Not when they have 5,500 employees, 2,000 of which, including all the sr. executives, work in the location I was working in.
And not when the state gives the company extremely benefitial tax treatment for staying. Let's put this way...they had two states competing over the company last time they were thinking of relocating. They stayed where they are, because the state gave them an incredible deal on taxes AND they gave them a deal worth somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 million dollars.
Shithole or not, they are not moving. Employees are though, including me, who did not want to work in that shithole.
"WTF is wrong with you? H1B is application is a dozen pages. Hire a damn attourney"
Paperwork is not a hassle. The cost is not a hassle. There are other factors in place, like for example already having had hired too many. You did know that the legislation puts limits to how many foreign workers you can hire, right?
One of the other real obstacles to hiring H1-B workers is that it takes a long time to get them to start. For example, when I did that the first time it took 8 months from the time I had the offer, till I could start. It's my understanding that those times are now a little better, but they still do present a real obstacle to hiring, in some cases.
"You mean GOOD US citizens/green card holders?"
You guessed wrong again, but when did facts ever get in the way of a/. poster.
Go back to reading what I wrote. In fact, we had extended offers to several H1-B workers in both companies. Only one of them was actually hired.
Well, you really can't move a whole company, although they've tried, so the geographical area really doesn't hurt as much as it's a constant you can't change. They have an excellent relocation package, btw. I took advantage of that when they hired me.
In general, I personally think the immigration policies in the US regarding temporary workers are run by lobbyists of all kinds instead of what really needs to be done, top that with a completely f***ed up educational system, and you're not left with a lot of good options, unless your company is located in a major metropolitan area with a lot of people or in another desirable area (anyone in French Riviera hiring???)
Well, that depends on what the company is looking for.
Tech skills and depth of experience aside, in general both of these companies were looking for someone with good communications skills (you would be surprised how many candidates fail this), someone who we could see ourselves working with (teamwork, personality, "culture" fit) and most importantly someone who is bright. Both of these companies were willing to compromise a little bit in the tech skills area, if the person appeared as someone who could learn things easily.
That being said, the first company had some specific tech requirements as it was hiring for a somewhat senior development position. You can't hire someone to be trained for 6 months for some positions, especially since this particular company had failed to hire enough people to begin with and really needed people who could get productive from day one.
I've been helping on hiring at two different companies during the past 20 months or so. I do the tech screens.
The sad fact is that there just isn't that many good candidates out there. In the first company especially - they were located in a not-so-desirable geographical area - we could not find good candidates, who were permanent residents or US citizens, at all. We had a bunch of really great H1-B candidates, but due to all kinds of hassles related to hiring H1-Bs we couldn't hire but one of them (there were half a dozen positions open). This REALLY hurt the company.
I see the same situation in my current job, though I suspect since we're located in a little bit of a better geographical area, we're seeing a few more qualified candidates who are permanent residents or US citizens. However, once again, the best candidates were H1-B visa holders, and we couldn't hire them either. This delayed hiring a new developer by about 6 months.
I'm not sure what the problem is, but there just doesn't appear to be enough GOOD candidates out there.
I don't think this is necessarily a bad idea, but it all depends on how they implement it. The article says a small log will be displayed somewhere on the screen. If that's so, then I am not going to mind at all.
The reason I skip ads is stop wasting my time on stuff I don't want to see. I watch a lot of sports, and I skip the non-action parts on the games for the same reason. The viewing time on NFL games gets reduced from 4 hours to 1 hour.
The Tivo plans in no way interferes with that. In fact, if the ads are targeted specifically to me, it may even benefit me, although I doubt that'll happen.
It'd be nice if the link pointed to the FIRST page of the holiday buyer's guide rather than the page where the submitter was spanking his monkey while submitting the/. story.
I think people are trying to interpret Professor Pausch's paper as some sort of a pro-EA propaganda, when the intent of the paper was not to write a "review on EA", but to enhance the educational programs they have at CMU by learning more about how EA does things.
I think the paper is extremely good and thought out given its intended goal.
Might have something to do with the fact that the article took financial data from the Q1 2004. EA has stayed put since, Apple has more than doubled: comparison chart
EA is a publicly traded company. They don't care anything about quality of the game or the employees.
For them it's a simple cost vs. revenue equation. The longer the game takes to develop, the more it costs them. If it goes out on schedule, investors are happy, because EA's published revenue expectations have some sort of a chance to be met. If the game is late, you lose the expected revenue between the original release date and the eventual release date. Not only that, but you can no longer release the next game on time either, because your team is working on a game that was supposed to already have been released.
That's bad news for investors. That's why EA does what it does.
Overall the problem is bad expectations management, project scheduling, accounting or all of the above.
"Nullsoft/AOL would just not be able to compete at this late stage in the game."
I disagree. AOL would have an advantage over Apple, because they *own* the music they would sell. They could price very competitively.
What Apple or AOL does with the user interface is really secondary, although of course if they really screw it up, that won't go too well.
