Yes, it's his fault for not exercising an ability to predict the future.
He didn't believe good grades were enough because his thinking was deficient, he believed it because the people with the responsibility for teaching him about the world actively misled him.
No, they go one better - be the most *expensive* bid, thereby convincing clueless MBAs of the superiority of your product, and then proceed to overcharge, delay, etc.
Car analogy: They sell you the most expensive car ever. Then tell you the engine costs extra. And then tell you the petrol tank is extra. And by the way don't put regular petrol in it, only aviation fuel. And isn't that logarithmic-scale odometer so much more science-y than those other brands of cars?
I also figured out that intelligence was a liability, and I've still seen very few environments where that wasn't true, and all of those only well after childhood.
Because sales, particularly if an employee's performance/compensation is based on it, becomes predatory, and is the opposite of jobs described as technical support or customer service.
Because some people don't understand that no means no.
Usually the law *requires* you to drive at a safe speed, and if everyone is exceeding the speed limit then not keeping pace is an unsafe speed and illegal.
If you're very, very careful, you can ask follow-up questions that appear to be advancing the discussion in the direction management wants but are actually mocking their cluelessness. (Unfortunately not as satisfying as it sounds.)
...than it eliminates. Every time a politician opens their mouth, there will a headline tagged 'satire', and then they'll complain that Facebook is misrepresenting what they said, and then someone will have to explain to the politician what 'satire' actually means.
For example, every 'security' measure of the TSA is a cruel satire, but they are also actual rules that people are really subject to.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it's his fault for not exercising an ability to predict the future.
He didn't believe good grades were enough because his thinking was deficient, he believed it because the people with the responsibility for teaching him about the world actively misled him.
No, they go one better - be the most *expensive* bid, thereby convincing clueless MBAs of the superiority of your product, and then proceed to overcharge, delay, etc.
Car analogy: They sell you the most expensive car ever. Then tell you the engine costs extra. And then tell you the petrol tank is extra. And by the way don't put regular petrol in it, only aviation fuel. And isn't that logarithmic-scale odometer so much more science-y than those other brands of cars?
Trying to tell other people they are wrong all the time is a liability. Telling people, "I am smarter than you, so you are wrong" is a liability.
I'll have to take your word for it; I wouldn't know since I never did any of that.
I don't know if Oregon's suit has merit or not, but that sure sounds like my employer's experience with Oracle.
I figured out I was smart as a kid.
I also figured out that intelligence was a liability, and I've still seen very few environments where that wasn't true, and all of those only well after childhood.
Bear in mind that, besides over-representing and under-representing (false dichotomy fallacy), there is a third possibility, known as reality.
...when I tell my cat she's cute.
It's not easy, since "Securing Networks In the Internet of Things Era" means exactly the same thing as "Securing Networks".
We need way, way, more women like her on TV.
Yes, let's over-represent a minority group on purpose.
I've also worked in places where Agile was a stultifying cover story for "actually waterfall but that doesn't sound as cool so we'll never admit it".
That's my environment. They've stopped trying to say 'Agile' with a straight face.
They enjoy being hypocrites.
It's a useful distinction to make, so there should be a term for it.
Of course, that term should on include the word 'engineering', since it has nothing to do with the correct meaning of the word 'engineering'.
Unions exist because in general an employer, especially a corporation, has far more bargaining power than the worker.
Unions, regrettably, are a terrible solution to the problem, because unions abuse their bargaining power at least as much as any other quasi-monopoly.
Sadly no-one has the courage to stand up to them and try to come up with a solution that could actually work.
... in this so-called 'new' research?
Because, except for part about giving up hope based on one example in another species, medical science has known all of this for decades.
Hang on a minute - where does Comcast recruit from?
Because sales, particularly if an employee's performance/compensation is based on it, becomes predatory, and is the opposite of jobs described as technical support or customer service.
Because some people don't understand that no means no.
And to make it worse, outside companies that enter the US market are corrupted by it.
Because species that diverged genetically several billion years ago will physically closely resemble each other.
In the absence of governments preventing them quasi-monopolies will act like quasi-monopolies?
Usually the law *requires* you to drive at a safe speed, and if everyone is exceeding the speed limit then not keeping pace is an unsafe speed and illegal.
With this in place, and with computer reflexes why not speed like a maniac?
Because unlike speeding by 5 or 10 km/h over the speed limit to keep pace with the flow of traffic, excessive speeding is actually dangerous.
If you're very, very careful, you can ask follow-up questions that appear to be advancing the discussion in the direction management wants but are actually mocking their cluelessness. (Unfortunately not as satisfying as it sounds.)
So they're saying they're not sure which year it will hit? That's worse!
Just like in real life, there are no rules for the person with that kind of money.
...than it eliminates. Every time a politician opens their mouth, there will a headline tagged 'satire', and then they'll complain that Facebook is misrepresenting what they said, and then someone will have to explain to the politician what 'satire' actually means.
For example, every 'security' measure of the TSA is a cruel satire, but they are also actual rules that people are really subject to.