out one of their own projections. Only 35% is engineering. That's pretty much the opposite of "lean" for a company that PRODUCES NO CONTENT.
>This is an organization in crisis. It is highly dysfunctional, there is a strong culture of secrecy, which is surprising for an organization working in open knowledge. Teams are siloed and isolated, C-levels disagree on direction, ED has lost the support needed to do her job, BoT is in a freeze and too weak to drive change. It is a toxic and depressing place to work.
>Bureaucracy and secrecy creeps in unless regularly checked. Our Board sometimes wants us to be a venture-style tech company rather than a knowledge-empowerment nonprofit. Community consultation adds a layer of complexity to every new venture (but its worth it!).
>PHP. Low pay. Fear of changes. Top management has almost completely flipped since Lila took over in 2015. (including bosses who have come and gone since then) It's really tough to get work done when your boss keeps changing.
>Many mid-level managers are inexperienced and have trouble supporting their employees. Overall lack of strategy and lack of will to make positive change. The communication can be disrespectful. The foundation values diversity but fails to make it one of their own priorities.
>Politics! Politics! Politics! Performance review process outdated.
>Tolerance of non performers, Hostile behaviors by some staff threaten continued diversity/innovation.
Slashdot Mirror
If it was Apple, they'd call it a "courageous error logging" to allow for "continuous system improvement."
AH, the Toshiba strategy.
While you can't easily prove your phone ISN'T sending data, you can certainly prove when it IS sending data.
Simply take out the SIM card, turn on WiFi, and monitor the connections. I'd imagine many apps/hacks/vulnerabilities aren't designed to automatically disable if the cellular radio is off. So that'd logically leave you with ones that are, and ones that depend specifically on a cellular modem. (Fun fact: Cellular modems can actually have root file access to your phone, an "Red Flag!"-level vulnerability.)
--- Citation for last point:
http://www.darkreading.com/mob...
----------------- Secondary post:
Lastly, come to think of it. I wonder if you could design a "Communication LED" like modems and ethernet hubs/cards have. A blinking LED any time the PHY layer is sending data. However, I don't know enough about the GSM/CDMA protocol to know how often a cellphone "actively" sends data (announcement to look for potential cell towers), or if it's passive in nature.
A quick Google seems to favor the passive route (and battery conservation sure sounds like the right idea for a protocol.)
https://www.quora.com/How-ofte...
This would certainly be outside of "most" people's abilities. Cellphones are a pain-in-the-ass to open without damaging, and you'd have to identify the PHY layer and I would imagine you can't simply attach an LED to a GSM antenna. But the point remains. For a donor phone and a (hardware) hacker with a free weekend, one could likely build a phone that lights up an LED whenever it sends data. And logically, you've then made a phone that will tell you if entire ranges of apps and Android features "call home."
Perhaps I'm overthinking it. An even better method (if you had the cash) would be to create a fake cellphone tower ("base station") that forwards back to the internet and gives you a packet log. OpenBTS (open base station) exists already. Then you'd be able to see many layers of the stack and not just a transmit LED, to help identify what is talking and where it's going.
- Deny it's an issue until absolutely possible.
- Detract from anyone who might be right and calling attention to the issue. Call them nerds, neckbeards. Imply they're "not holding the phone right."
- Only when the PR storm STILL hasn't faded and sales continue to decline:
- STILL don't admit there's a problem and "work with" whoever did the study/comment to try and attack their clarity. (Say they "did the test wrong.")
And then... MAYBE just then... if they admit any blame?
- PUSH BLAME onto a few scapegoat engineers and never admit it's a result of a manager being an asshole. (The GM method.)
The sad thing is, I probably missed a few more strategies on the top. It's amazing how "Hard" it is for a company to just admit when something doesn't meet their own specifications.
Disable Nagle's Algorithm?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You won't. But you're clearly not their target market. Otherwise, they'd be pandering specifically to your interests like FOSS.
