No, employer do not seek recessions. They do, however, make an excellent excuse. The fact of the matter is that a good bit of the severity of this recession is solely the responsibility of employers who saw the upcoming recession as an excuse to lay off significant portions of their laborforce, EVEN BEFORE SALES WERE AFFECTED!
Microsoft has been roundly criticized for extending its' layoffs over the course of a year, making it hard on all their employees not knowing when the next shoe will drop. Everyone who watched the process agrees that it should have been "cut once, cut deep" so that the survivors, and everyone else, would be able to concentrate on moving forward.
You can't criticize a business for planning in advance so that they'll have the resources to weather the recession and save some jobs, rather than fail and lose all the jobs.
There's no "ideal solution" that will make everyone happy. But if you have a better idea, instead of ranting anonymously, put it out there for discussion.
Your attitude is childish, greedy, and thoughtless.
Precisely the point they were trying to make. If companies are going to be childish, greedy, and thoughtless, then why wouldn't the employees behave the same way?
How about "because it's kind of hypocritical of you to criticize someone for acting a certain way when you act the same way?"
Or "If you want to lead, you have to lead by example, not 'Do as I say, not as I do'".
Or "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." That got man to the moon.
But back on earth - are you going to claim that everyone in the company is childish, greedy, and thoughtless? If so, and you're there, then you're part of that "everybody." If not, then why do you want to make life harder for those who aren't?
Everyone's had a boss who acts like a jerk at times. It happens - and they can say they've had employees who have acted like jerks at times too. There's still a human being there, and you should remember that, because sometimes you might not be so lovable either.
"I won't even name my previous employer until the NDA has expired."
That must make interviews rather awkward.
Yes, it does. However, I feel it's the right thing to do - this way, there's no temptation to share things inappropriately.
It's the same thing as when I was on jury duty. I was supposed to hand in the notification sheet at the beginning of the murder trial, but I told my employer I would only be handing it in after it was all over, to avoid the possibility of anyone searching for news about it and either accidentally saying something I wasn't supposed to hear about the case, or bugging me about details. It's not just about "respecting the law" - it's about respecting the other 11 jurors, the rights of the defendant, the judge, and the general public who both fund the courts and expected us to do our duty.
Kurt Greenbaum tried to say that he didn't out the anonymous poster - he only gave the employer the IP of the user and the time the comment was posted. We all know how bogus that sounds, but some people might actually buy that lame excuse. As director of social media for the Post-Dispatch, he certainly thought it would work. It didn't. Similarly, I'm not supposed to divulge either the code of the servers we developed and ran, or any proprietary business information. People are innately curious, so not identifying the employer by name is the easiest way to avoid problems. Nobody can ask - "Hey, you used to work for XYZ - we know they can do this - how did you handle it there?" Do you say, in which case you're an untrustworthy jerk, or do you refuse, in which case you just look like a jerk?
I've got people who I've worked with who won't hesitate to give me a great personal AND professional reference. Or anyone wanting to know where I'm at can always read my random postings and journal entries. Or they can ask my freak collection if they want to see an opposing viewpoint. After all, this IS the Internet, and you should assume they can do that sort of thing:-)
Psst... you still need the proxy to initiate every transfer. That's not a real web server in the real world. A real web server opens a socket and listens for incoming connections - and you can get to it directly by typing the protocol (http or https) IP address and (where it's listening on a non-standard port) the port number. eg: http://23.45.67.89:8000/
It's a step in the right direction, but only a step, towards a more distributed web.
Kanuckistan, otherwise known as Montreal, Quebec, Canada, eh:-)
The funny thing is, if you act decently, you soon find yourself surrounded by people who act the same way. If someone finds themselves surrounded by people they wouldn't trust with the deposit on an empty soda pop bottle, they might want to look in the mirror. If you find yourself surrounded by people you can trust, its probably because they feel they can trust you too.
Don't give me the two wrongs don't equal a right, crap. What about what goes around, comes around? I think that in Darwinian system such as ours, all is fair. After all, AIG, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, and Goldman Sachs fucked us, the little guy. If you want to go the philosophical route, A tooth for a tooth, an eye for an eye motherfuckers!
