Apple did what they tend to do well- they saw something that wasn't working well, and rolled out something that did it better. Of course, "better" here means "by making it profitable."
According to the article, you are not a "creative worker" since you actually produce a physical product (eventually).
Their spin on the phrase is more of artists, website writers, newspapers, film makers, and for some reason software writers (don't get that one, myself). This includes the distribution channels of the previous people- physical newspapers are dying, music and book stores are closing, movie rental shops are nearly dead. One of the themes was that the internet was going to open up more avenues to do more, and push prices down. Sure did, and now you can find pages and pages of "Cow Jokes" on Google. Now someone trying to produce something has to go against a much larger set of people trying to do the same thing. To get a book published before you needed a publisher that was willing to pay for the physical object upfront (unless you went to a 'designer press'). Now, with e-books, the barrier to entry is much lower, so you may make a few sales of a few bucks. It is an interesting article, though I don't agree with all of it. Seems like the most stable jobs now are with unions or in government positions for the lower skilled folks. With more knowledge and skills (and luck and/or who you know) you can advance to higher levels of management, which is slightly more stable than being a normal office worker. These are just some off-the-cuffs thoughts, I'm sure you all will be able to find more or find faults in them.
Makes you wonder what would make customers more uncomfortable- bad security or total incompetence? Though I would feel oh so much better with the statement "We're not going to comment on the technicalities of what we do." That just warms the cockles.
Agree. People always forget about the snow reflection factor. Gave myself snow blindness for a day by using the wrong sunglasses (this was before every pair of sunglasses were UV blocking). And water does a nice job, too (stupid canoeing trip fried my nose so bad I looked like Jimmy Durante).
And it didn't mean when they first started issuing Social Security numbers that those numbers would be used as primary identifiers, either, yes? Those who don't know history....
There are some towns (counties?) in Texas that opted out of SS/Medicare back in the '80s(?), and have done way better financially than the government plans. But remember when Bush tried to push the "Personal choice" thing for SS, and how he was eviscerated? I would rather get to choose where I get to save my money rather the government. If you're so dumb not to save while you're working, too bad for you.
I generally agree with you in letting employees have more freedom, but I still see a need for an overview group/agency/whatever or you go back to the times of the railroad barons and all the various evil stuff they did.
By the way, "you RTFA? WTF? You are not supposed to!" gave me a hearty chuckle.
I wonder how popular the iNano (or whatever it's called) is? Really tiny thing you can clip to your shirt and go for a run. And I think it's fairly cheap, too ($50 or so?)
Why publish when you can keep it for yourself for your own gain? Also, just because they don't publish doesn't mean they are not doing research. (no, I have zero idea if the are or are not.)
Also, you may want to quote your own evidence that-
"we have been mislead on a massive scale by grant-loving scientists is entirely from the imagination of people who dislike the findings, or from crackpots who had their unscientific papers rejected."
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Roemer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363-406.
Yep, took about 4 posts after yours to happen. And he also seems to forget that scientists will lean to where the money is (left or right, up or down). They don't get lots of money if they are studying things that either 1) don't interest, or 2) don't coincide with the purse-string holders' ideas/beliefs.
Sounds neat, but what caught my attention was the misread "Adapteva Announces METH Processor." Oops, I thought it was going to be one heckuva an article. Still neat, though.
Thanks for naming it, best I could come up with off the top of my head was 'vortex.' I've driven past semis, and I can feel some effects, but in the scaled up version I wasn't sure if it would be magnified or not. (I'm not a physics guy.)
The whole case was about the owner denying unemployment benefits. Since the owner is forced to pay into it, and you're saying that it's a contract between owner and employee, the employees should just not pay their share into it, and it's all good because there is no contract between the employee & owner on payment into UI.
Well, you can't complain with needing to wear the company's shirt- it marks you as an employee. But I guess you'd be OK with some overweight, hairy guy coming to work in a thong. Hey, he just sits at his desk all day, so no safety concerns, right? Secretaries in bikinis? Oh yeah! Maybe the HR person can dress up like "The Gimp." That would make for some awesome interview stories.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple did what they tend to do well- they saw something that wasn't working well, and rolled out something that did it better. Of course, "better" here means "by making it profitable."
According to the article, you are not a "creative worker" since you actually produce a physical product (eventually).
Their spin on the phrase is more of artists, website writers, newspapers, film makers, and for some reason software writers (don't get that one, myself). This includes the distribution channels of the previous people- physical newspapers are dying, music and book stores are closing, movie rental shops are nearly dead. One of the themes was that the internet was going to open up more avenues to do more, and push prices down. Sure did, and now you can find pages and pages of "Cow Jokes" on Google. Now someone trying to produce something has to go against a much larger set of people trying to do the same thing. To get a book published before you needed a publisher that was willing to pay for the physical object upfront (unless you went to a 'designer press'). Now, with e-books, the barrier to entry is much lower, so you may make a few sales of a few bucks.