I guess if I'm splitting hairs, peer-to-peer likely predated any games too. I should have worded that better to point out that a major, well-known product was running peer-to-peer a LONG time ago.
"Peer-to-peer technology" has existed since like... some of the first network games.
DOOM ran peer-to-peer.
Fun fact: As soon as they launched it they went "Oh shit, that means anyone who hacks their... can cheat? What have we done?!" (John Romero on a GDC talk) Quake would be client-server after that. Quakeworld was the first (or one of the first) major game to support latency compensation. Quake was completely tested "in house" on LANs and their dedicated T1/T3 or whatever and when people tried to play on their crappy 28.8K modems it was a disaster. People forget that not only have modems gotten better, but the infrastructure of the internet itself has gotten WORLDS more reliable and fast.
But now I'm going pretty far off-topic.
Hurr Durr
The 1060 and 1050 are the budget cards. The lowest 1050's with 2 GB are a mere $115. You want more speed and RAM? Pay more.
Is that just because something is edited the most, doesn't mean the article is of high quality, or importance. It seems far more likely that Donald Trump's wiki is more of a proxy war for people's frustrations with politics, and the "Weapons" are cleverly twisting Wikipedia's rules to get what you want.
I'll be surprising nobody but the most staunch biased people, that Wikipedia has plenty of great articles but you NEVER go to the "dark side" of Wikipedia... which is anything hardcore liberals might find interesting and worthy of "parking"--sitting on an article, watching any changes, and ferociously fighting any changes you don't like. As long as the parking-person is more willing to fight than you are to see the truth (almost always), then they win. And Wikipedia becomes this world of dicks fighting turf wars over control of mere words.
I'll never forget reading the article on "Political Correctness." It was horrific. Like entering a completely different (hence "dark") Wikipedia. It called PC a "pejorative" word (you know, like a hate word used to hurt someone). It argued that PC didn't actually exist AND that it was actually a good thing at the same time. It didn't even try to be rational and in the the talk pages? They "ruled" that any professor, article, or idea they didn't like was "violating Wikipedia's rules". Rules they didn't apply to their own links to radical blogs with readers in the dozens.
I'm no fan of that conservative wikipedia (ew...) but man, it sure would be nice if people were as fair and rational as they claimed to be. It doesn't help when the heads of the project at Wikimedia don't call them out and try to stop it. You know, "it's only 'wrong' if the dicks are saying things you don't agree with." Which strikes me, as an adult, and an outsider, as rather sad. A willful corruption of a wonderful idea "for the greater good."
And I say all of this AS A LIBERAL. But I'm honest first, and political second. I honestly don't understand why people are so willing to obscure facts, and twist Wikipedia guidelines to push their agenda. It's like trying to put my head into that of a serial killer, or an alien. I can't even begin to figure out why people do it. Isn't the truth a noble goal in, and of, itself? And wouldn't you want to be on the side of the truth, even if it goes against your preconceived ideas about the world? Oh well...
Tell that to all the shows that are STILL in syndication today.
Seinfeld?
Star Trek: Next Generation?
Die Hard airing on Christmas Day?
Every time they air, they STILL make money.
I played and beat Trespassor. I still loved it. Imagine it today with an Oculus Rift.
Sure, it didn't live up to it's potential AT ALL. But it had more gameplay than many games I never enjoyed enough to beat. It had basic physics puzzles long before most (all?) FPS games did.
You incidentally described my experience with VLC. Much of the UI and many features are broken and never get fixed on Windows and the developers will straight up say they don't care. VLC ignores the standard which says a disabled audio track should not be the first one played even if it comes first in the steam order. (So you get files with Russian audio playing even though the spec says the first non-disabled track should be English.) VLC ignores color profiles. (GAMMA? WHAT GAMMA?) It loads directories wrong and just won't "see" any files.
Here's a quote from a bug report about gamma:
>Noone seems to care about this feature, noone has been working on it.
Wow. Great guys.
