It's a polite way of saying "stop putting crap in your resumes". Don't encourage people to do more of it;-)
In all seriousness though, have you ever tried to analyse unstructured text? It's hard. How would you realistically improve it? Do you start with a preconceived list of technology key words and count them in the resumes? People misspell words. Words have multiple meanings depending on context. Technologies change and you might miss key words. Or you could count recent Stack Exchange topic tags, but that only shows the latest fads people are struggling with, not what they are being hired for. Survey a bunch of people about what they do at work? Too expensive. I think this is a really good start in spite of the limitations.
Being poor sucks, but being poor != depression. Depression doesn't discriminate based on wealth. Rich people have have problems too, just like the rest of us (family feuds, marriage problems, bills, poor health...). Having no job could lead to depression, but depression could just as likely make it hard to find or maintain a job. And you might find that having bucket loads of money doesn't solve all your problems the way you hope it will. It just pays off your old problems and buys you a new set of problems.
I am aware of societal pressure, but I wonder if it's credited with more influence than it deserves. When I was a boy I wanted to be a steward working on aeroplanes. Everyone told me it was a women's job and I should become a pilot or something. I didn't care. Somehow I became a programmer when I grew up. I don't know why. Maybe it was subconsciously societal pressure that subverted my choice, or maybe it was the bad wages, long hours, frequent redundancies, and lack of career progress that did it. I have since seen many men working as stewards, so other men had the same idea I had, and have forged careers in a classically female dominated field. I admire them for it. In spite of that I won't become a steward, for now. I don't want to become a pilot either for similar reasons, and that is a stereotypical male job in the same industry. If I ever change my mind though, I doubt I would let stereotypes stop me.
You could equally ask why men aren't flocking to careers in nursing, early childhood care, or beauty therapy. I suspect it has less to do with discrimination, and more to do with men just don't give a shit about those careers. Be it money, status, working conditions, whatever. Men don't want it. Same probably goes for women in technology, construction, and trades. I don't even care if there is a gender imbalance in nursing, early childhood care, or beauty therapy. I don't know any women who care either. But if I did care, I might find that balancing the male side of the equation in female dominated careers already half solves the female side if things in male dominated careers. Men are welcome to join female dominated careers, if they want. Women are welcome to join male dominated careers, if they want. If people don't want, then they don't want.
You are lucky. I work in research. We compete with each other for grant money, co-authership, and basically everything else. When someone gets funded, and others need money, then the person with money can hire and exploit the ones who need money. When that money runs out and someone else gets funded, tables turn and it's payback time. Publishing more than your supervisor? Expect to get jerked around with useless tasks so you don't have time to write, then get a bad performance review because you didn't complete all the useless tasks. Supervisor publishing more than you? You are their bitch. And don't expect to be acknowledged for it either. Have a good idea? Don't tell anyone, or before you know it someone else will write a grant application and get funding for your idea. And the politics! Every single thing people do is related to manoeuvring, butt covering, back stabbing, buck passing, ass kissing, or anything else just to survive. Enough of my colleagues have had cancer to make me wonder...
I think you might be the snowflake here. I get this all the time. Someone thinks their project is more important than everyone else, and they are the only person to ask me to prioritise their work. Stand in line buddy. I have six other customers who think their project is the most important thing going, and a bunch of other customers who really do have important projects with deadlines but patiently wait their turn while impatient little snowflakes like you keep jumping the queue.
When I need something done and someone doesn't do it, I have several choices. I either do it myself, or I find some other source who can do it, or I use some suboptimal solution until such time as a better solution can be found and live with the consequences, or I find more money to entice someone to do what I need, or I just wait my turn. I don't like it when people hassle me, so I don't hassle other people.
No need. Great leader Kim will invent water roads to replace all dirt roads, so everyone can enjoy a smooth ride in their canoe cars. Water roads on hills will have the great advantage of running downstream both ways, not like what the American imperialists invented, so nobody needs to paddle over a hill ever again. Also, canoe cars run on water, so you never need to pay for fuel ever again.
But if algebra is compatible with quantum mechanics (and Schrödinger's cat), shouldn't divide by zero be able to maintain both positive and negative infinity states simultaneously? Until you observe it, at which time the superposition collapses into a definite state.
My mother asked me in all seriousness if I ever saw any aliens or their technology while in the army. I told her I got probed and I don't want to talk about it;-)
Maybe, with a bit of coercion. I doubt he would have had access to those servers though. And it would be really impressive if nobody remembered to change the server passwords in that time:-)
Exactly. The cheapest way for Russia/China to put western intelligence agencies on the defensive is to fake it. Use some other intel to take a stab at the contents, spread a rumour that you cracked it, and watch western intelligence personnel leave as a precaution. Then just check names off your list of suspected agents as they leave, AND send them home at their own expense.