There's plenty of opportunity still left in the downloadable music market. Apple may have a huge lead, but they still have barely scratched the entire potential of the market.
It's a humongous market in Eastern Europe and the Far East. Because of it audio CDs and computer programs basically do not sell over there. Everyone buys pirated.
I've visited Estonia and Moscow a few times. Estonia has since cracked down, hard, on the pirated music market, but when I went, they used to have whole marketplaces dedicated to selling pirated music. You could spend a day browsing through the warez. In Moscow, you had a kiosk at every street corner and subway entrance selling pirated CDs out in the open.
500 sales off of 70,000 impressions is not bad. It's even better, if you compare the cost of the promotion (near zero) to the traditional marketing campaigns recording labels do. 500 copies sold with near $0 USD invested, is a pretty damn good return on investment.
" This is a study, just like the other studies made. Because this one says what you want to hear, doesn't make it 'truth.'"
It wasn't just any study. It was made by one of the major music publishers. Not by an pro-consumer group or the lobbying arm of the consumer electronics manufacturers, but by the VERY people, who have been claiming Napster killed the CD star.
The article discusses how the majors and the music industry as a whole are tackling the issue. It seems like they're well aware of the problems, and are, if not slowly, addressing it.
RIAA will, of course, still spew their propaganda, that much is given. RIAA, however, is not the same as "the music industry".
If I, as a customer of your retail store, go in and buy something that I have to return for whatever reason (maybe the item was faulty in some way that was not apparent at the time of purchase, for example), the "do not shop there" excuse does not quite cut it when I'm unable to return damaged goods to the store, because I've been flagged as an unwanted customer.
I think a better idea would be to just before purchase ask the store clerk whether the item can be returned and get that information in writing.
Slashdot Mirror
"Companies move all the time"
Not when they have 5,500 employees, 2,000 of which, including all the sr. executives, work in the location I was working in.
And not when the state gives the company extremely benefitial tax treatment for staying. Let's put this way...they had two states competing over the company last time they were thinking of relocating. They stayed where they are, because the state gave them an incredible deal on taxes AND they gave them a deal worth somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 million dollars.
Shithole or not, they are not moving. Employees are though, including me, who did not want to work in that shithole.
"How many years of experience does an H1 usually have?"
In general, they have experience going back to several years before they came to the US.
"WTF is wrong with you? H1B is application is a dozen pages. Hire a damn attourney"
/. poster.
Paperwork is not a hassle. The cost is not a hassle. There are other factors in place, like for example already having had hired too many. You did know that the legislation puts limits to how many foreign workers you can hire, right?
One of the other real obstacles to hiring H1-B workers is that it takes a long time to get them to start. For example, when I did that the first time it took 8 months from the time I had the offer, till I could start. It's my understanding that those times are now a little better, but they still do present a real obstacle to hiring, in some cases.
"You mean GOOD US citizens/green card holders?"
You guessed wrong again, but when did facts ever get in the way of a
Go back to reading what I wrote. In fact, we had extended offers to several H1-B workers in both companies. Only one of them was actually hired.
"With a username like gorbachev, are you here on an H1-B yourself?"
;) - , yes I was on an H1-B. I am now a permanent resident.
Mr. SwedeGeek - glass houses indeed
"What really hurt the company again?"
Well, you really can't move a whole company, although they've tried, so the geographical area really doesn't hurt as much as it's a constant you can't change. They have an excellent relocation package, btw. I took advantage of that when they hired me.
In general, I personally think the immigration policies in the US regarding temporary workers are run by lobbyists of all kinds instead of what really needs to be done, top that with a completely f***ed up educational system, and you're not left with a lot of good options, unless your company is located in a major metropolitan area with a lot of people or in another desirable area (anyone in French Riviera hiring???)
"What would make someone a GOOD candidate?"
Well, that depends on what the company is looking for.
Tech skills and depth of experience aside, in general both of these companies were looking for someone with good communications skills (you would be surprised how many candidates fail this), someone who we could see ourselves working with (teamwork, personality, "culture" fit) and most importantly someone who is bright. Both of these companies were willing to compromise a little bit in the tech skills area, if the person appeared as someone who could learn things easily.
That being said, the first company had some specific tech requirements as it was hiring for a somewhat senior development position. You can't hire someone to be trained for 6 months for some positions, especially since this particular company had failed to hire enough people to begin with and really needed people who could get productive from day one.
I've been helping on hiring at two different companies during the past 20 months or so. I do the tech screens.
The sad fact is that there just isn't that many good candidates out there. In the first company especially - they were located in a not-so-desirable geographical area - we could not find good candidates, who were permanent residents or US citizens, at all. We had a bunch of really great H1-B candidates, but due to all kinds of hassles related to hiring H1-Bs we couldn't hire but one of them (there were half a dozen positions open). This REALLY hurt the company.
I see the same situation in my current job, though I suspect since we're located in a little bit of a better geographical area, we're seeing a few more qualified candidates who are permanent residents or US citizens. However, once again, the best candidates were H1-B visa holders, and we couldn't hire them either. This delayed hiring a new developer by about 6 months.