Now, before some asshole chimes in. I "get it." It's a privately, free program and they don't HAVE TO do anything they don't want. That's not the problem. The problem is too many large projects throw away "usability for their users" just so they can follow features they enjoy as the rest of the code base rots away.
You're welcome to do that all you want, but you can't also advertise to people that they're getting a sound, maintained software package. You can pretend all you care about is random git commits, but people care about the complete package. Who cares if you added an awesome (stupid) dancing light effect to VLC, if you also broke the file loading routines and no one can use the whole thing?
You can't release something to the public (for them to use) and then pretend people's complaints don't exist. If VLC (and projects like it) want to be "private" repos for coders to test out silly effects, then great. But don't advertise it anymore like it's a real project for everyone to use.
And what I "think" happens is that the core, senior programmers leave or become "very part-time" and lots of new programmers come in and either 1) miss out on their core knowledge and are afraid to touch anything, and/or 2) don't care about the project in the same way and only care about their little tweaks. Nobody steps up to become a core maintainer for general bug fixes.
When I was trying to mod the Dolphin Project, the only people who knew anything about the shader generation routines I wanted to touch were in Germany and only frequented IRC at certain German hours. It was hard as hell to get any information from anyone. Everyone just said, "Only X and Y might know anything about that, sorry." Now I'm NOT saying Dolphin guys are bad guys or the project is an upcoming failure--they're very active and great guys. What I am saying is that I ran into an area where the project had been experiencing Knowledge Loss. When people left or became "almost left", their knowledge of why code existed a certain way went them.
The UI is not slow.
What's slow is the fact you're loading MEGABYTE APPLICATIONS full of commands through the web that have to be processed before display.
Go to a 90's era website with HTML3.2. Watch how magically fast everything is displayed.
Check out the old website, "Internet Explorer is Evil":
http://toastytech.com/evil/
Watch how magically fast the animated GIF backgrounds display. How magically instantaneous the text renders. Why? NO CSS. NO JAVASCRIPT. No 5 MB app being downloaded.
And even then CSS and JS don't have to be slow. But people designing these websites simply don't give a shit about speed. Have you ever tried to load a Google Document on a Netbook with an Atom processor? Apparently a dual-core CPU with 2 GB of RAM isn't enough TO DISPLAY TEXT and if you try and multi-task it'll bring your computer to a complete halt. I've literally had to panic close tabs in Linux with my netbook with Google Docs open with other tabs, because if it starts getting laggy, it'll quickly get to the point it freezes the whole computer (>15 seconds between mouse moving) and it's actually faster to reboot the entire thing. (SSD ftw.)
Use case example?
I'm searching for X programming topic. I enter it into Google.
Because I'm not a moron, I hold control-click and load all top-ten results in tabs. I then quickly compare-and-contrast them to make sure I getting the complete picture and not a heavily biased, tunnel-vision answer.
TADA.
Also, I open windows for separate "tasks" and tabs for related information to those tasks. (For example, one window is personal tabs like YouTube music and Gmail.) By time I end a work day, I've had over 180 tabs open. I use OneTab to store blocks of interesting tabs for later. Great for saving RAM on a netbook too.
And what happens if Chrome crashes, OR, I accidentally hit Control-Shift-Q (kill ALL CHROME TABS) instead of Control-Shift-W (kill all tabs in a single window.) Well, now I've got to RELOAD EVERYTHING holding control-shift-T until all the tabs I need come back.
I'm not arguing that Chrome should cache everything you do. But the idea that this use case never shows up is just plain silly. Maybe you should learn to multitask more before claiming other people never do.
Apple is slut-shaming our laptops and phones into anorexia.
Let's think about this differently.
Don't get me wrong, we all know those results should be "correct."
But remember, and this is the core discussion to be had, how do you know:
1 - If any of your top results are correct? Should you really take Google's top position over your own critical thinking and compare-and-contrast of other articles?