The timing of this is rather suspicious though. Snowden has been in Russia since June 2013, and I doubt Russia would have pissed around for two years trying to decrypt those files if they really wanted them. Just install a keylogger and wait. Western intelligence agencies would have removed their personnel long ago. As others have mentioned, this announcement comes hot on the heels of the hacked government personnel records, including people with clearances. This could be butt covering, as in "Those suspicious people are not agents, pay no attention to them, we already removed all our personnel because of Snowden".
I know, right. No mater how many handy little search bars I install on peoples systems, someone will always call me to solve their shitty little problems. The search thing is right there, people! Use it.
I think investors are fully invested. I am. What else can we do? It's just the companies aren't translating that into increasing productivity. There is less R&D, fewer new production facilities opening (even in China), barely any wage growth (stagnant consumer spending, catch 22 right there), keeping old machinery rather than replacing with more efficient machinery, little product innovation, I haven't seen anyone expanding into foreign markets (quite the opposite), etc. It's as if everyone looked around at everyone else, collectively shrugged their shoulders, and said "I dunno".
What companies ARE doing is borrowing at really low interest rates and buying back shares. There are multiple reasons for that. It's a cheap shot at raising share prices. By buying on the open market there is one more bidder nudging the share price ever so slightly higher, and reducing the number of shares that can be sold. It also reduces the number of shares, thereby artificially raising earnings per share. Remember, many CEOs are partially paid in stock options, so they benefit directly from higher share prices. They were supposed to do that by improving market share, revenue, margins, etc, but they just found the path of least resistance instead. I don't know how to fix everything else, but CEO stock options and share buy backs should be mutually exclusive at the very least. Heck, pay it back as a special dividend and let me decide if I want to buy more shares or spend that money.
Inflation might work. Japan is trying that after decades of mediocre growth. Doing so by raising interest rates risks stalling what little progress there has been though. If the fed does do that then they should have started a year ago, because the higher markets go, the further they fall.
Cars don't have to cost a fortune. Tata Nano sells for the equivalent of US$3000 in India, and could do the same in many developing countries. How much did a PC cost in the 80s? About the same, or more factoring in inflation. At that price I don't mind if the whole thing is obsolete in a few years. I'd hate to be in one when it crashes like an 80s PC, but I cycle to work so for me it's always going to be the equivalent of an 80s PC crash anyway.
Oracle already does this too, embedding R as part of Oracle Advanced Analytics, but only if your boss can afford to sell your kidney. Looks like MS is falling behind.
It just baffles me that someone is willing to pay almost 100 people to sit around waiting for terrorists. Did somebody look at the accounts and think to themselves "Dude, we gotta get rid of this money somehow"? Think of all the great things you could achieve if you put 100 smart people together and gave them all the time and resources they needed. Could we figure out how to provide universal healthcare for half the cost? Create a male contraceptive pill? Or an AIDS vaccine? A battery that stores 10 times the energy in one tenth the weight? Double solar panel efficiency for half the cost? Figure out how to provide a universal minimum income for everyone without disincentivizing hard work in those who are capable? Reduce police brutality? Anything at all that could make the world even marginally better in any measurable way? Nothing?
So the most productive task we can put 100 people towards is sitting around waiting for terrorists.
Agent1: Hay man, seen any terrorists today?
Agent2: Nah. You?
Agent1: Nothing.
Agent2: I saw a cat licking itself. Check this out...
Agent1: Cool
To his credit, he did say "don't worry about getting infected by this kind of crap". You can rest assured you are being infected by some other kind of crap.
It's not just the police and courts, it's the jury too. I was a juror a few years ago on a case based entirely on circumstantial evidence. Most of the jurors simply couldn't accept that a real world case doesn't always rely on 3D slow motion video of bullets piercing internal organs and perfect DNA matches. They didn't want to think about the balance of probabilities of all the pieces of circumstantial evidence and decide if someone was guilty or not. They wanted cold hard forensic evidence to do that for them. If someone presented DNA evidence then the jury would have decided guilt without deliberation.
Can you give me some sources for the 47% figure? That sounds round about the proportion of population I would expect to be underage, studying, unemployed, disabled, stay-at-home parents, caring for elderly relatives, retired, frail, incarcerated, dying, etc. Those naughty tax dodgers, how dare they!
This "who you know" type of thinking might work in the short term, but in the long term it will bite you on the ass real bad if you don't also have "what you know".
