Yes, I knew that they WERE, but not any longer. McDonald's also owned at one time the Donato's pizza chain (an OH/MI small regional pizza chain), but they got out of that business too. Funny that McDonald's always boosts my favorite restaurants and then backs off again. It's like they know I loathe them and steer clear of me! (Just kidding, sheesh!)
That is by far one of the more important items on your list. "Learn one, do one, teach one." is what one of my work mentors was fond of saying, and it's true. You learn it first, you begin doing it second, and then you show others how to do it. I saw a statistic not too long ago (forget where), that a teacher retains 90% of the information they are teaching, whereas a student will only retain between 30 and 50%. (based on the instructional method being used - visual, verbal, reading, etc.)
I would be curious how many teenagers would significantly benefit from teaching children much younger than them the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic as part of their daily educational activities. Teachers would have more free time for training the teens on the more esoteric and difficult concepts in those main subjects, the teens would be beefing up their fundamentals, while still having the opportunities to learn new stuff from their teachers, teachers would have more time to be trained on progressively more difficult subject matter past their initial college education (the concept behind requiring a Master's to teach at the HS or lower level here in Ohio), and the whole system would self-perpetuate. Teachers could then more easily advance to the college professor level, etc. This is how big business largely works, and it's how early American society educated itself (apprenticeships), so why have we done away with it in our modern classrooms?
I'm convinced that this is the reason Chipotle is growing like a weed across the country. The food comes from better-than-McDonald's sources, usually all but one or two of the staff are Mexican, and even if they can barely understand English they're given the opportunity to serve the customers directly - AND they're waaaaayyyy better at it than your lazy-ass American kid at the drive-through!! Not to mention that they give their workers all kinds of great benefits like the day before Christmas off and the day after Thanksgiving off. (in addition to those holiday days off, which always pisses me off when we leave town to travel to the in-laws... no damn Chipotle's are open!)
I'm glad someone posted this early to this story. I saw ABC's lame-ass attempt at investigative journalism and America's "HS dropout rate - oh noes! won't somebody PLEASE think of the children!", and it was extreme media-spin and hyperbole. My wife likes to catch all the celebrity sleaze watching ABC, but we both agree that it's mostly useful for entertainment purposes ONLY in the morning based on world and national news. No, I don't like Fox either... they're even worse. In fact, ALL of the news media outlets on TV today are pretty much fluff, IMHO.
America has no severe HS drop-out problem that's just wildly out of control like ABC would like you to believe. Far more colonists' children were dropping out of "school" before they were 13 when this country was founded to help on the family farm, and yet we're told by intelligent journalists and researchers that kids in those days had more difficult education regimen's than today's HS students!
Face it everyone, if you're capable of carrying on an intelligent discussion on Slashdot, then you're probably already 90% not as likely to fit the modern American average Joe demographic that the major TV news media panders to on a daily basis. Don't worry about the crap they fling on those shows - it's not news, it's infoTAINMENT.
You need to overcome differing viewpoints and resistance to change which is obvious, but a non-obvious way to help you evaluate why the resistance to change exists and how to overcome it can be done through a "stakeholder analysis". See Table 1 from this link: http://www.isixsigma.com/library/content/c030708a. asp and the section just below that table called "putting improvements in place".
Many organizations (including my own) are guilty of making changes to process and procedures without fully involving the stakeholders involved in performing steps in those processes. If you want to be successful in making useful changes, always make sure to keep your stakeholders involved in helping understand the reason that the change is needed, and how the proposed change will benefit the organization (as it may not always appear to benefit all of the stakeholders of the process). A feedback loop on measured improvements to a process or procedure is always a beneficial thing to keep those involved in making the change happen encouraged that the new way of doing things is the right way to continue doing things too.
OK, I loathe to admonish the "get drunk to decide" idea that you proposed, but you are right about sincerely listening to your subconscious when making a huge decision like this. The subconscious is useful for making quick, gut-check decisions, but sometimes I have found it to be REALLY REALLY WRONG!!! More likely, what is happening is that in getting plastered, you and your friends are getting to a state of consciousness where you finally realize that every decision is not the end all be all to your life. So in a way, you are using THAT part of your subconscious (shutup about my spelling, haven't had all my coffee yet!) to allow yourself to go out and make a potentially big mistake that you know you can still recover from. (it's just a job, after all!)
My advice to the submitter:
If you have considered starting your own company a lot in the past, take the small business job. If you've considered it at all, or you are the type who can lead your own activities and motivate yourself to accomplish work, then you'll probably be OK with the small company.
If you like being given assignments, doing them perfectly, and don't mind the overhead of multiple managers in your management chain, then take the big job. If you want to be an Executive VP of Computer Engineering in a prestigious firm, go with the big job, but realize it's not gonna be easy to work your way up. You will have to work at it.
In my experience, either choice can be beneficial to your career as long as you make the most of it. And even if it turns out to be a disaster (at either company), it sounds as if you'll be able to find gainful employment elsewhere without losing too much time at the one job. Working in a small company can be like the transition from dating to marriage. One day she's this wonderful love of your life that you can't seem to spend enough time with, and then all of the sudden you're married and she's nagging you to do the dishes. She still may be the love of your life, but all those annoyances you each have about one another come out in a big way and you have to learn how to deal with them. Working in a big company is like being in high school all over again. There's lots of different cliques, bullies, nerds, wimps, goths, etc. but instead of having teachers and school administrators lead you, you are being led by your peers... some of which sometimes suck at being a leader. Yes, you have a lot more opportunities to grow in whatever direction you want to in a big company, but the money is only as good as getting straight A's, and as we all know, grades and money are not a great indicator of your worth as a person or your ability to enjoy your life. Choose wisely.
