Kids pick up context from adults. Today it's common to skip commercials. Mom will say to Dad, "Fast forward, skip the commercial." Or "That's a bad/good commercial".
True that for the car wear n tear. I turned down a job at a micro-fiching service because they wanted me to use my car. In this case, to make money, one had to route the fastest, even if it went over rough roads.
Or, Accenture. I don't understand why companies keep doing projects with them when every single one of them I've heard of has failed. I've at least seen IBM Global Services succeed on two projects. Both took over twice as long and cost over twice as much, but at least they were able to release something that worked.
The most successful executives are the ones that are able to evade risk. Working with a BigFirm allows the exec to look good..."nobody ever got fired for recommending BigFirm", while, by the time the project sinks into a morass, said exec will be long gone, at another company, recommending...you guessed it, BigFirm.
I like what you say, but what do we do with the people that think that "big shots alla time makin' us lern stuff, like they was better than us or somethin" is a governmental/cultural/sociological/aristicracal/illuminatical conspiracy?
"Morons and nuclear weapons don't mix, so I'm thinking it's time to disempower the morons, one way or another."
Several of those "morons" in the past (you know, the regular people...everyone except you and the people in power) took steps that averted use of nuclear weapons.
On a tangent, XKCD did a graph of the number of cameras being carried by the general population against the number of verified pictures of said critters. The graph stays level until the 90's then does the ol' hockey-stick thing, while of course the number of pics remains at zero.
I was touristing in Seoul once. Every time I wanted to go somewhere else in the city, I'd look at the well-regulated taxi stands. With a well-regulated line of 20-40 people. All the time, it seemed.
We were young and healthy, so my friends and I ended up criss-crossing the city several times on foot instead.
I think I remember there wasn't much congestion, if any.
Corp lobbies local govt to simply declare eminent domain. Then sell the roads to the highest bidder. Now we have private roads "to let the market work". Simple.
"make more money working the same number of hours as McDonalds." FWIW, it'd have to be a good bump in the ol' pay envelope for me, if I was doing it. Lessee...
Uber: more or less working for self McD: Under the supervision of that pimply faced youth drunk with power.
Uber: Working in my very own customized "cubicle". Padded seats, stereo, air. McD: Standing behind a counter for 8 hours.
Uber: Set my own hours. McD: Slave to schedule devised by aforementioned pimply faced youth.
Yes, if I was in such a situation, I would certainly analyze it further. But, for me, my first approximation leans very heavily on the Uber side.
Ditto. Big meeting, big new program. Our engineering group immediately spent a good amount of time investigating replacement of our IBM mainframes with Fujitsu's, at about half the price. We were well motivated, as we would receive a good chunk of change from the savings.
After about three months we never heard about the program again.
I imagine, though, that upper mgmt could have used this data in negotiations with IBM, and may have gotten better stock^W licensing options.
You have to remember, young eyes don't have to squint. I remember the first time I saw a someone working on a high-end unix workstation. There was no way to stand over his shoulder and read the screen--the screen was huge but text was too small. At middle age, I found that even sitting at the screen the text was a little too small. Ten years earlier I don't think I would have had a problem and I would have enjoyed the extra real-estate afforded on the screen.
I, too, wonder at it sometimes. Then I catch myself doing it, at least for short videos.
I imagine if I were young I'd appreciate a mobile online video device that let's me watch what I want, whenever I want, and especially, wherever I want.
I don't have any real issues with someone getting rich after they leave govt office, as you stated. As someone else mentioned once, it just means they're smart, right?
Slashdot Mirror
I vote we replace the DSM with the OP's descriptions. They make so much sense and are easy to remember as everyone knows who Dexter and Joker are.
"...so thanks everyone else for creating the perception that bugging out of the open office for extended periods is cool."
On behalf of myself and everyone else pertinent, you're welcome.
Kids pick up context from adults. Today it's common to skip commercials. Mom will say to Dad, "Fast forward, skip the commercial." Or "That's a bad/good commercial".
""Zero tolerance" laws are always, no exception, a bad idea."
Er, is that a "law"?
Sorry, I haven't had my coffee yet and am still feeling pedanticly.
I believe rants like this give ammunition to the "America Firsters".