2 - If Google can "choose" what's correct, even with the most noble of intentions, then what's to say they won't do it for other--less noble--purposes? Now this is slightly moot of a point, because they're already choosing using their search algorithm. The question becomes a finer one of, should algorithm's be designed specifically for morality? Maybe?
You apparently care more about feelings than pages of criticism. (Since you neglected to refute any of the glass door reviews.)
Now you know why people hate it there.
And "last few months"? Good lord. If your only saving grace for a 15-year old company is "last few months it got better" you ain't got much.
You also didn't address my core issue. That the majority of people there are non-essential. Wikipedia doesn't even create content, they only serve other people's hard work. At the very least, since it's their only "real" mission, serving wiki pages, they should reflect that understanding and hire more engineers as a percentage than any other profession. Doing the opposite is a clear indicator of a "fat company."
If I ran restaurants and I wasn't hiring more chefs, dish washers, and waiters/waitresses than administrators, I'd be a failure.
That's kind of stupid. Windows 8 and 10 offer "almost" no useful features over Windows 7 and have a much less power-user friendly GUI. Every GUI dialog takes twice as long to display, and twice as many clicks to accomplish.
The ONLY feature of Windows 8/10 that I've noticed I'm missing? Desktop Duplication API which allows fast, user-mode, desktop capture. Why isn't it in Windows 7? Because Microsoft arbitrarily decided to remove it from that version of DirectX/DXGI for Windows 7.
Great folks.
And some psychopath backported it to Windows 7.
https://github.com/rgcjonas/dd...
And I work in IT and software development, supporting hundreds of Microsoft desktops and servers from XP (and Win server 2003, ugh.) to Windows 10 and use them all regularly. So I'm talking from a position of experience, and not willful blindness.
Your making silly arguments.
My boss wanted me to sign up for it. Then I saw it needed a credit card. Then I checked their online reviews for billing practices and saw the scam.
I told him "You want to give me a company credit card, go ahead. But I'm not compromising mine."
Yeah, it's not like Facebook has removed posts from other countries as they steamroll over their citizens. Nope. No chance.
Who the hell designs a secret drone WITHOUT a self-destruct button?!
Obama will blame Russia, and then never prove it.
People commenting are just guessing.
They used to have ONE or two full-time engineers running the entire site till like... 2008 or so. Then they started hiring TONS of people running the "Foundation" including marketing, events, charity shit, "diversity consultant" hires. Basically, an army of losers who don't do anything productive and spend their time justifying their existence and partying.
Basically, Wikipedia has become the US college system. A few productive teachers, surrounded by an army of "administrators" and their assistants... and their assistants... and their assistants.
Hell, check out one of their own projections. Only 35% is engineering. That's pretty much the opposite of "lean" for a company that PRODUCES NO CONTENT.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...
But don't take my word for it. Check the glass door:
https://www.glassdoor.com/Revi...
>This is an organization in crisis. It is highly dysfunctional, there is a strong culture of secrecy, which is surprising for an organization working in open knowledge. Teams are siloed and isolated, C-levels disagree on direction, ED has lost the support needed to do her job, BoT is in a freeze and too weak to drive change. It is a toxic and depressing place to work.
>Bureaucracy and secrecy creeps in unless regularly checked. Our Board sometimes wants us to be a venture-style tech company rather than a knowledge-empowerment nonprofit. Community consultation adds a layer of complexity to every new venture (but its worth it!).
>PHP. Low pay. Fear of changes. Top management has almost completely flipped since Lila took over in 2015. (including bosses who have come and gone since then) It's really tough to get work done when your boss keeps changing.
>Many mid-level managers are inexperienced and have trouble supporting their employees. Overall lack of strategy and lack of will to make positive change. The communication can be disrespectful. The foundation values diversity but fails to make it one of their own priorities.
>Politics! Politics! Politics! Performance review process outdated.
>Tolerance of non performers, Hostile behaviors by some staff threaten continued diversity/innovation.