My ex girlfriend was like that. Flunked everything she studied, got by on her personal connections, etc. Ironically, one day I introduced her to a buddy of mine I'd studied with who worked for a big government organisation. She used that connection to get a job there, then bluffed her way into a position earning double what I did at the time. Then she dumped me. So far so good. Problem is the job was *way* above her skill level. I warned her when she applied, but she ignored me and said she would learn on the job. OK, lets see how far this goes. At first she watched her colleagues and imitated them. If she got stuck she would ask one of her many friends to help or advise her, maybe under the guise of needing a "second opinion" or something. She had to rotate this task between friends often so her incompetence wouldn't become too obvious. If anyone ever made an issue of it, she would find excuses. If she fucked up, she would conceal it. This seems to work for a few years.
Eventually, one by one, her friends became fed up with covering for her. They had their own jobs to do. This is about the time when she really fucked up big time. She tried to cover it up of course. Unfortunately for her the customer got a layer, who then asked her top boss for compensation. This triggered an internal investigation which revealed she had covered up multiple big fuck-ups. She got the boot of course, plus a court case which dragged on for over a year, plus her name all over the newspapers and the internet. Now, every single time a prospective employer Googles her name, they get a screen full of bad press, and her CV is filed in the bin. Anyone stupid enough to vouch for her will be tarnished. I think she ended up giving "happy massages" to make ends meet. As far as I know she is still unemployed several years later.
If you thing you can get by with "who you know", and not "what you know", then you are a fool. Good luck to you. Just remember, eventually your reputation will catch up with you. When it does, who you know might not want to know you.
I RTFA. Don't worry, the proposal was widely shelved, in what seems like a rare moment of clarity in Australian politics these days. Any restrictions on 3D printing would be about as useful as regulating lathes because they could be used to make Owen or Sten guns. If current legislation is not sufficient to cover 3D printed guns then there are bigger problems to fix.
I seriously read "Kinect for women is dead; Long live Kinect for women via USB". First thought: Microsoft, you insensitive jerks! Second thought: What is Kinect for women anyway? Pink with softer curves?
Slashdot Mirror
It's a polite way of saying "stop putting crap in your resumes". Don't encourage people to do more of it ;-)
In all seriousness though, have you ever tried to analyse unstructured text? It's hard. How would you realistically improve it? Do you start with a preconceived list of technology key words and count them in the resumes? People misspell words. Words have multiple meanings depending on context. Technologies change and you might miss key words. Or you could count recent Stack Exchange topic tags, but that only shows the latest fads people are struggling with, not what they are being hired for. Survey a bunch of people about what they do at work? Too expensive. I think this is a really good start in spite of the limitations.
Being poor sucks, but being poor != depression. Depression doesn't discriminate based on wealth. Rich people have have problems too, just like the rest of us (family feuds, marriage problems, bills, poor health...). Having no job could lead to depression, but depression could just as likely make it hard to find or maintain a job. And you might find that having bucket loads of money doesn't solve all your problems the way you hope it will. It just pays off your old problems and buys you a new set of problems.
But the hosts file toner refill prints fewer adds, so you can print 10,000% MORE pages with the same toner. Totally worth 3 weeks.
I am aware of societal pressure, but I wonder if it's credited with more influence than it deserves. When I was a boy I wanted to be a steward working on aeroplanes. Everyone told me it was a women's job and I should become a pilot or something. I didn't care. Somehow I became a programmer when I grew up. I don't know why. Maybe it was subconsciously societal pressure that subverted my choice, or maybe it was the bad wages, long hours, frequent redundancies, and lack of career progress that did it. I have since seen many men working as stewards, so other men had the same idea I had, and have forged careers in a classically female dominated field. I admire them for it. In spite of that I won't become a steward, for now. I don't want to become a pilot either for similar reasons, and that is a stereotypical male job in the same industry. If I ever change my mind though, I doubt I would let stereotypes stop me.
You could equally ask why men aren't flocking to careers in nursing, early childhood care, or beauty therapy. I suspect it has less to do with discrimination, and more to do with men just don't give a shit about those careers. Be it money, status, working conditions, whatever. Men don't want it. Same probably goes for women in technology, construction, and trades. I don't even care if there is a gender imbalance in nursing, early childhood care, or beauty therapy. I don't know any women who care either. But if I did care, I might find that balancing the male side of the equation in female dominated careers already half solves the female side if things in male dominated careers. Men are welcome to join female dominated careers, if they want. Women are welcome to join male dominated careers, if they want. If people don't want, then they don't want.
