Don't be silly. The "marketing bigwigs" accept the interview because it can be good PR for them. What did you expect him to say?
"Yeah that whole Blu-Ray thing? Man, don't even get me started."
"Price cuts for the PS3? HAHAHA if you're too poor to buy our PS3 then you're too poor to buy our Blu-Ray movies. We don't want you as a customer anyway."
"Our developers are kind of slow, which is why we haven't leveraged the PS3's power fully, yet."
I mean, really. What's in it for them if they're honest?
Why spend on testing, when you got paying consumers to do the bug reports for you?
Because anything more complex than calc.exe is going to have weird bugs that can't discovered within a realistic timeframe to keep release dates. And if I'm not mistaken, open-source software does the same thing. BugZilla anyone? If it weren't for user feedback, a great majority of bugs wouldn't get fixed.
I'm going to go ahead and say that it's not necessarily a "security risk" as it is lazy coding. The majority of us here know the importance of input validation; just because the file ends in.DOC doesn't make it a bona-fide, working Word document.
If Word went ahead and executed arbitrary code, that's one thing. But as it stands, it just crashes out. Elegant? Not by a long shot. Security risk? Not so much.
Obviously, we have some bias when it comes to ad-blocking extensions, as Computerworld is an ad-supported site. We also understand that these are very popular extensions. But if everyone blocked ads, how would sites such as ours continue to offer content free of charge?
Who says free content at the price of advertising is a good thing? Take a good look at TFA. Do you SEE those ads? I'm on page two, which weighs in at 136kb. That's for what, two paragraphs of text? And don't forget -- gotta navigate all 4 pages for maximum impressions!
Really, sites like Slashdot, Google, etc. have it right. Minimally intrusive ads with quality content == a good experience for most users.
Well, it just so happens that I'm not good at hiring people that aren't good at coming in at 7:30. That's fine, I wouldn't want to work for someone with such arbitrary standards anyway.
It's a numbers game. There are thousands (tens of thousands, hundreds?) of people that are more talented than you; AND they are willing to show up to work on time and put in a full day of productive labor...maybe even work for less.
Doubtful, mostly on the "working for less" part. Possibly on the "full day of productive labor" part. Agreed on the talent part, but salaries in my range go up very, very quickly as the employee has my skill set. The next highest 2% skill-wise make around twice my salary (as I learned when I was looking into jobs I was *just barely* underqualified for).
You have a mighty high opinion of yourself to think you have any leverage in this world.
Who said anything about leverage? I'm just astounded at the manager-types here blowing a gasket when an employee-type dares to think outside of commonly-accepted paradigms that are designed to enslave the worker. You argue that there's one right way to do it, and you believe yourself. You're small-minded. You are a victim of an education system that was designed to make you believe you had to grab your ankles in order to get anywhere in the world.
I learned that with little exception, an employer works to sqeeze as much productivity out of their employee as they can, for as little pay as they can, for as long as they can, and then when that worker's dried up, toss them out and grab a new one. Not for me, thanks.
I understand your point of view. In fact, I've worked for people exactly like you since I've been working, and I don't think it's a bad management style to have. What I'm trying to point out -- and I think you missed this because you're so entrenched in your way of thinking -- is that while your style is good, there can be styles that are *even better* depending on the people you have working for you. If you're pleased with things now, how much more pleased would you be with a 10%, 15%, or even 20% productivity boost? Just because a lot of people are awake from 9am to 5pm doesn't mean that's when all of those people have their peak production times. It simply makes no sense to correlate the two.
I think it also depends on the job. Support staff? Forget about it, you've got to be there 8 hours. A team of 1 assigned to, say, transfer a very large database from FileMaker to MySQL? I see no reason why not.
I love it when I can live an integrated life with my job and my non-job components. I was downsized last year, and spent a few months freelancing -- those were the best few months of my life. I could be watching a movie, get a call from a client, and spend billable time with him on the phone while making dinner. Then, I'd stay up till all hours of the night working on his projects, taking breaks to mess around in GarageBand or whatever. Things got done, they got done right, and quickly, and I have nothing but positive recommendations from those clients.
Now that I've typed all that out, it seems like freelancing is the way to go.
Look, I've got lots of experience working with old-school businesspeople who value "face-time". Let me explain to them what's important:
Ready?
Results. That's it. Are projects done on-time? Up to standards? If so, don't bitch at me because I was 15 minutes late today. Maybe I was working on your project, maybe I was playing WoW. Whatever the reason, I work best between 11pm-2am. Those are my peak productivity hours, whether I'm writing songs, making headway in a game, or coding. But I'm also not real good at coming in at 7:30am.
