Software development has and Agile/Waterfall split, professionals in the business know this, its as simple as that. Applying conservative and liberal as tags is stupid.
Yes, and it looks especially stupid to those of us who see "conservative/liberal" as a false dichotomy in U.S. politics, and to those of us who hate the political system altogether.
Okay, you've got me sold. I'm a radical libertarian, and I don't believe the government should engage in either, but in keeping with the Pareto principle I'll concentrate on eliminating the war on terror first. That should allow NASA projects like this to go on for a very long time.:)
You are right, but the thing is, nobody can start up a competitor and do it differently. It's true there are plenty of natural barriers to entry that would make doing so difficult, but the main hassles involved would be regulatory. People like you and I should be able to start a company that provides this service in a way people like better. The result would be that these carriers would act differently. They don't have to do that now, because they are artificially protected from competition.
I am all in agreement about what you said, and I don't blame these companies, per se. But there is more to it than that: there is the legal environment in which these companies exist. They (and we) had a part in creating that.
Something can be valuable without being an inviolable ideal. I'm all in favour of free speech as long as people take the consequences of their words. We invented the law to avoid the instinctive reaction to someone spouting filth in your face, which is to hit them very hard. Instead we let the law punish them.
I can't think like that at all. The law should punish people who hit people. The consequences of saying filth should be that nobody wants to listen to you, nobody wants to talk to you, nobody wants to be around you. If they hit you, then they should bear the consequences of their wrong. Two wrongs do not make a right. Transferring the hitting to some agency (the government) and possibly changing its form (imprisonment or fine instead of hitting) doesn't change it from being a wrong.
You might think it's no big deal to taunt someone with the fact that their parent is dead
I certainly think it is a big deal, but it is a social deal; it is not a crime.
Personally, if someone did that to me, I'd be tempted to find out where they lived and saw their knackers off with a blunt hacksaw
I would hope you would agree with me that such an out of proportion response would be uncivilized. A proportional response would be to say something mean about them, wouldn't it? Do we shoot people for stepping on the grass? Flog or cut off hands for shoplifting? Cane people for graffiti? We all have baser, uncivilized instincts, but hopefully in our calmer moments we can reason about what is right and wrong.
This kid chose to reach out into a public place to harass and intimidate someone
And the "victim" chose to be in that public place.
The Internet is unlimited. There are an unlimited number of places to go; an unlimited number of places can be created.
The "victim" of this harassment chose to be on Twitter. Twitter can chose to expel one or the other. The "victim" can choose to leave Twitter if they don't take measures to make Twitter safe and enjoyable enough for him. In this way, the absolute freedom of all parties can coexist, without anyone needing to be arrested.
The idea that free speech is the most holy ideal is rubbish
The idea that there's only one true, right opinion on this subject is rubbish. Perhaps free speech is not valuable to you, but other minds think differently.
For that matter, why don't the police just produce photos and video from their own cameras to prove what really happened? They should have nothing to fear from the truth, right?
There is a playful, complimenting way, and an aggressive, bitter one. I dare say if it's genuine and happens in a reverent and respectful way, EVERYBODY likes it
No, I do not. I do not want anybody but my wife talking to me that way, not even in a playful complimenting way.
It's not, which is the point I was trying to make. As someone else pointed out, it can be considered rude, it can be considered assault, but if there is no use of a position of power to gain an advantage, it's not harassment. But the replies in this thread merely go to underline my point: harassment nowadays seems to include any arbitrary behavior that is unwanted.
Harass: a: exhaust, fatigue, b: 1) to annoy persistently, 2) to create an unpleasant or hostile situation for especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct
Just one day after Chief Cathy Lanier made it illegal for MPD cops to take recording equipment
My understanding is that the court system ruled it was illegal weeks or months before Chief Lanier's announcement. Lanier didn't make anything illegal or change the law. Lanier simply issued a decree to the MPD informing them of the law and directing them to comply with it.
And of course, with or without the court's ruling, the chief's decree, or any legislative action, it was always immoral for police to confiscate private property when no crime has been committed. Tyranny is still "illegal" (i.e., in violation of the natural law giving us the right to life, liberty, and property) whether or not the legal system supports it or condemns it.