"- the internet itself is a very democratic concept (everyone an ip, one-to-one communication, empowerment of the individual,...)"
Bzzzt! Wrong! The Internet (or ARPANET, when it was officially begun as an expirement) existed to provide a fault tolerant communications system for the U.S. military who had come to rely on their wired communications for quick decision making in the battlefield. And anyone who has served in the military can tell you that it is still (for good reason) one of the least democratic institutions in the world! Yes, once "the Internet" got into academic hands the 'democracy' angle was pushed big time, but just look at the major influence capitalism is now having on how we use the Internet. Copyright issues, clogged up Internet tubes that need to be tiered for big companies, political fundraising and campaigning issues, and all the other bickering occurring between large swathes of people about the Internet today do not prove your point. On the contrary, I think these issues help justify the idea that technology is hardly a cause of a particular cultural behavior, but rather, is used in cultures to bolster or tear down differing cultural memes to the detriment of society as a whole. In other words, if we weren't all so selfish and caught up in our own causes then we'd probably be able to use our technology for the betterment of society much faster than we do today.
As for the original discussion topic, I think that the PhD candidate is going to have a hard time finding ample evidence to support his hypothesis because technology in and of itself is not a by-product of culture, but rather the usage of technology by a culture as a means towards a particular end is what is the more interesting, and more justifiable, research topic.
So what the hell? If boss is out until Tuesday and wants it Friday, why in the world would you deliver on Friday?!?! Boss won't even see it until Tues. so there's *theoretically* absolutely no harm in delivering on Tues. Now, if other people are relying on it to be done Fri. and it's your fault it's not done on time - your bad. If, however, the boss never told you about it, then you'd better explain to him/her periodically how much of your ass they need to be kissing to get it done AS A FAVOR to them for their own forgetfulness.
I still do not understand why so many people complain about too much work, how work intrudes on their private lives, etc. etc. If it intrudes so much so that it hurts, either push back on your boss, or go find a new job. Can't get a new job because the current one pays the bills and any other job wouldn't? Guess who's fault that is? Not mine, and not the government's, and not your company's, and not your boss' fault. It's your paycheck, budget the use of it!
Now, all that being said, I KNOW there are situations that we all run into where it's not that easy, and you gotta provide for your family, etc. But for the whiners who ALWAYS complain about this year in and year out - hello! you've had a few years now to correct the situation through creative alternatives to your predicament... it should be the awfully special case that such a situation has no other resolution after a few years.
OK, that's a fair comment that there is this unique 10-20 yr group of people (GenX'ers and GenY'ers in popular media) that grep's the whole computer thing in a way that anyone else born before or after us doesn't. (I was born in 1976, btw) I guess I wasn't so much arguing that point as much as the thought that those who grow up with computers (post early 90's babies) will somehow have a very different experience than others. I am just viewing that paradigm as similar to previous technological advances in our society like flight or the automobile.
However, if part of your argument happens to be that our educational system in the U.S. blows chunks and could therefore contribute to a future generation knowing basically nothing about the actual operations of computers, then yes, I can agree with that. Which leads us to either welcome our future Chinese overlords, or to run around acting like idiots in our future oversized jail cell: the U.S.A. as the rest of the world passes us by.:-P
You're not exactly correct about generational differences. I think the thing you are witnessing is the switchover from "how things used to be" (i.e. no computers) to "how all things now are" (i.e. everyone uses computers).
Notice the flip from a no-car society to a 2 cars in every garage society. We take cars for granted, everyone learns to drive, and only some become very knowledgeable and capable mechanics, and only some can really drive well... all the rest pretend to do both, but it's obvious that they're idiots to the knowledgeable and capable drivers and mechanics. (I'd place myself in the "knowledgeable and capable enough" category - i.e. I can troubleshoot some stuff but generally will defer to paying an arm and a leg to someone better than me whenever it gets a little complicated.)
Computer users in this age are much the same. The older generation of people who wouldn't ever "get it" in the first place are the ones who repeatedly infect their computers with spyware and other virus crap, and those few who do get it don't stick out like sore thumbs because their capacity to master their computer puts them entire leagues ahead of the other old people. Meanwhile, you have these kids growing up with computers everywhere who "use" computers everyday, but still couldn't distinguish between a CPU, a video card, and the monitor and the functions of each... to them, those are just parts that go in "the computer."
And what about those kids who are users in almost all aspects of their lives? Well, they grow up to be used car salesmen and Best Buy computer salesmen.
Oh yeah, right - a straight face without bias. Have you not yet seen the YouTube clip of Jon Stewart's segment on "the question mark" being used in news stories yet? It's an absolute riot, because, if you do pay attention to any one newscast on a daily basis long enough you'll see that he is RIGHT ON TARGET. This morning for instance, ABC's fluff morning national news show had Diane Sawyer saying about 5 questions in a row, all on some stupid fluff piece that wasn't really that big of a deal. But all the questions made it sound like a big deal! And Stewart totally mocks this behavior by the entire big news media establishment with his question mark segment. He slams them all for stupid, crappy reporting by simply using questions to form that psychological basis in the public's minds as the "story" being somehow legitimate and/or important when it's just fluff. (Of course, Fox News makes out the worst with their overtly Yay Bush and Republicans! bias, but watch any of the "hard hitting" news shows on the major networks and you'll find that they're more akin to sports-casters covering the big game than they are to actual journalists - just like Stewart's mockery points out.)