... and they had the complicity of over 20 million greedy Americans, who believed that it was okay to lie on mortgage applications, or be willfully blind to obvious problems, or ignored the experiences from the previous housing bubbles and the warnings from people like me by mindlessly chanting "this time it's different", or who profited from the hype in other ways, or whose cases now clog the courts, or whose recklessness helped cause the meltdown that is costing other people their jobs, or who treated their homes as ATMs, or who rang up huge credit card debts for no rational reason.
The bubble couldn't have happened without their willful participation. The banks couldn't have done it without your neighbours help. So, yes indeed, what goes around has come around. Your neighbours helped f*ck you over. They were the crucial element without which the housing bubble could not have happened.
And why not apply it to the international level. The US and Great Britain were the two countries that fueled the housing bubble - so, as you so vulgarly put it - "A tooth for a tooth, an eye for an eye motherfuckers!" - we're glad to hear you'll forfeit your assets to compensate the other countries for the damage you two did to the global economy.
Or you could stop being so childish and realize that two wrongs don't make a right.
This isn't 1950 any more. People don't care if you're gay, lesbian, bi, trans, or like to sit at home and compose haikus.
Yeah, yeah. Tell it to your wife, her lawyer, and the judge.
Then kiss half your bank account and possessions goodbye.
1. In my jurisdiction, the *only* grounds for divorce is that one of the parties no longer wishes to be married to the other. 100% no fault. the judge doesn't want to hear about why the marriage failed - in fact, he can't even take it into account if he wanted to.
2. In case you haven't been paying attention, judges don't care if you're gay, lesbian, bi, trans, or whatever. That sort of thinking went out the door in most civilized jurisdictions ages ago, and would get any lawyer trying to argue same a rebuke from the judge.
If it doesn't make any difference to most of the public, why would it make a difference to a divorce judge, who's heard it all ad nauseum? Or does it in fact make a difference to you?
but it is imperative for corporations (mandated to make a profit in order to exist) to do so.
Sure, most* have to make a profit long-term in order to exist, but this sounds dangerously similar to "they have a legal obligation to maximize shareholder profits" - which is the basest of lies, because like any big lie, it's been told so many times that people actually believe it.
Of course, when challenged, they can't find the appropriate statute (there is none) so they just go around waving their hands...
* (there are plenty of corporations whose mandate is definitely not to make a profit. Some are philanthropic in nature, some are purposefully tax shelters, some are NGOs, some are professional corporations charged with overseeing their members to make sure they adhere to standards, etc.)
You're working on the loading dock, and you don't report how the shipper is taking money and selling stock out the back door. When asked about inventory shrinkage, you mumble about stuff that gets broken, returned and must have lost the paperwork, etc. - you are now an accessory after the fact.
You're in the military, and your senior officer orders you to do something against the regs. Forget the Nuremberg defense.
Sorry, I don't buy that. Does failing to report every speeder that passes you make you an accomplice? Or failing to report anyone who smokes pot? Refusing to help some moron who wants to attempt to steal his employer's clients isn't going to land you in jail. After all, you (or whoever the OP is, I don't feel like researching the message chain here) didn't report this "illegality" to the police, you reported it to the company. If there's a crime committed, you're supposed to report it to the police directly, not to some private entity. If you didn't go straight to the police, it must not have been much of a crime. And if you had gone to the police, they would have told you to stop wasting their time anyway.
You're confusing a crime (criminal act) with civil torts. You don't "report" civil torts to the police.
being honest and impartial and serving with fidelity the public, their employers and clients;
Serving with fidelity means you act in your employer and clients' best interests.
Engineers shall act in professional matters for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees, and shall avoid conflicts of interest.
... self-evident... an employee asking you to work against the clients' best interest - if you don't speak up you are putting yourself in a conflict of interests, and certainly not acting as a faithful agent or trustee
Engineers shall act in such a manner as to uphold and enhance the honor, integrity, and dignity of the engineering profession and shall act with zero-tolerance for bribery, fraud, and corruption.
Engineers shall avoid all known or potential conflicts of interest with their employers or clients and shall promptly inform their employers or clients of any business association, interests, or circumstances which could influence their judgment or the quality of their services.