True that for the car wear n tear. I turned down a job at a micro-fiching service because they wanted me to use my car. In this case, to make money, one had to route the fastest, even if it went over rough roads.
Or, Accenture. I don't understand why companies keep doing projects with them when every single one of them I've heard of has failed. I've at least seen IBM Global Services succeed on two projects. Both took over twice as long and cost over twice as much, but at least they were able to release something that worked.
The most successful executives are the ones that are able to evade risk. Working with a BigFirm allows the exec to look good..."nobody ever got fired for recommending BigFirm", while, by the time the project sinks into a morass, said exec will be long gone, at another company, recommending...you guessed it, BigFirm.
Not hard, either. Like chumming with dynamite.
SYSTEM360, baby!
that made me actually lol
Yah. Wanted to up-mod him but he already at 5.
I like what you say, but what do we do with the people that think that "big shots alla time makin' us lern stuff, like they was better than us or somethin" is a governmental/cultural/sociological/aristicracal/illuminatical conspiracy?
The other explanation is: As the casual pirates have obeyed the 'law', the die-hard pirates have increased their quantity of pirating.
This gives the copyright holders a smaller herd to surround and attack with lawyers.
Is this the "invisible hand" I keep hearing about?
Anyways, not saying you're wrong, but, to me, there seems to be something wrong in the supply v. demand equation.
"Morons and nuclear weapons don't mix, so I'm thinking it's time to disempower the morons, one way or another."
Several of those "morons" in the past (you know, the regular people...everyone except you and the people in power) took steps that averted use of nuclear weapons.
"Being "a signatory" to something doesn't mean squat. "
John Hancock would like a word with you.
On a tangent, XKCD did a graph of the number of cameras being carried by the general population against the number of verified pictures of said critters. The graph stays level until the 90's then does the ol' hockey-stick thing, while of course the number of pics remains at zero.
I was touristing in Seoul once. Every time I wanted to go somewhere else in the city, I'd look at the well-regulated taxi stands. With a well-regulated line of 20-40 people. All the time, it seemed.
We were young and healthy, so my friends and I ended up criss-crossing the city several times on foot instead.
I think I remember there wasn't much congestion, if any.
Corp lobbies local govt to simply declare eminent domain. Then sell the roads to the highest bidder. Now we have private roads "to let the market work". Simple.
"Capitalism. It's what's for dinner."
"make more money working the same number of hours as McDonalds." FWIW, it'd have to be a good bump in the ol' pay envelope for me, if I was doing it. Lessee...
Uber: more or less working for self
McD: Under the supervision of that pimply faced youth drunk with power.
Uber: Working in my very own customized "cubicle". Padded seats, stereo, air.
McD: Standing behind a counter for 8 hours.
Uber: Set my own hours.
McD: Slave to schedule devised by aforementioned pimply faced youth.
Yes, if I was in such a situation, I would certainly analyze it further. But, for me, my first approximation leans very heavily on the Uber side.
Ok. +1 insightful then :)
Ditto. Big meeting, big new program. Our engineering group immediately spent a good amount of time investigating replacement of our IBM mainframes with Fujitsu's, at about half the price. We were well motivated, as we would receive a good chunk of change from the savings.
After about three months we never heard about the program again.
I imagine, though, that upper mgmt could have used this data in negotiations with IBM, and may have gotten better stock^W licensing options.
An oldie but a goodie.
I find it interesting that Khrushchev lost his job over this.
sr
You have to remember, young eyes don't have to squint. I remember the first time I saw a someone working on a high-end unix workstation. There was no way to stand over his shoulder and read the screen--the screen was huge but text was too small. At middle age, I found that even sitting at the screen the text was a little too small. Ten years earlier I don't think I would have had a problem and I would have enjoyed the extra real-estate afforded on the screen.
I, too, wonder at it sometimes. Then I catch myself doing it, at least for short videos.
I imagine if I were young I'd appreciate a mobile online video device that let's me watch what I want, whenever I want, and especially, wherever I want.
I won't judge...so maybe it's just an age thing.
Kudos for the drive-by snark.
Or inherited a hell of a good chunk.
I don't have any real issues with someone getting rich after they leave govt office, as you stated. As someone else mentioned once, it just means they're smart, right?