You are lucky. I work in research. We compete with each other for grant money, co-authership, and basically everything else. When someone gets funded, and others need money, then the person with money can hire and exploit the ones who need money. When that money runs out and someone else gets funded, tables turn and it's payback time. Publishing more than your supervisor? Expect to get jerked around with useless tasks so you don't have time to write, then get a bad performance review because you didn't complete all the useless tasks. Supervisor publishing more than you? You are their bitch. And don't expect to be acknowledged for it either. Have a good idea? Don't tell anyone, or before you know it someone else will write a grant application and get funding for your idea. And the politics! Every single thing people do is related to manoeuvring, butt covering, back stabbing, buck passing, ass kissing, or anything else just to survive. Enough of my colleagues have had cancer to make me wonder...
I think you might be the snowflake here. I get this all the time. Someone thinks their project is more important than everyone else, and they are the only person to ask me to prioritise their work. Stand in line buddy. I have six other customers who think their project is the most important thing going, and a bunch of other customers who really do have important projects with deadlines but patiently wait their turn while impatient little snowflakes like you keep jumping the queue.
When I need something done and someone doesn't do it, I have several choices. I either do it myself, or I find some other source who can do it, or I use some suboptimal solution until such time as a better solution can be found and live with the consequences, or I find more money to entice someone to do what I need, or I just wait my turn. I don't like it when people hassle me, so I don't hassle other people.
No need. Great leader Kim will invent water roads to replace all dirt roads, so everyone can enjoy a smooth ride in their canoe cars. Water roads on hills will have the great advantage of running downstream both ways, not like what the American imperialists invented, so nobody needs to paddle over a hill ever again. Also, canoe cars run on water, so you never need to pay for fuel ever again.
But if algebra is compatible with quantum mechanics (and Schrödinger's cat), shouldn't divide by zero be able to maintain both positive and negative infinity states simultaneously? Until you observe it, at which time the superposition collapses into a definite state.
My mother asked me in all seriousness if I ever saw any aliens or their technology while in the army. I told her I got probed and I don't want to talk about it ;-)
Maybe, with a bit of coercion. I doubt he would have had access to those servers though. And it would be really impressive if nobody remembered to change the server passwords in that time :-)
Exactly. The cheapest way for Russia/China to put western intelligence agencies on the defensive is to fake it. Use some other intel to take a stab at the contents, spread a rumour that you cracked it, and watch western intelligence personnel leave as a precaution. Then just check names off your list of suspected agents as they leave, AND send them home at their own expense.
The timing of this is rather suspicious though. Snowden has been in Russia since June 2013, and I doubt Russia would have pissed around for two years trying to decrypt those files if they really wanted them. Just install a keylogger and wait. Western intelligence agencies would have removed their personnel long ago. As others have mentioned, this announcement comes hot on the heels of the hacked government personnel records, including people with clearances. This could be butt covering, as in "Those suspicious people are not agents, pay no attention to them, we already removed all our personnel because of Snowden".
I must be covered in $50 worth of bacteria right now, and I have more where that came from.
I know, right. No mater how many handy little search bars I install on peoples systems, someone will always call me to solve their shitty little problems. The search thing is right there, people! Use it.
I think investors are fully invested. I am. What else can we do? It's just the companies aren't translating that into increasing productivity. There is less R&D, fewer new production facilities opening (even in China), barely any wage growth (stagnant consumer spending, catch 22 right there), keeping old machinery rather than replacing with more efficient machinery, little product innovation, I haven't seen anyone expanding into foreign markets (quite the opposite), etc. It's as if everyone looked around at everyone else, collectively shrugged their shoulders, and said "I dunno".
What companies ARE doing is borrowing at really low interest rates and buying back shares. There are multiple reasons for that. It's a cheap shot at raising share prices. By buying on the open market there is one more bidder nudging the share price ever so slightly higher, and reducing the number of shares that can be sold. It also reduces the number of shares, thereby artificially raising earnings per share. Remember, many CEOs are partially paid in stock options, so they benefit directly from higher share prices. They were supposed to do that by improving market share, revenue, margins, etc, but they just found the path of least resistance instead. I don't know how to fix everything else, but CEO stock options and share buy backs should be mutually exclusive at the very least. Heck, pay it back as a special dividend and let me decide if I want to buy more shares or spend that money.
Inflation might work. Japan is trying that after decades of mediocre growth. Doing so by raising interest rates risks stalling what little progress there has been though. If the fed does do that then they should have started a year ago, because the higher markets go, the further they fall.
Dude, if you have a self driving van full of cheerleaders, then what the hell are you doing in the drivers seat?