Engineers shall not accept compensation from more than one party for services on the same project, or for services pertaining to the same project, unless the circumstances are fully disclosed to and agreed to, by all interested parties.
Engineers shall act with zero-tolerance for bribery, fraud, and corruption in all engineering or construction activities in which they are engaged.
That's how professionals are supposed to act, and how companies expect contractors to act, even if they're not engineers. As an independent IT professional, you have an obligation to act professionally, to act keeping a view to your clients' best interests, etc. When you don't act professionally, your client has the right to claim damages for any consequent loss.
There's a difference between your personal contacts with a company and stealing the green-bar printout of all the company customers, as well as the company internal product and price codes and margins.
Example: I worked for 3 years writing server software for an Internet search engine. If I were to go to another similar job, the code doesn't come with me. Neither does the customer list. Nor the affiliates. Nor certain other stuff.
1. For the code, there's no need. I can do it over, better, from scratch, same as anyone else who's given a second opportunity to design and implement a project.
2. For the customer list, affiliates, etc. - sorry, but that's simply not mine to give either, short of a court order. That is quite simply the law.
... or we can strengthen the social safety net... so that people get a feeling of responsibility towards one another instead of "every man (and woman) for themselves."
... and publicly punish those who created the current crisis... so that people don't feel like there's two sets of rules, and that breaking them is ethically ok.
All I want is recognition that they're in the wrong. And a apology, of course.
So in the end, it's all about your ego being bruised... ask anyone, you'll be the bigger person if you can just walk away from it. I know, when you feel they've ripped you a new one and left you bleeding on the sidewalk, that's hard to do, but it's not worth it.
Two men were walking along. Their religion forbade them from having any physical contact with women not their wives.
They came to a stream, and there was a woman there, who was too small and delicate to get across on her one.
One man silently picked her up and carried her across.
The other one watched in equally silent disapproval.
Later that day, the first man, noticing the scowl still on his friends' face, said "Friend, what is wrong?"
The second man said "You picked up that woman and carried her across the stream."
"Yes, but I put her down hours ago. Why are you still carrying her around?"
The problem with your course of action is that you GOT the grief involved with wasting your time with testimony, etc. Did the company pay you for your time involved there, time which you could have used instead doing work for other paying clients?
Better an afternoon in discovery where everyone on both sides is nice and polite, than a day or two in court, having one side trying to discredit you, or worse, trying to shift at least a part of the blame to you. It's the same as donating blood or doing jury duty - it's all part and parcel of doing your share to make sure the system is a bit fairer and a bit nicer.
Sometimes it's better to just look the other way if someone's doing something that doesn't involve you. It's not like someone was getting raped or murdered. This doesn't mean lying if asked about what you knew, but volunteering just means more work for you, plus it puts you on this now ex-employee's hit list.
1. What ever happened to "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem"?
2. If you were the one being betrayed, wouldn't you hope that not everyone would "look the other way"? If a woman's being raped, are you just going to "look the other way" because the guy might have a gun, or he might come after you while awaiting trial? this is one time when "slippery slope" does apply.
3. What sort of example is that to set for your kids? How will it affect how they can trust your advice, if they know your ethics are so questionable? Won't they justifiably call you a hypocrite if you do the "Do as I say, not as I do" thing?
4. Why would I worry about the ex-employee? He's a proven dishonest scum-bucket not worthy of trust. Anyone who would trust him over me has bigger problems. Besides, what's he going to do?
In my case, I created everything worth stealing in our company, except the company name and the customer database. Sure, I got paid while doing it, but if it will benefit me in the future, I'll use it. I wouldn't steal customer info, but the tech stuff, you bet. All I'd be doing is stealing back my own time and effort, the way I see it.
1. Are you going to pay them back the money they gave you in exchange for creating it?
2. Are you that poor a developer that a year later you can't think of a better way to implement something, that doesn't involve misappropriated the code that belongs to them, because they PAID for it?
3. Are you that poor a developer that you're basically a one-trick pony, and can't work on anything other than that one product?
4. Do you have the guts to put your name on it here and now?
This principle does work if you're in sales and you're walking out the door with a customer list.