Any behavior toward another person that is not welcome is not fine. Including getting razzed. All I meant by the comment is that I am personally okay with a bit of teasing, but that sexual harassment is not just "getting razzed."
And really...if the women started making double entendre comments and the like...does anyone think the typical man entering that group would get upset in the least bit?
Anyone who would say this has probably never been subject to unwelcome comments of a sexual nature. It's really quite upsetting, to say the least.
It sounds like he welcomes all comments of a sexual nature. Fair enough. But not all of us do, and for some of us this is quite serious.
Making a comment about a co-workers boobs in NOT harassment. Slapping a co-worker's ass is NOT harassment
Back in my day, we felt like we were lucky if we were able to disagree with any aspect of feminism whatsoever without someone crying "harassment." The term definitely was overused, and people were definitely mistreated and held to unrealistic standards by oppressive political correctness. Just being a conservative could be deemed as "harassment."
But you want to defend a man's right to touch and talk about a woman's private parts??? Unreal.
any sexual behavior between anyone if one of the parties doesn't consent
Why on earth should behavior be tolerated when one of the parties does not consent? Whether you want to call that harassment or not, it is bullying, and it is abuse.
or later changes their mind about consenting
Thanks to people like you, some people don't always feel comfortable standing up and expressing their objections right from the start.
Making a comment about a co-workers boobs in NOT harassment. Slapping a co-worker's ass is NOT harassment
I am really confused as to why you think that it is okay to touch or comment on a person's body parts if they don't want it touched or talked about. Especially sexual or erogenous parts. Do you invite yourself into other people's bedrooms, too? If I have a physical defect, do you comment on it, too?
No wonder men don't care often for working with women. You have to bend to the lowest common denominator as far as 'feelings' go....legally.
Guys can't be guys in the workplace....
Basic respect means not pressuring people to join you in conversations or activities they are uncomfortable about, for whatever reason. Respect means you don't pass judgment on their reasons ("oh, she's just a girl," "he must be gay," etc.); you just accept them and treat them the way they want to be treated.
Your idea of what "being a guy" means may be different from other people's ideas. Somehow I and the many men in my workplace manage to go through the day without double entendres, and none of us feels that we can't "be a guy."
Unfortunately, these days...legal reasons are the bottom line, which is sad. I mean, shouldn't all adults be able to have a bit of thick skin and do their job. Even in a bunch of just guys....individual guys get razzed and all, that's just normal. And yet...no one get sued, and work gets done...etc.
Getting razzed is fine. Having comments made about your sexuality when they haven't been invited is absolutely unacceptable. Besides gender issues, many people prefer to keep their sexuality private. I can think of hundreds of reasons ranging from closeted non-standard sexual orientations to religious conviction, not to mention the fact that some people are there to do a job, not to be propositioned or pick up a hookup for the night.
Basically, I prefer to keep my sexuality in the bedroom (so to speak), and I demand that everybody stay out of my bedroom unless invited, and I have only invited one person. I don't think that this privacy is too much to ask, and I do think that invading it in this way is intolerably disrespectful.
And really...if the women started making double entendre comments and the like...does anyone think the typical man entering that group would get upset in the least bit?
I don't know what culture you are a part of that tolerates this, but I am a married man, and no, I would not appreciate double entendre statements addressed to me. I do take my wedding vows seriously as they are the foundation of my children's whole world and existence, and I would never joke or permit someone to joke about the idea of me being sexual with someone besides my wife. Maybe that is all just a joke to you. But in my workplace, men don't talk to women like that, women don't talk to men like that. And we are in "good old boy" east Texas, yet somehow we manage to behave like grownups who are here to do a job, not to get laid.
Forking Wikipedia (or parts of it) is one possible solution to the very real objections you raise.
(Interestingly enough, Jimbo Wales is ready with his for-profit wiki site to offer you space to have a specialized wiki on whatever subject interests you. It is interesting to me how once that site started to take off, suddenly the standards of notability on Wikipedia got a lot more stringent, and you quit hearing people emphasize that the wiki medium was not paper and would not run out of space.)
Sometimes I complain that Slashdot has gone downhill, and I long for the "glory days." And then every so often I see a post like yours. Thank you for raising the education level around here and making Slashdot better than it ever was!