You make an interesting point, and I can appreciate your concern for people of lesser means. But consider this:
When I was a child, there was this kid in our classes (2nd grade? - 5th grade) who was pretty mentally and physically handicapped due to an ongoing fight with brain tumors. He was always in a wheelchair, had to have someone help him at the lunch table to get his food and eat it (not always though), and did all his schoolwork in "the van" (where the mentally challenged kids went for parts of the day for classes). He would have seizures, vomiting, and other "socially embarassing" moments from time to time whenever he was around the rest of me and my classmates just because he couldn't help it. He didn't know as much as we did - hence his schooling in "the van", but he never failed to smile, make jokes as he was able to, and generally be friends with other kids - and other kids were indeed his friend, even if they didn't do much more than talk at the lunch table. Sometimes I would sit at his table, other times not - just depended.
Anyway, I grew up with my other classmates, and he continued to become more severely disabled due to his brain tumors. He died at the age of 21 I believe, but I don't doubt that everyone in my childhood classes remembers him to this day because he was such a joyful person. I mean like the really awe-inspiring, how could anyone be happy in that kind of condition?? kind of joyful person. An honest-to-God wonderful example of joyfulness despite adversity - severe adversity.
The reason I share that story is because I am the opposite type of person - I find it easy to judge others for all the things I believe that they lack. I look down on them. You, however, obviously have at least A soft spot for those that aren't as well off. Either way, just know that I've found through life that regardless of situation, income, or IQ, people can choose to make the most of their lives (despite all the stuff of life), or they can choose to waste their lives. Hopefully I'm mostly making the most of mine, but sometimes I know I don't. Best thing to do is to help someone out like those kids playing sports on the south side of Chicago, and then not worry about whether or not you're making a real "difference" - they're still gonna grow up and make their own choices about their lives; hopefully you happen to be one of the positive influences they can choose to emulate.
You have the typical mindset of the typical "business user" who thinks IT exists solely to serve their every whimsical request to make their lives magically easier through technology. Did Slashdot have D2 up until the past few months? NO! Did many hordes of geeks still emerge, year after year, from their nerderies to comment on Slashdot all day long? YES! Not having D2 available to IE users is TOO BAD, SO SAD! Get a standards compliant browser, or burn time at work elsewhere on the 'net if it's such a deal-breaker for you. You're obviously quite capable of still reading Slashdot and posting to stories, so it's merely unfortunate that you work at an extremely restrictive workplace that won't let you install Firefox.
I am a "business user" that has to evaluate requests for changes that involve IT work every day. I get awfully tired of seeing random requests that will 1) not benefit the business, 2) not save or make us any money, and 3) are quantified as good projects because "it will make it a lot easier to do XYZ." Guess what, we're all busy here, so bitching about a feature that you don't have doesn't make my life any less busy when there are a dozen other projects I could be working on to actually save money, time, and labor for the company as a whole. This is exactly why the last paragraph smacks users like you and requests that improvements be contributed by those of you who don't like what is currently in place rather than just complaining about it.
I agree with the paper trail part, totally disagree with the "quit the job" part of your advice. First, it IS important to keep that paper trail so that when things go wrong you and your employer can evaluate why things went wrong and how to mitigate that error in the future. (It also provides extra CYA if anything goes really south with your employer because of the error.) However, there is no such thing as the "better job" when you think it will just be found *somewhere else*. The "better job" is the one where you have the freedom to make the job into the one you want. So, if you're requesting money for system security enhancements and they're not giving it to you, make improvements to security for free, or do things to work around the lack of money to make security enhancements. You should only consider leaving when the initiatives that you take (when they're the right initiatives and only benefit, not harm, others) are stomped on simply because "we didn't tell you to do that." That's when you know that management is beyond clueless, and actually potentially harmful to your own career and the business as a whole - which could certainly spell long-term trouble for your continued gainful employment in the future.
You make a good point about being a felon and not being allowed to vote. Which only furthers my theory that the people doing the most voting are the ones with the most time on their hands: high school seniors to about 28 year olds, and retirees. Who mans the polls? Not anyone in their 30's - early 50's! Who gets catered to the most in TV commercials? college-age Democrats and crusty old seniors scared to death of losing their Medicare coverage.
I was just pointing out to my wife this morning as we were watching the news for the weather forecast why do the stupid political campaign ads ALWAYS warn senior citizens that they'll lose something if they vote for so-and-so? Because these are the vast majority of voters! I guess you could say I should have known that already, but I've been too busy in my career to really care that much about seniors losing their health-care benefits that my tax dollars are paying, or in college kids' stupid crusades against tobacco companies.
BTW, The Toledo Blade is a notoriously bad newspaper that is run by a local family that pretty much controls everything that gets printed in it. Joe McNamara, a local Toledo candidate running for Toledo city council, is getting tons of play in that newspaper because he must have some "in" with that family. And I know from personal experience (my wife), that he is an A1 asshole, even though The Blade makes him out to be the second coming of John F. Kennedy in the flesh. I wouldn't take anything The Blade has to say too literally.