No, it doesn't. I was called in to do some consulting for a few months at one place, and one of the sales reps approached me about making an app for him; he had started up a business, had his customer lists, prices, etc., and was skimming customers for his new business while still employed at his current location.
Even if he had already quit, it's still illegal. Customer and price lists are the employers' proprietary information.
I informed the ownership, and gave testimony during discovery with lawyers for both sides present. If I hadn't informed them, there would have been questions asked about what I knew and when, since I had access to everything (a lot more than the dickhead did). I don't need the grief, and neither should you. Act like a professional.
Moral of the story - even a dog knows better than to bite the hand that feeds it.
In this context, we should not judge the morality of stealing sensitive data from your previous employer
Since when do two wrongs make a right? Did everyone who didn't get laid off | fired | whatever do you wrong? Do they deserve to pay the consequences if you screw over your previous employer and it results in even more job losses?
Your attitude is childish, greedy, and thoughtless. Or did you not have any friends working there, so in your mind "they all deserve to pay?"
Employers don't seek out recessions so they can fire people.
Why would anyone want to risk hiring someone who demonstrates that they're crooked?
I've gathered up the passwords to the products we make and have been using them as part of my pitch to the competition
...
I am going to take anything and everything with me that will help me succeed with the competition
I won't even name my previous employer until the NDA has expired. As for passwords, etc., I do my best to forget them the minute I walk out, after handing them over. I don't even want to be tempted, and it's a small world. It's nice to be called back a year later because they know that, no matter whether you left on good or bad terms, you can still be trusted.
"If you're going to steal for me, what's to stop you from stealing from me?"
"If you're going to lie for me, what's to stop you from lying to me?"
"If you're going to screw someone else over, why should I trust you?"
"Would you do it for a million bucks? Yes? How about a dollar? What do you mean, 'What kind of a person do you think I am?' We already established that with your first answer!"
Trust is easy to lose - and once gone, you can end up like Kurt Greenbaum the "social media director" who is now a pariah because he violated people's trust by revealing a posters' identity and then gloating about it in his column. Don't leave mad - just leave. Life is too short.
Check the documentation - your web browser is not really becoming a "web server" - your requests go through their proxy server at yourdevicename.yourusername.operaunite.com
They've just wrapped xhmhttprequests (XHR) in their own custom javascript class, and provided a default proxy for it.
If you're in a habit of leaving your phone in your pocket while talking with a wireless hands-free, then you'd probably be cooking those lower parts ( as opposed to cooking your head).
That's one of the new problems with bluetooth headsets - guys will leave the phone in their pocket, and their exposure will exceed the recommended SAR level on a regular basis. This is one area where women have the advantage - purses are so much more convenient, and in this case, safer.
Moreover, we got where we are by being curious, not by being aggressive.
We got where we are (top of the food chain) by being aggressive. We can afford the luxury of being curious, but we're still the most aggressive animal on the planet. Don't believe it? Look at what we watch for entertainment - stories about murders and rapes are okay, natural expressions of affection and reproduction are taboo.
Only 10%? It's pretty much 100%, from the sample size we know (sample = 1 planet, dominant lifeform is extremely aggressive predator). If we hadn't been aggressive, we wouldn't be the dominant life form - something else would be, and we'd be their cows and goats and pigs.
On a galactic scale, the most aggressive life form will wipe out the others - so by the time they find out about us, they've probably had lots of experience. They're more likely to say "Nuke them from orbit - it's the only way to be sure" than to be peaceful in any first contact scenario.
[X] In inverted-boobies China, citizens welcome buxom party overlords.
[X] In buxom China, who cares if party censors YOU?
[X] Confucius say: Buxoms just like Chinese food - hour later, you want see buxoms again.
[X] Headline should read: Opera and China kiss and make up - buxom buddies - searches now return 50% more boobies so citizens no longer complain about being deprived of foreign culture.
[X] "buxom of party censorship" - pics or it didn't happen!
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft has been roundly criticized for extending its' layoffs over the course of a year, making it hard on all their employees not knowing when the next shoe will drop. Everyone who watched the process agrees that it should have been "cut once, cut deep" so that the survivors, and everyone else, would be able to concentrate on moving forward.