I'm not sure what the problem is, but there just doesn't appear to be enough GOOD candidates out there.
That one was really thought provoking. I am not sure if I should be scared shitless or wishing it was 2014 already.
I don't think this is necessarily a bad idea, but it all depends on how they implement it. The article says a small log will be displayed somewhere on the screen. If that's so, then I am not going to mind at all.
The reason I skip ads is stop wasting my time on stuff I don't want to see. I watch a lot of sports, and I skip the non-action parts on the games for the same reason. The viewing time on NFL games gets reduced from 4 hours to 1 hour.
The Tivo plans in no way interferes with that. In fact, if the ads are targeted specifically to me, it may even benefit me, although I doubt that'll happen.
It'd be nice if the link pointed to the FIRST page of the holiday buyer's guide rather than the page where the submitter was spanking his monkey while submitting the /. story.
"The significance of this case is that it applies a fairly harsh penalty for spamming."
It was mainly due to the fact that the scum was peddling fraudulent "products". He conned a shitload of people with his MMF schemes and other frauds.
I think people are trying to interpret Professor Pausch's paper as some sort of a pro-EA propaganda, when the intent of the paper was not to write a "review on EA", but to enhance the educational programs they have at CMU by learning more about how EA does things.
I think the paper is extremely good and thought out given its intended goal.
That paper was published way before the current PR trouble.
Might have something to do with the fact that the article took financial data from the Q1 2004. EA has stayed put since, Apple has more than doubled: comparison chart
EA is a publicly traded company. They don't care anything about quality of the game or the employees.
For them it's a simple cost vs. revenue equation. The longer the game takes to develop, the more it costs them. If it goes out on schedule, investors are happy, because EA's published revenue expectations have some sort of a chance to be met. If the game is late, you lose the expected revenue between the original release date and the eventual release date. Not only that, but you can no longer release the next game on time either, because your team is working on a game that was supposed to already have been released.
That's bad news for investors. That's why EA does what it does.
Overall the problem is bad expectations management, project scheduling, accounting or all of the above.
"Nullsoft/AOL would just not be able to compete at this late stage in the game."
I disagree. AOL would have an advantage over Apple, because they *own* the music they would sell. They could price very competitively.
What Apple or AOL does with the user interface is really secondary, although of course if they really screw it up, that won't go too well.
There's plenty of opportunity still left in the downloadable music market. Apple may have a huge lead, but they still have barely scratched the entire potential of the market.
Who the hell modded the parent as flamebait?
It's a humongous market in Eastern Europe and the Far East. Because of it audio CDs and computer programs basically do not sell over there. Everyone buys pirated.
I've visited Estonia and Moscow a few times. Estonia has since cracked down, hard, on the pirated music market, but when I went, they used to have whole marketplaces dedicated to selling pirated music. You could spend a day browsing through the warez. In Moscow, you had a kiosk at every street corner and subway entrance selling pirated CDs out in the open.
"Whoah! _500_ sales!"
500 sales off of 70,000 impressions is not bad. It's even better, if you compare the cost of the promotion (near zero) to the traditional marketing campaigns recording labels do. 500 copies sold with near $0 USD invested, is a pretty damn good return on investment.
" This is a study, just like the other studies made. Because this one says what you want to hear, doesn't make it 'truth.'"
It wasn't just any study. It was made by one of the major music publishers. Not by an pro-consumer group or the lobbying arm of the consumer electronics manufacturers, but by the VERY people, who have been claiming Napster killed the CD star.
The article discusses how the majors and the music industry as a whole are tackling the issue. It seems like they're well aware of the problems, and are, if not slowly, addressing it.
RIAA will, of course, still spew their propaganda, that much is given. RIAA, however, is not the same as "the music industry".
Same here (I also buy from clearance sales). I haven't bought a full price CD in years.
Well, except for about half a dozen favorite artists that put out an album about once every two years, so that's, what, 3 full price purchases / year.
It helps, of course, that I don't listen to what other people listen, so I don't have to fight for that last copy of Britney Spears' latest flop.
"what about the ~7 billion lives it will eventually cost to ignore this?"
Not Bush' problem, since it's not happening during his presidency.
Or at least that's how Dick Cheney phrased it when he told Bush to oppose the Kyoto treaty.
If I, as a customer of your retail store, go in and buy something that I have to return for whatever reason (maybe the item was faulty in some way that was not apparent at the time of purchase, for example), the "do not shop there" excuse does not quite cut it when I'm unable to return damaged goods to the store, because I've been flagged as an unwanted customer.
I think a better idea would be to just before purchase ask the store clerk whether the item can be returned and get that information in writing.
Creative had these players prominently displayed and demoed at a recent electronics expo I went to.
This thing looks and feels like a toy. The buttons have horrible feel to them, and do not react well at least to my fingers pressing them.
If their target audience is 12-year-olds and younger, then I guess it'd sell well, but somehow I doubt it.