I don't think there's any one particular difference between men and women in the workplace just because it's "IT", and the department is all guys and one girl, or vice versa. I've been in both situations, and in both situations it only matters whether you can suck it up and be a person and get over your own machoism or feminism enough to just relate to other *people*.
So, if you're the only girl in a group of guys at work, stop whining and worrying about what they must think of you. You're a girl, and as such you need to realize that most dudes really don't overanalyze every word, smirk, and tone of voice used in conversation. You girls tend to do that, generally, but us guys don't tend to do that, so stop worrying so much about it!
If you're the only dude in a group of females at work, don't try to worry about who said what like your female coworkers will tend to do. Don't be a flaming a--hole with your machoism, but instead realize that you're gonna have to be a bit more empathetic, a bit more caring, and a bit more nurturing than you would around your buddies while playing poker.
And to all the others that say "be friendly", I agree, but take it one step further - be-friend others. Don't just act nicey-nice to others to "break in" to their group. Actually be their friend.
If you don't want it at your house, it's perfectly acceptable (socially, check with your boss for employer rules) to have the LAN party at work after hours.
Hahahaha! You haven't worked at very many big companies, have you? I got an email from the "computing policies" group just for having installed Winamp a while back. How likely do you think it will be that I can pull off an install of 3Gig's worth of the latest FPS on my crappy laptop?!
Well then you will appreciate the fact that you *were* a class-action f___-tard at that stage of life. (I'm at work - love those internet tube filters here!) Anyways, the point is not that I'm hating on you, but that I seriously doubt that Consumer Reports or any other real-world test lab would be that stupid. Here's the solution to your dilemma in the real world:
1. Put five computers without CDRW, DVDRW, floppy or USB drives in small room. (And physically crush, mangle, destroy, or clog with superglue any peripheral device ports or other means of "opening up the computer" so absolutely nothing can be used to gain access to the computer's innards.) 2. Turn off, disable, or unplug any possible connections to ANY other network outside of said room. 3. Put a researcher or two in room after making them change into a "clean suit". 4. Put camera's in room to monitor researchers. 5. Run virus tests, see how bad the AV software breaks. 6. Record findings with good ol' pencil and paper. 7. Provide one, paper-thin slot through which researchers slip paper to waiting journalists. 8. Require researchers to strip bare-ass naked before leaving room. 9. Researchers leave room. 9. Physically destroy, with liquid hot MAGMA every computer in room. 10. Publish findings that McAfee and Symantec suck 11. Get donations from Consumer Reports subscribers 12. Profit!!!
Oh, and I am a 'mature' student. I'll be one month shy of my 30th birthday when I finally graduate from DeVry with my BS in Comp. Eng. Tech. And yes, I only went there to get the paper to say that I'm qualified for certain jobs. I've actually been working in large companies for the past 8 years... right up the corporate ladder.;)
Haha! I did get a kick out of your post and your aggrandizement of the horrors of the word "management.":)
That being said, don't read too literally what I wrote. The "fun and profit" for me will come when I am my own manager, boss, leader, and the only things I have to do during the day are what *I* decide I need to do. Of course, this ignores the wife factor, but I digress.;)
My point was mainly that a good leader has either raw talent or developed talent for leading others, or more likely of mix of raw and developed talent to do so. A "Project Manager" or a "PMP" is just a title, and only reflects a person's given responsibilities, not their abilities. So when I said that a really good leader who happens to also be called a "project manager" usually doesn't last as simply a "project manager" because their talent allows them to go on to pursue bigger and better challenges and opportunities as a leader, which oftentimes turns into the title "Manager of people" in one form or another. (And when I say "manager of people", I'm merely talking about leading the day-to-day processes that go on, rather than a particular project with defined start and stop dates.)
So in the end, it's not that I think having a stupid certification somehow makes me a great leader, or technically capable. Far from it! I know most titles are crap! But what it does give you is paper credibility for about 80% of hiring managers to actually look at your resume. The street cred is all earned, and only comes from performing well in the role you've been given. And let's face it, like it or not, the paper cred is the easiest way to weed out those with potential street cred from those with neither the paper cred or the street cred.
You don't see any good project LEADERS because most project managers are not good leaders. Good leaders get promotions, and quick, because they LED their projects very successfully. So most good project leaders turn into business leaders. The not-so-good project managers do just that - manage a project right down the toilet, and never have a good reason why they keep failing because they don't know how to lead and stay on top of issues that cause failures in the first place.
The problem is such a large one because the successful leaders of projects stand out even more than successful day-to-day managers since their project has a defined start and end. When they bring that bad boy in on-time, under budget, and fully functional you can bet the other leaders who assigned them that task will say "Hot Damn! That's a great leader! We could use her in upper management!" And, because the pay in upper management is indeed, so good, that great project leader becomes a business leader and doesn't lead half as many projects again.
* P.S. Once I finish my bachelor's in the next couple of months, I'm planning on going for my PMP certification. Once I have that I'll have the silly piece of paper that says I'm "allowed" to manage projects, then I'm going to go lead some projects - well, because I know I could do it better than most - get noticed, and start turbo-ing my way to the top of the business ranks for fun and profit!:-P
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I knew that they WERE, but not any longer. McDonald's also owned at one time the Donato's pizza chain (an OH/MI small regional pizza chain), but they got out of that business too. Funny that McDonald's always boosts my favorite restaurants and then backs off again. It's like they know I loathe them and steer clear of me! (Just kidding, sheesh!)