You can't criticize a business for planning in advance so that they'll have the resources to weather the recession and save some jobs, rather than fail and lose all the jobs.
There's no "ideal solution" that will make everyone happy. But if you have a better idea, instead of ranting anonymously, put it out there for discussion.
How about "because it's kind of hypocritical of you to criticize someone for acting a certain way when you act the same way?"
Or "If you want to lead, you have to lead by example, not 'Do as I say, not as I do'".
Or "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." That got man to the moon.
But back on earth - are you going to claim that everyone in the company is childish, greedy, and thoughtless? If so, and you're there, then you're part of that "everybody." If not, then why do you want to make life harder for those who aren't?
Everyone's had a boss who acts like a jerk at times. It happens - and they can say they've had employees who have acted like jerks at times too. There's still a human being there, and you should remember that, because sometimes you might not be so lovable either.
Yes, it does. However, I feel it's the right thing to do - this way, there's no temptation to share things inappropriately.
It's the same thing as when I was on jury duty. I was supposed to hand in the notification sheet at the beginning of the murder trial, but I told my employer I would only be handing it in after it was all over, to avoid the possibility of anyone searching for news about it and either accidentally saying something I wasn't supposed to hear about the case, or bugging me about details. It's not just about "respecting the law" - it's about respecting the other 11 jurors, the rights of the defendant, the judge, and the general public who both fund the courts and expected us to do our duty.
Kurt Greenbaum tried to say that he didn't out the anonymous poster - he only gave the employer the IP of the user and the time the comment was posted. We all know how bogus that sounds, but some people might actually buy that lame excuse. As director of social media for the Post-Dispatch, he certainly thought it would work. It didn't. Similarly, I'm not supposed to divulge either the code of the servers we developed and ran, or any proprietary business information. People are innately curious, so not identifying the employer by name is the easiest way to avoid problems. Nobody can ask - "Hey, you used to work for XYZ - we know they can do this - how did you handle it there?" Do you say, in which case you're an untrustworthy jerk, or do you refuse, in which case you just look like a jerk?
I've got people who I've worked with who won't hesitate to give me a great personal AND professional reference. Or anyone wanting to know where I'm at can always read my random postings and journal entries. Or they can ask my freak collection if they want to see an opposing viewpoint. After all, this IS the Internet, and you should assume they can do that sort of thing :-)
Psst ... you still need the proxy to initiate every transfer. That's not a real web server in the real world. A real web server opens a socket and listens for incoming connections - and you can get to it directly by typing the protocol (http or https) IP address and (where it's listening on a non-standard port) the port number. eg: http://23.45.67.89:8000/
It's a step in the right direction, but only a step, towards a more distributed web.
Kanuckistan, otherwise known as Montreal, Quebec, Canada, eh :-)
The funny thing is, if you act decently, you soon find yourself surrounded by people who act the same way. If someone finds themselves surrounded by people they wouldn't trust with the deposit on an empty soda pop bottle, they might want to look in the mirror. If you find yourself surrounded by people you can trust, its probably because they feel they can trust you too.
The bubble couldn't have happened without their willful participation. The banks couldn't have done it without your neighbours help. So, yes indeed, what goes around has come around. Your neighbours helped f*ck you over. They were the crucial element without which the housing bubble could not have happened.
And why not apply it to the international level. The US and Great Britain were the two countries that fueled the housing bubble - so, as you so vulgarly put it - "A tooth for a tooth, an eye for an eye motherfuckers!" - we're glad to hear you'll forfeit your assets to compensate the other countries for the damage you two did to the global economy.
Or you could stop being so childish and realize that two wrongs don't make a right.
1. In my jurisdiction, the *only* grounds for divorce is that one of the parties no longer wishes to be married to the other. 100% no fault. the judge doesn't want to hear about why the marriage failed - in fact, he can't even take it into account if he wanted to.
2. In case you haven't been paying attention, judges don't care if you're gay, lesbian, bi, trans, or whatever. That sort of thinking went out the door in most civilized jurisdictions ages ago, and would get any lawyer trying to argue same a rebuke from the judge.