Family Christian is essentially a bookstore, and this is their "Nook" or "Kindle." I'm a little surprised they are big enough to do that, but it's attractive that they are offering an android tablet comparable to the Kindle Fire, for $50 less. That could be pretty useful, regardless of religion.
My Dad and I shopped at the predecessor to Family Christian Stores years ago, when the name was changed from "Christian Bookstores" to "Christian Stores." We joked that you could go there and buy a Christian, and that obviously enslavement of Christians and throwing them to the lions had returned. I guess our humor probably isn't typical Christian humor. Mainly I think we were annoyed that the book selection shrank and the rest of the space was taken up with artwork and stuff.
There are lots of people who do not perform well in their jobs, for various reasons. Age may be a red herring, as I've seen the behavior you describe in both old people and young people. (I was 19 when I started my career, so it is not "needless to say" that you are the youngest in your office. I am 34 now.)
I recommend that you not waste time psychoanalyzing your coworkers for underperforming. Instead, I recommend you take exploit your willingness to get to the bottom of things and simply earn a reputation for being the guy who can actually fix things. This will pay off in $$$, or should, if you handle it right. Alternatively, blaming your coworkers' failure to do this on age, or even fixating on that issue at all, is likely to earn you a reputation for being a cocky and arrogant young jerk that nobody wants to work with. Remember, I was 19. Don't do it.:)
If you have this level of attention to detail, one thing you might want to watch out for later on is a perfectionism that might cause you to obsess about investigating things even when there is no payoff. Watch out for letting yourself get trapped into jobs that don't have a payoff, whether that payoff be in monetary or in some other type of satisfaction. It's okay to work for a reward besides money; it's not okay to let yourself obsess and waste time that could be spent doing something you like better or that brings you better rewards.
A book I recommend for you is Leadership and Self-deception. The format is "business parable," which always comes off as silly and preachy, but the concepts in it are sound and useful as you discover and deal with mental blocks on the job, in others and also in yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
I vote that this be done in the private sector, by the free market, instead of at government expense and with compulsory attendance.
Software development has and Agile/Waterfall split, professionals in the business know this, its as simple as that. Applying conservative and liberal as tags is stupid.
Yes, and it looks especially stupid to those of us who see "conservative/liberal" as a false dichotomy in U.S. politics, and to those of us who hate the political system altogether.
Okay, you've got me sold. I'm a radical libertarian, and I don't believe the government should engage in either, but in keeping with the Pareto principle I'll concentrate on eliminating the war on terror first. That should allow NASA projects like this to go on for a very long time. :)
BWAHA! You made me spew my drink on my monitor! Why in the world was this AC? :)
You are right, but the thing is, nobody can start up a competitor and do it differently. It's true there are plenty of natural barriers to entry that would make doing so difficult, but the main hassles involved would be regulatory. People like you and I should be able to start a company that provides this service in a way people like better. The result would be that these carriers would act differently. They don't have to do that now, because they are artificially protected from competition.
I am all in agreement about what you said, and I don't blame these companies, per se. But there is more to it than that: there is the legal environment in which these companies exist. They (and we) had a part in creating that.
It sounds like you need to invest in RivalCorp.
Something can be valuable without being an inviolable ideal. I'm all in favour of free speech as long as people take the consequences of their words. We invented the law to avoid the instinctive reaction to someone spouting filth in your face, which is to hit them very hard. Instead we let the law punish them.
I can't think like that at all. The law should punish people who hit people. The consequences of saying filth should be that nobody wants to listen to you, nobody wants to talk to you, nobody wants to be around you. If they hit you, then they should bear the consequences of their wrong. Two wrongs do not make a right. Transferring the hitting to some agency (the government) and possibly changing its form (imprisonment or fine instead of hitting) doesn't change it from being a wrong.
You might think it's no big deal to taunt someone with the fact that their parent is dead
I certainly think it is a big deal, but it is a social deal; it is not a crime.
Personally, if someone did that to me, I'd be tempted to find out where they lived and saw their knackers off with a blunt hacksaw
I would hope you would agree with me that such an out of proportion response would be uncivilized. A proportional response would be to say something mean about them, wouldn't it? Do we shoot people for stepping on the grass? Flog or cut off hands for shoplifting? Cane people for graffiti? We all have baser, uncivilized instincts, but hopefully in our calmer moments we can reason about what is right and wrong.