That is by far one of the more important items on your list. "Learn one, do one, teach one." is what one of my work mentors was fond of saying, and it's true. You learn it first, you begin doing it second, and then you show others how to do it. I saw a statistic not too long ago (forget where), that a teacher retains 90% of the information they are teaching, whereas a student will only retain between 30 and 50%. (based on the instructional method being used - visual, verbal, reading, etc.)
I would be curious how many teenagers would significantly benefit from teaching children much younger than them the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic as part of their daily educational activities. Teachers would have more free time for training the teens on the more esoteric and difficult concepts in those main subjects, the teens would be beefing up their fundamentals, while still having the opportunities to learn new stuff from their teachers, teachers would have more time to be trained on progressively more difficult subject matter past their initial college education (the concept behind requiring a Master's to teach at the HS or lower level here in Ohio), and the whole system would self-perpetuate. Teachers could then more easily advance to the college professor level, etc. This is how big business largely works, and it's how early American society educated itself (apprenticeships), so why have we done away with it in our modern classrooms?
I'm convinced that this is the reason Chipotle is growing like a weed across the country. The food comes from better-than-McDonald's sources, usually all but one or two of the staff are Mexican, and even if they can barely understand English they're given the opportunity to serve the customers directly - AND they're waaaaayyyy better at it than your lazy-ass American kid at the drive-through!! Not to mention that they give their workers all kinds of great benefits like the day before Christmas off and the day after Thanksgiving off. (in addition to those holiday days off, which always pisses me off when we leave town to travel to the in-laws... no damn Chipotle's are open!)
I'm glad someone posted this early to this story. I saw ABC's lame-ass attempt at investigative journalism and America's "HS dropout rate - oh noes! won't somebody PLEASE think of the children!", and it was extreme media-spin and hyperbole. My wife likes to catch all the celebrity sleaze watching ABC, but we both agree that it's mostly useful for entertainment purposes ONLY in the morning based on world and national news. No, I don't like Fox either... they're even worse. In fact, ALL of the news media outlets on TV today are pretty much fluff, IMHO.
America has no severe HS drop-out problem that's just wildly out of control like ABC would like you to believe. Far more colonists' children were dropping out of "school" before they were 13 when this country was founded to help on the family farm, and yet we're told by intelligent journalists and researchers that kids in those days had more difficult education regimen's than today's HS students!
Face it everyone, if you're capable of carrying on an intelligent discussion on Slashdot, then you're probably already 90% not as likely to fit the modern American average Joe demographic that the major TV news media panders to on a daily basis. Don't worry about the crap they fling on those shows - it's not news, it's infoTAINMENT.
You need to overcome differing viewpoints and resistance to change which is obvious, but a non-obvious way to help you evaluate why the resistance to change exists and how to overcome it can be done through a "stakeholder analysis". See Table 1 from this link: http://www.isixsigma.com/library/content/c030708a. asp and the section just below that table called "putting improvements in place".
Many organizations (including my own) are guilty of making changes to process and procedures without fully involving the stakeholders involved in performing steps in those processes. If you want to be successful in making useful changes, always make sure to keep your stakeholders involved in helping understand the reason that the change is needed, and how the proposed change will benefit the organization (as it may not always appear to benefit all of the stakeholders of the process). A feedback loop on measured improvements to a process or procedure is always a beneficial thing to keep those involved in making the change happen encouraged that the new way of doing things is the right way to continue doing things too.
OK, I loathe to admonish the "get drunk to decide" idea that you proposed, but you are right about sincerely listening to your subconscious when making a huge decision like this. The subconscious is useful for making quick, gut-check decisions, but sometimes I have found it to be REALLY REALLY WRONG!!! More likely, what is happening is that in getting plastered, you and your friends are getting to a state of consciousness where you finally realize that every decision is not the end all be all to your life. So in a way, you are using THAT part of your subconscious (shutup about my spelling, haven't had all my coffee yet!) to allow yourself to go out and make a potentially big mistake that you know you can still recover from. (it's just a job, after all!)
My advice to the submitter:
If you have considered starting your own company a lot in the past, take the small business job. If you've considered it at all, or you are the type who can lead your own activities and motivate yourself to accomplish work, then you'll probably be OK with the small company.
If you like being given assignments, doing them perfectly, and don't mind the overhead of multiple managers in your management chain, then take the big job. If you want to be an Executive VP of Computer Engineering in a prestigious firm, go with the big job, but realize it's not gonna be easy to work your way up. You will have to work at it.
In my experience, either choice can be beneficial to your career as long as you make the most of it. And even if it turns out to be a disaster (at either company), it sounds as if you'll be able to find gainful employment elsewhere without losing too much time at the one job. Working in a small company can be like the transition from dating to marriage. One day she's this wonderful love of your life that you can't seem to spend enough time with, and then all of the sudden you're married and she's nagging you to do the dishes. She still may be the love of your life, but all those annoyances you each have about one another come out in a big way and you have to learn how to deal with them. Working in a big company is like being in high school all over again. There's lots of different cliques, bullies, nerds, wimps, goths, etc. but instead of having teachers and school administrators lead you, you are being led by your peers... some of which sometimes suck at being a leader. Yes, you have a lot more opportunities to grow in whatever direction you want to in a big company, but the money is only as good as getting straight A's, and as we all know, grades and money are not a great indicator of your worth as a person or your ability to enjoy your life. Choose wisely.