I think IT managers need to realize that different people have different ways of working. If they could (or had the power) to leverage that, far more would get done in far shorter periods of time. If my boss came to me today and said, "Ok, you can telecommute 3 days a week. But if your productivity drops even a little, you're back here 5 days a week", I'd take it -- and they would see just how productive someone can be when you let them take on projects on their own terms.
*shrug*. Everyone I've met who complains that TV is inane impresses me as sanctimonious. How is it that the Discovery Channel is for idiots with square eyes, and discovery.com is for the enlightened? With insane amounts of programming, the only reason to be exposed to "idiotic crap" on TV is to choose to watch it. There's plenty of idiotic crap on the Internet, too, isn't there, but the same people who smugly proclaim their lack of TV dick around on the Internet. Right.
For the record, this wasn't an intent to flame you, or really directed personally at YOU at all. Your comment kind of sparked my brain on that subject. That is all.
"Although there's no word on damage to the engine from using used cooking oil, a diesel-fueled car did run on it. However, the MythBusters speculate that once this alternative fuel achieves a significant interest level among the public, used cooking oil will be hoarded as a saleable commodity. The used cooking oil also did not quite fit the requirement of improved fuel efficiency, as it yielded approximately 10% less distance for an equivalent amount of diesel."
You are correct in what you are saying; however, it goes even deeper. Magazines, as well as other "old-school media" such as radio, are quickly scrambling to find relavence in the age of new media. I used to work for Clear Channel Radio as a webmaster for KFBK-AM, a radio station with a significant history in Sacramento. The fact is that people go to the Internet for their information more than they go to TV and Radio -- and if you're not even going to watch TV, what are the odds you'll pick up a magazine?
I'm more than a little saddened to see historical entities like newspapers (anyone keeping up with Knight-Ridder?) and AM stations going down the tubes. But such is the cost of evolution.
Do a google search on "Ben Hocking". I'm not a back seat scientist. I might not be that credentialed, but I do have an MS in astrophysics, a Masters of Computer Science and I will soon have a Ph.D. in CS. I've also published several articles in Journal of Neuroscience and have written two grant proposals to the NIH. What are your credentials?
Ben Hocking: MS, Astrophysics
Ben Hocking: MS, CS
Ben Hocking: Ph.D (soon), CS
I'm not being sanctimonious, but you're not a climatologist. I'm not saying any research you've done is worthless, but don't you dare even TRY to use your own credentials as de facto proof of your claims after making this post.
experience is a necessary but insufficient condition for expertise. Look at the second picture, also by your good friend Hajj: http://zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/
You know, the one with the cloned "missles" that were actually flares?
Oops.
He's done it before, you'd be blind not to think he did it again with this photo.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't be silly. The "marketing bigwigs" accept the interview because it can be good PR for them. What did you expect him to say?
"Yeah that whole Blu-Ray thing? Man, don't even get me started."
"Price cuts for the PS3? HAHAHA if you're too poor to buy our PS3 then you're too poor to buy our Blu-Ray movies. We don't want you as a customer anyway."
"Our developers are kind of slow, which is why we haven't leveraged the PS3's power fully, yet."
I mean, really. What's in it for them if they're honest?
Yet another failed car analogy. BMW had 66.6 Billion USD in revenue in 2006.
Hyundai had 29.5 Billion USD in revenue.
So, bottom line, BMW might move fewer units, but they make more money.
I'm going to go ahead and say that it's not necessarily a "security risk" as it is lazy coding. The majority of us here know the importance of input validation; just because the file ends in .DOC doesn't make it a bona-fide, working Word document.
If Word went ahead and executed arbitrary code, that's one thing. But as it stands, it just crashes out. Elegant? Not by a long shot. Security risk? Not so much.
Just a nitpick, but the UCs are in California (University of California) and U of Colorado is called CU. So it's CU-Boulder.
Really, sites like Slashdot, Google, etc. have it right. Minimally intrusive ads with quality content == a good experience for most users.
Clear Channel uses internet streaming as another source of revenue.
Example.
There are "internet only" advertising packages which include ads on a radio station site along with streaming, etc.
So yeah, CC has a big stake in this. Non-traditional revenue/internet revenue is (obviously) a big part of their long-term strategy.
You know what two words would make *me* buy a Creative card?
Smell Blaster
Thank you for providing a well-reasoned and experienced point of view. It has given me something to consider.
Nothing more to add, I think you make a lot of sense.
Well, it just so happens that I'm not good at hiring people that aren't good at coming in at 7:30.
That's fine, I wouldn't want to work for someone with such arbitrary standards anyway.
It's a numbers game. There are thousands (tens of thousands, hundreds?) of people that are more talented than you; AND they are willing to show up to work on time and put in a full day of productive labor...maybe even work for less.
Doubtful, mostly on the "working for less" part. Possibly on the "full day of productive labor" part. Agreed on the talent part, but salaries in my range go up very, very quickly as the employee has my skill set. The next highest 2% skill-wise make around twice my salary (as I learned when I was looking into jobs I was *just barely* underqualified for).