If it doesn't make any difference to most of the public, why would it make a difference to a divorce judge, who's heard it all ad nauseum? Or does it in fact make a difference to you?
Just a quick point:
Sure, most* have to make a profit long-term in order to exist, but this sounds dangerously similar to "they have a legal obligation to maximize shareholder profits" - which is the basest of lies, because like any big lie, it's been told so many times that people actually believe it.
Of course, when challenged, they can't find the appropriate statute (there is none) so they just go around waving their hands ...
* (there are plenty of corporations whose mandate is definitely not to make a profit. Some are philanthropic in nature, some are purposefully tax shelters, some are NGOs, some are professional corporations charged with overseeing their members to make sure they adhere to standards, etc.)
"Aiding and abetting."
You're working on the loading dock, and you don't report how the shipper is taking money and selling stock out the back door. When asked about inventory shrinkage, you mumble about stuff that gets broken, returned and must have lost the paperwork, etc. - you are now an accessory after the fact.
You're in the military, and your senior officer orders you to do something against the regs. Forget the Nuremberg defense.
You're confusing a crime (criminal act) with civil torts. You don't "report" civil torts to the police.
Also, the engineering code of ethics would like a word or two with you being such a slacker:
Serving with fidelity means you act in your employer and clients' best interests.
That's how professionals are supposed to act, and how companies expect contractors to act, even if they're not engineers. As an independent IT professional, you have an obligation to act professionally, to act keeping a view to your clients' best interests, etc. When you don't act professionally, your client has the right to claim damages for any consequent loss.
There's a difference between your personal contacts with a company and stealing the green-bar printout of all the company customers, as well as the company internal product and price codes and margins.
Example: I worked for 3 years writing server software for an Internet search engine. If I were to go to another similar job, the code doesn't come with me. Neither does the customer list. Nor the affiliates. Nor certain other stuff.
1. For the code, there's no need. I can do it over, better, from scratch, same as anyone else who's given a second opportunity to design and implement a project.
2. For the customer list, affiliates, etc. - sorry, but that's simply not mine to give either, short of a court order. That is quite simply the law.
So in the end, it's all about your ego being bruised ... ask anyone, you'll be the bigger person if you can just walk away from it. I know, when you feel they've ripped you a new one and left you bleeding on the sidewalk, that's hard to do, but it's not worth it.
Two men were walking along. Their religion forbade them from having any physical contact with women not their wives.
They came to a stream, and there was a woman there, who was too small and delicate to get across on her one.
One man silently picked her up and carried her across.
The other one watched in equally silent disapproval.
Later that day, the first man, noticing the scowl still on his friends' face, said "Friend, what is wrong?"
The second man said "You picked up that woman and carried her across the stream."
"Yes, but I put her down hours ago. Why are you still carrying her around?"
You have enough carrying your own burdens.
Better an afternoon in discovery where everyone on both sides is nice and polite, than a day or two in court, having one side trying to discredit you, or worse, trying to shift at least a part of the blame to you. It's the same as donating blood or doing jury duty - it's all part and parcel of doing your share to make sure the system is a bit fairer and a bit nicer.
1. What ever happened to "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem"?
2. If you were the one being betrayed, wouldn't you hope that not everyone would "look the other way"? If a woman's being raped, are you just going to "look the other way" because the guy might have a gun, or he might come after you while awaiting trial? this is one time when "slippery slope" does apply.
3. What sort of example is that to set for your kids? How will it affect how they can trust your advice, if they know your ethics are so questionable? Won't they justifiably call you a hypocrite if you do the "Do as I say, not as I do" thing?
4. Why would I worry about the ex-employee? He's a proven dishonest scum-bucket not worthy of trust. Anyone who would trust him over me has bigger problems. Besides, what's he going to do?
5. It's the right thing to do.
1. Are you going to pay them back the money they gave you in exchange for creating it?
2. Are you that poor a developer that a year later you can't think of a better way to implement something, that doesn't involve misappropriated the code that belongs to them, because they PAID for it?
3. Are you that poor a developer that you're basically a one-trick pony, and can't work on anything other than that one product?