Bzzzt! Wrong! The Internet (or ARPANET, when it was officially begun as an expirement) existed to provide a fault tolerant communications system for the U.S. military who had come to rely on their wired communications for quick decision making in the battlefield. And anyone who has served in the military can tell you that it is still (for good reason) one of the least democratic institutions in the world! Yes, once "the Internet" got into academic hands the 'democracy' angle was pushed big time, but just look at the major influence capitalism is now having on how we use the Internet. Copyright issues, clogged up Internet tubes that need to be tiered for big companies, political fundraising and campaigning issues, and all the other bickering occurring between large swathes of people about the Internet today do not prove your point. On the contrary, I think these issues help justify the idea that technology is hardly a cause of a particular cultural behavior, but rather, is used in cultures to bolster or tear down differing cultural memes to the detriment of society as a whole. In other words, if we weren't all so selfish and caught up in our own causes then we'd probably be able to use our technology for the betterment of society much faster than we do today.
As for the original discussion topic, I think that the PhD candidate is going to have a hard time finding ample evidence to support his hypothesis because technology in and of itself is not a by-product of culture, but rather the usage of technology by a culture as a means towards a particular end is what is the more interesting, and more justifiable, research topic.
Or maybe I'm just retarded, I dunno.
So what the hell? If boss is out until Tuesday and wants it Friday, why in the world would you deliver on Friday?!?! Boss won't even see it until Tues. so there's *theoretically* absolutely no harm in delivering on Tues. Now, if other people are relying on it to be done Fri. and it's your fault it's not done on time - your bad. If, however, the boss never told you about it, then you'd better explain to him/her periodically how much of your ass they need to be kissing to get it done AS A FAVOR to them for their own forgetfulness.
I still do not understand why so many people complain about too much work, how work intrudes on their private lives, etc. etc. If it intrudes so much so that it hurts, either push back on your boss, or go find a new job. Can't get a new job because the current one pays the bills and any other job wouldn't? Guess who's fault that is? Not mine, and not the government's, and not your company's, and not your boss' fault. It's your paycheck, budget the use of it!
Now, all that being said, I KNOW there are situations that we all run into where it's not that easy, and you gotta provide for your family, etc. But for the whiners who ALWAYS complain about this year in and year out - hello! you've had a few years now to correct the situation through creative alternatives to your predicament... it should be the awfully special case that such a situation has no other resolution after a few years.
OK, that's a fair comment that there is this unique 10-20 yr group of people (GenX'ers and GenY'ers in popular media) that grep's the whole computer thing in a way that anyone else born before or after us doesn't. (I was born in 1976, btw) I guess I wasn't so much arguing that point as much as the thought that those who grow up with computers (post early 90's babies) will somehow have a very different experience than others. I am just viewing that paradigm as similar to previous technological advances in our society like flight or the automobile.
:-P
However, if part of your argument happens to be that our educational system in the U.S. blows chunks and could therefore contribute to a future generation knowing basically nothing about the actual operations of computers, then yes, I can agree with that. Which leads us to either welcome our future Chinese overlords, or to run around acting like idiots in our future oversized jail cell: the U.S.A. as the rest of the world passes us by.
And using crappy business jargon like "flavor" to describe an entirely tasteless entity (software code, in this instance) is retarded.
You're not exactly correct about generational differences. I think the thing you are witnessing is the switchover from "how things used to be" (i.e. no computers) to "how all things now are" (i.e. everyone uses computers).
Notice the flip from a no-car society to a 2 cars in every garage society. We take cars for granted, everyone learns to drive, and only some become very knowledgeable and capable mechanics, and only some can really drive well... all the rest pretend to do both, but it's obvious that they're idiots to the knowledgeable and capable drivers and mechanics. (I'd place myself in the "knowledgeable and capable enough" category - i.e. I can troubleshoot some stuff but generally will defer to paying an arm and a leg to someone better than me whenever it gets a little complicated.)
Computer users in this age are much the same. The older generation of people who wouldn't ever "get it" in the first place are the ones who repeatedly infect their computers with spyware and other virus crap, and those few who do get it don't stick out like sore thumbs because their capacity to master their computer puts them entire leagues ahead of the other old people. Meanwhile, you have these kids growing up with computers everywhere who "use" computers everyday, but still couldn't distinguish between a CPU, a video card, and the monitor and the functions of each... to them, those are just parts that go in "the computer."
And what about those kids who are users in almost all aspects of their lives? Well, they grow up to be used car salesmen and Best Buy computer salesmen.
Oh yeah, right - a straight face without bias. Have you not yet seen the YouTube clip of Jon Stewart's segment on "the question mark" being used in news stories yet? It's an absolute riot, because, if you do pay attention to any one newscast on a daily basis long enough you'll see that he is RIGHT ON TARGET. This morning for instance, ABC's fluff morning national news show had Diane Sawyer saying about 5 questions in a row, all on some stupid fluff piece that wasn't really that big of a deal. But all the questions made it sound like a big deal! And Stewart totally mocks this behavior by the entire big news media establishment with his question mark segment. He slams them all for stupid, crappy reporting by simply using questions to form that psychological basis in the public's minds as the "story" being somehow legitimate and/or important when it's just fluff. (Of course, Fox News makes out the worst with their overtly Yay Bush and Republicans! bias, but watch any of the "hard hitting" news shows on the major networks and you'll find that they're more akin to sports-casters covering the big game than they are to actual journalists - just like Stewart's mockery points out.)