Cars don't have to cost a fortune. Tata Nano sells for the equivalent of US$3000 in India, and could do the same in many developing countries. How much did a PC cost in the 80s? About the same, or more factoring in inflation. At that price I don't mind if the whole thing is obsolete in a few years. I'd hate to be in one when it crashes like an 80s PC, but I cycle to work so for me it's always going to be the equivalent of an 80s PC crash anyway.
Oracle already does this too, embedding R as part of Oracle Advanced Analytics, but only if your boss can afford to sell your kidney. Looks like MS is falling behind.
It just baffles me that someone is willing to pay almost 100 people to sit around waiting for terrorists. Did somebody look at the accounts and think to themselves "Dude, we gotta get rid of this money somehow"? Think of all the great things you could achieve if you put 100 smart people together and gave them all the time and resources they needed. Could we figure out how to provide universal healthcare for half the cost? Create a male contraceptive pill? Or an AIDS vaccine? A battery that stores 10 times the energy in one tenth the weight? Double solar panel efficiency for half the cost? Figure out how to provide a universal minimum income for everyone without disincentivizing hard work in those who are capable? Reduce police brutality? Anything at all that could make the world even marginally better in any measurable way? Nothing?
So the most productive task we can put 100 people towards is sitting around waiting for terrorists.
Agent1: Hay man, seen any terrorists today?
Agent2: Nah. You?
Agent1: Nothing.
Agent2: I saw a cat licking itself. Check this out...
Agent1: Cool
Why is this even tolerated?
To his credit, he did say "don't worry about getting infected by this kind of crap". You can rest assured you are being infected by some other kind of crap.
It's not just the police and courts, it's the jury too. I was a juror a few years ago on a case based entirely on circumstantial evidence. Most of the jurors simply couldn't accept that a real world case doesn't always rely on 3D slow motion video of bullets piercing internal organs and perfect DNA matches. They didn't want to think about the balance of probabilities of all the pieces of circumstantial evidence and decide if someone was guilty or not. They wanted cold hard forensic evidence to do that for them. If someone presented DNA evidence then the jury would have decided guilt without deliberation.
Can you give me some sources for the 47% figure? That sounds round about the proportion of population I would expect to be underage, studying, unemployed, disabled, stay-at-home parents, caring for elderly relatives, retired, frail, incarcerated, dying, etc. Those naughty tax dodgers, how dare they!
This "who you know" type of thinking might work in the short term, but in the long term it will bite you on the ass real bad if you don't also have "what you know".
My ex girlfriend was like that. Flunked everything she studied, got by on her personal connections, etc. Ironically, one day I introduced her to a buddy of mine I'd studied with who worked for a big government organisation. She used that connection to get a job there, then bluffed her way into a position earning double what I did at the time. Then she dumped me. So far so good. Problem is the job was *way* above her skill level. I warned her when she applied, but she ignored me and said she would learn on the job. OK, lets see how far this goes. At first she watched her colleagues and imitated them. If she got stuck she would ask one of her many friends to help or advise her, maybe under the guise of needing a "second opinion" or something. She had to rotate this task between friends often so her incompetence wouldn't become too obvious. If anyone ever made an issue of it, she would find excuses. If she fucked up, she would conceal it. This seems to work for a few years.
Eventually, one by one, her friends became fed up with covering for her. They had their own jobs to do. This is about the time when she really fucked up big time. She tried to cover it up of course. Unfortunately for her the customer got a layer, who then asked her top boss for compensation. This triggered an internal investigation which revealed she had covered up multiple big fuck-ups. She got the boot of course, plus a court case which dragged on for over a year, plus her name all over the newspapers and the internet. Now, every single time a prospective employer Googles her name, they get a screen full of bad press, and her CV is filed in the bin. Anyone stupid enough to vouch for her will be tarnished. I think she ended up giving "happy massages" to make ends meet. As far as I know she is still unemployed several years later.
If you thing you can get by with "who you know", and not "what you know", then you are a fool. Good luck to you. Just remember, eventually your reputation will catch up with you. When it does, who you know might not want to know you.
I RTFA. Don't worry, the proposal was widely shelved, in what seems like a rare moment of clarity in Australian politics these days. Any restrictions on 3D printing would be about as useful as regulating lathes because they could be used to make Owen or Sten guns. If current legislation is not sufficient to cover 3D printed guns then there are bigger problems to fix.
I seriously read "Kinect for women is dead; Long live Kinect for women via USB". First thought: Microsoft, you insensitive jerks! Second thought: What is Kinect for women anyway? Pink with softer curves?