4. Do you have the guts to put your name on it here and now?
Your mother would be ashamed of you.
People aren't afraid to own up to being blackmailed any more. Ask David Letterman - or better yet, ask the jerk who tried to cash the $2M check.
This isn't 1950 any more. People don't care if you're gay, lesbian, bi, trans, or like to sit at home and compose haikus.
No, it doesn't. I was called in to do some consulting for a few months at one place, and one of the sales reps approached me about making an app for him; he had started up a business, had his customer lists, prices, etc., and was skimming customers for his new business while still employed at his current location.
Even if he had already quit, it's still illegal. Customer and price lists are the employers' proprietary information.
I informed the ownership, and gave testimony during discovery with lawyers for both sides present. If I hadn't informed them, there would have been questions asked about what I knew and when, since I had access to everything (a lot more than the dickhead did). I don't need the grief, and neither should you. Act like a professional.
Moral of the story - even a dog knows better than to bite the hand that feeds it.
Since when do two wrongs make a right? Did everyone who didn't get laid off | fired | whatever do you wrong? Do they deserve to pay the consequences if you screw over your previous employer and it results in even more job losses?
Your attitude is childish, greedy, and thoughtless. Or did you not have any friends working there, so in your mind "they all deserve to pay?"
Employers don't seek out recessions so they can fire people.
Why would anyone want to risk hiring someone who demonstrates that they're crooked?
I won't even name my previous employer until the NDA has expired. As for passwords, etc., I do my best to forget them the minute I walk out, after handing them over. I don't even want to be tempted, and it's a small world. It's nice to be called back a year later because they know that, no matter whether you left on good or bad terms, you can still be trusted.
"If you're going to steal for me, what's to stop you from stealing from me?"
"If you're going to lie for me, what's to stop you from lying to me?"
"If you're going to screw someone else over, why should I trust you?"
"Would you do it for a million bucks? Yes? How about a dollar? What do you mean, 'What kind of a person do you think I am?' We already established that with your first answer!"
Trust is easy to lose - and once gone, you can end up like Kurt Greenbaum the "social media director" who is now a pariah because he violated people's trust by revealing a posters' identity and then gloating about it in his column. Don't leave mad - just leave. Life is too short.
The survey asked banksters and Wall Street fraud artists: FTFA:
We already know that Wall Street and Canary Wharf are full of crooks. I suspect that among that bunch, the 41% is low - the other 59% probably lied.
Check the documentation - your web browser is not really becoming a "web server" - your requests go through their proxy server at yourdevicename.yourusername.operaunite.com
They've just wrapped xhmhttprequests (XHR) in their own custom javascript class, and provided a default proxy for it.
http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/opera-unite-developer-primer-revisited/#conceptsproxy
That's one of the new problems with bluetooth headsets - guys will leave the phone in their pocket, and their exposure will exceed the recommended SAR level on a regular basis. This is one area where women have the advantage - purses are so much more convenient, and in this case, safer.
So you would welcome your overlords from the planet goatse?
We got where we are (top of the food chain) by being aggressive. We can afford the luxury of being curious, but we're still the most aggressive animal on the planet. Don't believe it? Look at what we watch for entertainment - stories about murders and rapes are okay, natural expressions of affection and reproduction are taboo.
Only 10%? It's pretty much 100%, from the sample size we know (sample = 1 planet, dominant lifeform is extremely aggressive predator). If we hadn't been aggressive, we wouldn't be the dominant life form - something else would be, and we'd be their cows and goats and pigs.
On a galactic scale, the most aggressive life form will wipe out the others - so by the time they find out about us, they've probably had lots of experience. They're more likely to say "Nuke them from orbit - it's the only way to be sure" than to be peaceful in any first contact scenario.
[X] In inverted-boobies China, citizens welcome buxom party overlords.
[X] In buxom China, who cares if party censors YOU?
[X] Confucius say: Buxoms just like Chinese food - hour later, you want see buxoms again.
[X] Headline should read: Opera and China kiss and make up - buxom buddies - searches now return 50% more boobies so citizens no longer complain about being deprived of foreign culture.
[X] "buxom of party censorship" - pics or it didn't happen!