It is an interesting article, though I don't agree with all of it. Seems like the most stable jobs now are with unions or in government positions for the lower skilled folks. With more knowledge and skills (and luck and/or who you know) you can advance to higher levels of management, which is slightly more stable than being a normal office worker.
These are just some off-the-cuffs thoughts, I'm sure you all will be able to find more or find faults in them.
Makes you wonder what would make customers more uncomfortable- bad security or total incompetence? Though I would feel oh so much better with the statement "We're not going to comment on the technicalities of what we do." That just warms the cockles.
Kind of like the towel in Hitchhiker's.
Agree. People always forget about the snow reflection factor. Gave myself snow blindness for a day by using the wrong sunglasses (this was before every pair of sunglasses were UV blocking). And water does a nice job, too (stupid canoeing trip fried my nose so bad I looked like Jimmy Durante).
n/c
And it didn't mean when they first started issuing Social Security numbers that those numbers would be used as primary identifiers, either, yes? Those who don't know history....
Nah, just stick some Silly Putty all over it. If they come after you, "Hey, my kid was playing in the car, what ya want?"
There are some towns (counties?) in Texas that opted out of SS/Medicare back in the '80s(?), and have done way better financially than the government plans. But remember when Bush tried to push the "Personal choice" thing for SS, and how he was eviscerated? I would rather get to choose where I get to save my money rather the government. If you're so dumb not to save while you're working, too bad for you.
I generally agree with you in letting employees have more freedom, but I still see a need for an overview group/agency/whatever or you go back to the times of the railroad barons and all the various evil stuff they did.
By the way, "you RTFA? WTF? You are not supposed to!" gave me a hearty chuckle.
Actually, I did a post with a bunch of links that backed my point. It was before my "you should post your info" post. What the heck?
I wonder how popular the iNano (or whatever it's called) is? Really tiny thing you can clip to your shirt and go for a run. And I think it's fairly cheap, too ($50 or so?)
Why publish when you can keep it for yourself for your own gain? Also, just because they don't publish doesn't mean they are not doing research. (no, I have zero idea if the are or are not.)
Also, you may want to quote your own evidence that-
"we have been mislead on a massive scale by grant-loving scientists is entirely from the imagination of people who dislike the findings, or from crackpots who had their unscientific papers rejected."
Fair play.
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Roemer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363-406.
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/141453-scientists-put-aside-politics-and-focus-on-climate-science
http://www.servirglobal.net/tabid/409/Article/497/nasa-to-focus-more-on-studying-climate-change.aspx
http://articles.latimes.com/1994-03-03/local/me-29585_1_animal-science-curriculum
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/03/29/yale-to-greens-abandon-climate-change-focus-on-energy/
I see your point, but then he points it in one direction. How about he 'forgot' 1/2 of the money trail? Fair?
Yep, took about 4 posts after yours to happen.
And he also seems to forget that scientists will lean to where the money is (left or right, up or down). They don't get lots of money if they are studying things that either 1) don't interest, or 2) don't coincide with the purse-string holders' ideas/beliefs.
Sounds neat, but what caught my attention was the misread "Adapteva Announces METH Processor." Oops, I thought it was going to be one heckuva an article. Still neat, though.
Turbo and super? Wow, the engineers must have been absolutely giddy designing that.
Thanks for naming it, best I could come up with off the top of my head was 'vortex.' I've driven past semis, and I can feel some effects, but in the scaled up version I wasn't sure if it would be magnified or not. (I'm not a physics guy.)
If you'll pay my airfare to Australia, sure! Always wanted to see a drop bear....
Fair enough!
The whole case was about the owner denying unemployment benefits. Since the owner is forced to pay into it, and you're saying that it's a contract between owner and employee, the employees should just not pay their share into it, and it's all good because there is no contract between the employee & owner on payment into UI.
Ron Paul, huh? Good luck.
Do not bring logic into Slashdot! How many times do we have to tell you this! lol
Well, you can't complain with needing to wear the company's shirt- it marks you as an employee. But I guess you'd be OK with some overweight, hairy guy coming to work in a thong. Hey, he just sits at his desk all day, so no safety concerns, right? Secretaries in bikinis? Oh yeah! Maybe the HR person can dress up like "The Gimp." That would make for some awesome interview stories.
He'd definitely be a shitty manager.