You have a mighty high opinion of yourself to think you have any leverage in this world.
Who said anything about leverage? I'm just astounded at the manager-types here blowing a gasket when an employee-type dares to think outside of commonly-accepted paradigms that are designed to enslave the worker. You argue that there's one right way to do it, and you believe yourself. You're small-minded. You are a victim of an education system that was designed to make you believe you had to grab your ankles in order to get anywhere in the world.
I learned that with little exception, an employer works to sqeeze as much productivity out of their employee as they can, for as little pay as they can, for as long as they can, and then when that worker's dried up, toss them out and grab a new one. Not for me, thanks.
I don't know who your average employees are, but the ones I support are attorneys.
I understand your point of view. In fact, I've worked for people exactly like you since I've been working, and I don't think it's a bad management style to have. What I'm trying to point out -- and I think you missed this because you're so entrenched in your way of thinking -- is that while your style is good, there can be styles that are *even better* depending on the people you have working for you. If you're pleased with things now, how much more pleased would you be with a 10%, 15%, or even 20% productivity boost? Just because a lot of people are awake from 9am to 5pm doesn't mean that's when all of those people have their peak production times. It simply makes no sense to correlate the two.
I think it also depends on the job. Support staff? Forget about it, you've got to be there 8 hours. A team of 1 assigned to, say, transfer a very large database from FileMaker to MySQL? I see no reason why not.
I love it when I can live an integrated life with my job and my non-job components. I was downsized last year, and spent a few months freelancing -- those were the best few months of my life. I could be watching a movie, get a call from a client, and spend billable time with him on the phone while making dinner. Then, I'd stay up till all hours of the night working on his projects, taking breaks to mess around in GarageBand or whatever. Things got done, they got done right, and quickly, and I have nothing but positive recommendations from those clients.
Now that I've typed all that out, it seems like freelancing is the way to go.
Look, I've got lots of experience working with old-school businesspeople who value "face-time". Let me explain to them what's important:
Ready?
Results. That's it. Are projects done on-time? Up to standards? If so, don't bitch at me because I was 15 minutes late today. Maybe I was working on your project, maybe I was playing WoW. Whatever the reason, I work best between 11pm-2am. Those are my peak productivity hours, whether I'm writing songs, making headway in a game, or coding. But I'm also not real good at coming in at 7:30am.
I think IT managers need to realize that different people have different ways of working. If they could (or had the power) to leverage that, far more would get done in far shorter periods of time. If my boss came to me today and said, "Ok, you can telecommute 3 days a week. But if your productivity drops even a little, you're back here 5 days a week", I'd take it -- and they would see just how productive someone can be when you let them take on projects on their own terms.
For the record, this wasn't an intent to flame you, or really directed personally at YOU at all. Your comment kind of sparked my brain on that subject. That is all.
Why is this rated "funny"? Mythbusters did this:
"Although there's no word on damage to the engine from using used cooking oil, a diesel-fueled car did run on it. However, the MythBusters speculate that once this alternative fuel achieves a significant interest level among the public, used cooking oil will be hoarded as a saleable commodity. The used cooking oil also did not quite fit the requirement of improved fuel efficiency, as it yielded approximately 10% less distance for an equivalent amount of diesel."
See here and here (scroll down)
What would you say to some nice ethanol?
I'd say, "Don't get too comfortable in that glass!"
You are correct in what you are saying; however, it goes even deeper. Magazines, as well as other "old-school media" such as radio, are quickly scrambling to find relavence in the age of new media. I used to work for Clear Channel Radio as a webmaster for KFBK-AM, a radio station with a significant history in Sacramento. The fact is that people go to the Internet for their information more than they go to TV and Radio -- and if you're not even going to watch TV, what are the odds you'll pick up a magazine?
I'm more than a little saddened to see historical entities like newspapers (anyone keeping up with Knight-Ridder?) and AM stations going down the tubes. But such is the cost of evolution.
Ben Hocking: MS, CS
Ben Hocking: Ph.D (soon), CS
I'm not being sanctimonious, but you're not a climatologist. I'm not saying any research you've done is worthless, but don't you dare even TRY to use your own credentials as de facto proof of your claims after making this post.
Mario Kart Arcade GP already scans just your face and slaps it on a character model, "putting YOU in the GAME!".
experience is a necessary but insufficient condition for expertise. Look at the second picture, also by your good friend Hajj: http://zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/
You know, the one with the cloned "missles" that were actually flares?
Oops.
He's done it before, you'd be blind not to think he did it again with this photo.
That's what I saw at first, too. The package actually says "convection".
Or "My Socrates Note," right?
One of my favorite movies of all-time.