You make an interesting point, and I can appreciate your concern for people of lesser means. But consider this:
When I was a child, there was this kid in our classes (2nd grade? - 5th grade) who was pretty mentally and physically handicapped due to an ongoing fight with brain tumors. He was always in a wheelchair, had to have someone help him at the lunch table to get his food and eat it (not always though), and did all his schoolwork in "the van" (where the mentally challenged kids went for parts of the day for classes). He would have seizures, vomiting, and other "socially embarassing" moments from time to time whenever he was around the rest of me and my classmates just because he couldn't help it. He didn't know as much as we did - hence his schooling in "the van", but he never failed to smile, make jokes as he was able to, and generally be friends with other kids - and other kids were indeed his friend, even if they didn't do much more than talk at the lunch table. Sometimes I would sit at his table, other times not - just depended.
Anyway, I grew up with my other classmates, and he continued to become more severely disabled due to his brain tumors. He died at the age of 21 I believe, but I don't doubt that everyone in my childhood classes remembers him to this day because he was such a joyful person. I mean like the really awe-inspiring, how could anyone be happy in that kind of condition?? kind of joyful person. An honest-to-God wonderful example of joyfulness despite adversity - severe adversity.
The reason I share that story is because I am the opposite type of person - I find it easy to judge others for all the things I believe that they lack. I look down on them. You, however, obviously have at least A soft spot for those that aren't as well off. Either way, just know that I've found through life that regardless of situation, income, or IQ, people can choose to make the most of their lives (despite all the stuff of life), or they can choose to waste their lives. Hopefully I'm mostly making the most of mine, but sometimes I know I don't. Best thing to do is to help someone out like those kids playing sports on the south side of Chicago, and then not worry about whether or not you're making a real "difference" - they're still gonna grow up and make their own choices about their lives; hopefully you happen to be one of the positive influences they can choose to emulate.
According to my lawyer wife... the patent attorney types are socially backwards weirdo's too.
Fits this guy's profile to a T!
Yes, in fact, I was. I apologize for my abrupt rudeness. Breathe deeply.... there, all better. ;)
You have the typical mindset of the typical "business user" who thinks IT exists solely to serve their every whimsical request to make their lives magically easier through technology. Did Slashdot have D2 up until the past few months? NO! Did many hordes of geeks still emerge, year after year, from their nerderies to comment on Slashdot all day long? YES! Not having D2 available to IE users is TOO BAD, SO SAD! Get a standards compliant browser, or burn time at work elsewhere on the 'net if it's such a deal-breaker for you. You're obviously quite capable of still reading Slashdot and posting to stories, so it's merely unfortunate that you work at an extremely restrictive workplace that won't let you install Firefox.
I am a "business user" that has to evaluate requests for changes that involve IT work every day. I get awfully tired of seeing random requests that will 1) not benefit the business, 2) not save or make us any money, and 3) are quantified as good projects because "it will make it a lot easier to do XYZ." Guess what, we're all busy here, so bitching about a feature that you don't have doesn't make my life any less busy when there are a dozen other projects I could be working on to actually save money, time, and labor for the company as a whole. This is exactly why the last paragraph smacks users like you and requests that improvements be contributed by those of you who don't like what is currently in place rather than just complaining about it.
I agree with the paper trail part, totally disagree with the "quit the job" part of your advice. First, it IS important to keep that paper trail so that when things go wrong you and your employer can evaluate why things went wrong and how to mitigate that error in the future. (It also provides extra CYA if anything goes really south with your employer because of the error.) However, there is no such thing as the "better job" when you think it will just be found *somewhere else*. The "better job" is the one where you have the freedom to make the job into the one you want. So, if you're requesting money for system security enhancements and they're not giving it to you, make improvements to security for free, or do things to work around the lack of money to make security enhancements. You should only consider leaving when the initiatives that you take (when they're the right initiatives and only benefit, not harm, others) are stomped on simply because "we didn't tell you to do that." That's when you know that management is beyond clueless, and actually potentially harmful to your own career and the business as a whole - which could certainly spell long-term trouble for your continued gainful employment in the future.
You make a good point about being a felon and not being allowed to vote. Which only furthers my theory that the people doing the most voting are the ones with the most time on their hands: high school seniors to about 28 year olds, and retirees. Who mans the polls? Not anyone in their 30's - early 50's! Who gets catered to the most in TV commercials? college-age Democrats and crusty old seniors scared to death of losing their Medicare coverage.
I was just pointing out to my wife this morning as we were watching the news for the weather forecast why do the stupid political campaign ads ALWAYS warn senior citizens that they'll lose something if they vote for so-and-so? Because these are the vast majority of voters! I guess you could say I should have known that already, but I've been too busy in my career to really care that much about seniors losing their health-care benefits that my tax dollars are paying, or in college kids' stupid crusades against tobacco companies.
BTW, The Toledo Blade is a notoriously bad newspaper that is run by a local family that pretty much controls everything that gets printed in it. Joe McNamara, a local Toledo candidate running for Toledo city council, is getting tons of play in that newspaper because he must have some "in" with that family. And I know from personal experience (my wife), that he is an A1 asshole, even though The Blade makes him out to be the second coming of John F. Kennedy in the flesh. I wouldn't take anything The Blade has to say too literally.