This kid chose to reach out into a public place to harass and intimidate someone
And the "victim" chose to be in that public place.
The Internet is unlimited. There are an unlimited number of places to go; an unlimited number of places can be created.
The "victim" of this harassment chose to be on Twitter. Twitter can chose to expel one or the other. The "victim" can choose to leave Twitter if they don't take measures to make Twitter safe and enjoyable enough for him. In this way, the absolute freedom of all parties can coexist, without anyone needing to be arrested.
The idea that free speech is the most holy ideal is rubbish
The idea that there's only one true, right opinion on this subject is rubbish. Perhaps free speech is not valuable to you, but other minds think differently.
For that matter, why don't the police just produce photos and video from their own cameras to prove what really happened? They should have nothing to fear from the truth, right?
There is a playful, complimenting way, and an aggressive, bitter one. I dare say if it's genuine and happens in a reverent and respectful way, EVERYBODY likes it
No, I do not. I do not want anybody but my wife talking to me that way, not even in a playful complimenting way.
Whether you want to call that harassment or not
It's not, which is the point I was trying to make. As someone else pointed out, it can be considered rude, it can be considered assault, but if there is no use of a position of power to gain an advantage, it's not harassment. But the replies in this thread merely go to underline my point: harassment nowadays seems to include any arbitrary behavior that is unwanted.
Harass: a: exhaust, fatigue, b: 1) to annoy persistently, 2) to create an unpleasant or hostile situation for especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harass
Just one day after Chief Cathy Lanier made it illegal for MPD cops to take recording equipment
My understanding is that the court system ruled it was illegal weeks or months before Chief Lanier's announcement. Lanier didn't make anything illegal or change the law. Lanier simply issued a decree to the MPD informing them of the law and directing them to comply with it.
And of course, with or without the court's ruling, the chief's decree, or any legislative action, it was always immoral for police to confiscate private property when no crime has been committed. Tyranny is still "illegal" (i.e., in violation of the natural law giving us the right to life, liberty, and property) whether or not the legal system supports it or condemns it.
Any behavior toward another person that is not welcome is not fine. Including getting razzed. All I meant by the comment is that I am personally okay with a bit of teasing, but that sexual harassment is not just "getting razzed."
And really...if the women started making double entendre comments and the like...does anyone think the typical man entering that group would get upset in the least bit?
Anyone who would say this has probably never been subject to unwelcome comments of a sexual nature. It's really quite upsetting, to say the least.
It sounds like he welcomes all comments of a sexual nature. Fair enough. But not all of us do, and for some of us this is quite serious.
Making a comment about a co-workers boobs in NOT harassment. Slapping a co-worker's ass is NOT harassment
Back in my day, we felt like we were lucky if we were able to disagree with any aspect of feminism whatsoever without someone crying "harassment." The term definitely was overused, and people were definitely mistreated and held to unrealistic standards by oppressive political correctness. Just being a conservative could be deemed as "harassment."
But you want to defend a man's right to touch and talk about a woman's private parts??? Unreal.
any sexual behavior between anyone if one of the parties doesn't consent
Why on earth should behavior be tolerated when one of the parties does not consent? Whether you want to call that harassment or not, it is bullying, and it is abuse.
or later changes their mind about consenting
Thanks to people like you, some people don't always feel comfortable standing up and expressing their objections right from the start.
Making a comment about a co-workers boobs in NOT harassment. Slapping a co-worker's ass is NOT harassment
I am really confused as to why you think that it is okay to touch or comment on a person's body parts if they don't want it touched or talked about. Especially sexual or erogenous parts. Do you invite yourself into other people's bedrooms, too? If I have a physical defect, do you comment on it, too?
No wonder men don't care often for working with women. You have to bend to the lowest common denominator as far as 'feelings' go....legally. Guys can't be guys in the workplace....
Basic respect means not pressuring people to join you in conversations or activities they are uncomfortable about, for whatever reason. Respect means you don't pass judgment on their reasons ("oh, she's just a girl," "he must be gay," etc.); you just accept them and treat them the way they want to be treated.
Your idea of what "being a guy" means may be different from other people's ideas. Somehow I and the many men in my workplace manage to go through the day without double entendres, and none of us feels that we can't "be a guy."