I don't think there's any one particular difference between men and women in the workplace just because it's "IT", and the department is all guys and one girl, or vice versa. I've been in both situations, and in both situations it only matters whether you can suck it up and be a person and get over your own machoism or feminism enough to just relate to other *people*.
So, if you're the only girl in a group of guys at work, stop whining and worrying about what they must think of you. You're a girl, and as such you need to realize that most dudes really don't overanalyze every word, smirk, and tone of voice used in conversation. You girls tend to do that, generally, but us guys don't tend to do that, so stop worrying so much about it!
If you're the only dude in a group of females at work, don't try to worry about who said what like your female coworkers will tend to do. Don't be a flaming a--hole with your machoism, but instead realize that you're gonna have to be a bit more empathetic, a bit more caring, and a bit more nurturing than you would around your buddies while playing poker.
And to all the others that say "be friendly", I agree, but take it one step further - be-friend others. Don't just act nicey-nice to others to "break in" to their group. Actually be their friend.
Hahahaha! You haven't worked at very many big companies, have you? I got an email from the "computing policies" group just for having installed Winamp a while back. How likely do you think it will be that I can pull off an install of 3Gig's worth of the latest FPS on my crappy laptop?!
Well then you will appreciate the fact that you *were* a class-action f___-tard at that stage of life. (I'm at work - love those internet tube filters here!) Anyways, the point is not that I'm hating on you, but that I seriously doubt that Consumer Reports or any other real-world test lab would be that stupid. Here's the solution to your dilemma in the real world:
1. Put five computers without CDRW, DVDRW, floppy or USB drives in small room. (And physically crush, mangle, destroy, or clog with superglue any peripheral device ports or other means of "opening up the computer" so absolutely nothing can be used to gain access to the computer's innards.)
2. Turn off, disable, or unplug any possible connections to ANY other network outside of said room.
3. Put a researcher or two in room after making them change into a "clean suit".
4. Put camera's in room to monitor researchers.
5. Run virus tests, see how bad the AV software breaks.
6. Record findings with good ol' pencil and paper.
7. Provide one, paper-thin slot through which researchers slip paper to waiting journalists.
8. Require researchers to strip bare-ass naked before leaving room.
9. Researchers leave room.
9. Physically destroy, with liquid hot MAGMA every computer in room.
10. Publish findings that McAfee and Symantec suck
11. Get donations from Consumer Reports subscribers
12. Profit!!!
Easy, huh?
I'm amazed that this dang FBI system didn't catch a clue the second time around and actual do the tried and tested iterative development process!
Oh, and I am a 'mature' student. I'll be one month shy of my 30th birthday when I finally graduate from DeVry with my BS in Comp. Eng. Tech. And yes, I only went there to get the paper to say that I'm qualified for certain jobs. I've actually been working in large companies for the past 8 years... right up the corporate ladder. ;)
Haha! I did get a kick out of your post and your aggrandizement of the horrors of the word "management." :)
;)
That being said, don't read too literally what I wrote. The "fun and profit" for me will come when I am my own manager, boss, leader, and the only things I have to do during the day are what *I* decide I need to do. Of course, this ignores the wife factor, but I digress.
My point was mainly that a good leader has either raw talent or developed talent for leading others, or more likely of mix of raw and developed talent to do so. A "Project Manager" or a "PMP" is just a title, and only reflects a person's given responsibilities, not their abilities. So when I said that a really good leader who happens to also be called a "project manager" usually doesn't last as simply a "project manager" because their talent allows them to go on to pursue bigger and better challenges and opportunities as a leader, which oftentimes turns into the title "Manager of people" in one form or another. (And when I say "manager of people", I'm merely talking about leading the day-to-day processes that go on, rather than a particular project with defined start and stop dates.)
So in the end, it's not that I think having a stupid certification somehow makes me a great leader, or technically capable. Far from it! I know most titles are crap! But what it does give you is paper credibility for about 80% of hiring managers to actually look at your resume. The street cred is all earned, and only comes from performing well in the role you've been given. And let's face it, like it or not, the paper cred is the easiest way to weed out those with potential street cred from those with neither the paper cred or the street cred.
You don't see any good project LEADERS because most project managers are not good leaders. Good leaders get promotions, and quick, because they LED their projects very successfully. So most good project leaders turn into business leaders. The not-so-good project managers do just that - manage a project right down the toilet, and never have a good reason why they keep failing because they don't know how to lead and stay on top of issues that cause failures in the first place.
:-P
The problem is such a large one because the successful leaders of projects stand out even more than successful day-to-day managers since their project has a defined start and end. When they bring that bad boy in on-time, under budget, and fully functional you can bet the other leaders who assigned them that task will say "Hot Damn! That's a great leader! We could use her in upper management!" And, because the pay in upper management is indeed, so good, that great project leader becomes a business leader and doesn't lead half as many projects again.
* P.S. Once I finish my bachelor's in the next couple of months, I'm planning on going for my PMP certification. Once I have that I'll have the silly piece of paper that says I'm "allowed" to manage projects, then I'm going to go lead some projects - well, because I know I could do it better than most - get noticed, and start turbo-ing my way to the top of the business ranks for fun and profit!