Unfortunately, these days...legal reasons are the bottom line, which is sad. I mean, shouldn't all adults be able to have a bit of thick skin and do their job. Even in a bunch of just guys....individual guys get razzed and all, that's just normal. And yet...no one get sued, and work gets done...etc.
Getting razzed is fine. Having comments made about your sexuality when they haven't been invited is absolutely unacceptable. Besides gender issues, many people prefer to keep their sexuality private. I can think of hundreds of reasons ranging from closeted non-standard sexual orientations to religious conviction, not to mention the fact that some people are there to do a job, not to be propositioned or pick up a hookup for the night.
Basically, I prefer to keep my sexuality in the bedroom (so to speak), and I demand that everybody stay out of my bedroom unless invited, and I have only invited one person. I don't think that this privacy is too much to ask, and I do think that invading it in this way is intolerably disrespectful.
And really...if the women started making double entendre comments and the like...does anyone think the typical man entering that group would get upset in the least bit?
I don't know what culture you are a part of that tolerates this, but I am a married man, and no, I would not appreciate double entendre statements addressed to me. I do take my wedding vows seriously as they are the foundation of my children's whole world and existence, and I would never joke or permit someone to joke about the idea of me being sexual with someone besides my wife. Maybe that is all just a joke to you. But in my workplace, men don't talk to women like that, women don't talk to men like that. And we are in "good old boy" east Texas, yet somehow we manage to behave like grownups who are here to do a job, not to get laid.
Forking Wikipedia (or parts of it) is one possible solution to the very real objections you raise.
(Interestingly enough, Jimbo Wales is ready with his for-profit wiki site to offer you space to have a specialized wiki on whatever subject interests you. It is interesting to me how once that site started to take off, suddenly the standards of notability on Wikipedia got a lot more stringent, and you quit hearing people emphasize that the wiki medium was not paper and would not run out of space.)
Sometimes I complain that Slashdot has gone downhill, and I long for the "glory days." And then every so often I see a post like yours. Thank you for raising the education level around here and making Slashdot better than it ever was!
I appreciate your post; it's very informative to me, as I'm a tablet neophyte. I'd be interested in hearing your recommendation for a stylus.
Ooh, thank you! :)
Family Christian is essentially a bookstore, and this is their "Nook" or "Kindle." I'm a little surprised they are big enough to do that, but it's attractive that they are offering an android tablet comparable to the Kindle Fire, for $50 less. That could be pretty useful, regardless of religion.
My Dad and I shopped at the predecessor to Family Christian Stores years ago, when the name was changed from "Christian Bookstores" to "Christian Stores." We joked that you could go there and buy a Christian, and that obviously enslavement of Christians and throwing them to the lions had returned. I guess our humor probably isn't typical Christian humor. Mainly I think we were annoyed that the book selection shrank and the rest of the space was taken up with artwork and stuff.
There are lots of people who do not perform well in their jobs, for various reasons. Age may be a red herring, as I've seen the behavior you describe in both old people and young people. (I was 19 when I started my career, so it is not "needless to say" that you are the youngest in your office. I am 34 now.)
I recommend that you not waste time psychoanalyzing your coworkers for underperforming. Instead, I recommend you take exploit your willingness to get to the bottom of things and simply earn a reputation for being the guy who can actually fix things. This will pay off in $$$, or should, if you handle it right. Alternatively, blaming your coworkers' failure to do this on age, or even fixating on that issue at all, is likely to earn you a reputation for being a cocky and arrogant young jerk that nobody wants to work with. Remember, I was 19. Don't do it. :)
If you have this level of attention to detail, one thing you might want to watch out for later on is a perfectionism that might cause you to obsess about investigating things even when there is no payoff. Watch out for letting yourself get trapped into jobs that don't have a payoff, whether that payoff be in monetary or in some other type of satisfaction. It's okay to work for a reward besides money; it's not okay to let yourself obsess and waste time that could be spent doing something you like better or that brings you better rewards.
A book I recommend for you is Leadership and Self-deception. The format is "business parable," which always comes off as silly and preachy, but the concepts in it are sound and useful as you discover and deal with mental blocks on the job, in others and also in yourself.