The presumption of innocence is a rule that applies to criminal trials. All it means (ALL it means) is that the jury cannot convict you unless they find beyond a reasonable doubt that you committed the charged crime. Juries take this very seriously. "Every lawyer" knows that. Juries can be stupid, sometimes, but they very often are stupid on behalf of the defendant. In other words, if they're not sure then they cut the defendant a break. "Every lawyer" who actually does trials knows that, too.
Actually, research seems to contradict your findings.
For instance, when a confession gets thrown out by a judge, and the judge instructs the jury to disregard that specific confession, research found that when there is no other piece of evidence against the accused, such a confession is still effective enough to secure a conviction in a jury trial anywhere from 60 to 70% of the time (please forgive the round number, I do not actually remember the exact percentage).
In other words, your assumption that a jury, as a group, will listen very obediently to what a judge will tell them is very much mistaken. As a group, a jury will make up its own mind, and then its members (because they're not as stupid as you think) will know to keep the exact reasoning they used to themselves -- because they know that what they say could invalidate their decisions completely.
So if you ask me, this presumption of innocence does not work, and not because it's too lenient (well, it is too lenient to some extent for the people who already know how to play the system), but because the perceived protection that a court offers an accused seems so freaking high and at times so freaking unfair -- that when someone is accused -- the average jury member will try to counterbalance the perceived unfairness anyway he/she can.
In California for instance, another piece of evidence that the system is so warped, is that cops in training are taught at the academy *NOT* to read the Miranda rights to someone they really need a confession from. In other words, extracting a real confession out of someone is not easy, and it's far easier to make the person they arrest talk to them first, ask them a bunch of what-if scenarios, and then label whatever they say in response as a so-called "confession" -- this way -- since the confession is sure to be thrown out -- and since the defense lawyer can not cross-examine it (at the risk of getting it admitted officially into evidence)-- cops know that the so-called confessions they extract in this way will never be questioned afterwards, will never make it into the official court records, and yet will still have a pretty good likelihood of getting a solid conviction out of it.
So in other words, the system is indeed flawed, but your perception of the flaw is not helping -- it's only making the system more flawed than it already is -- because by assuming one extreme -- you're automatically taking the other extreme by default.
This guy doesn't sound like the typical average consumer. If the IRS starts putting ideologues in jail who ride bicycles and dumpster-dive for a living, then it will be reaching a point of diminishing returns.
We do too, if you live in the US. Depending on which State/Country/jurisdiction you live in, porno actors are often registered with our government, certified to be above a certain age, tested for STDs, and must often include samples of their work to make sure that no underage lookalike takes over their identity.
At my current employer, all we get is the slap on the back. Because of the bad economy, there's no chance for a raise or bonus, but they've sent us all an email asking us to please continue working hard and coming up with innovative ideas. Yeah, right.
Any innovative ideas I come up will be kept hidden until I'm out of here.
That's the problem with starting to financially reward people for their ideas, or to financially reward people for a job well done. Once you start doing it, you better keep doing it, otherwise the entire thing will fall apart. People will often complain at not getting raises, but it's infinitely worse if you give someone a raise one year, even if you carefully call it a bonus, and then if you stop paying that "bonus" that following year. So what was done by the employee for its own intrinsic value one year is only then done for its external reward -- every year after.
It's just like sex for instance, if a husband starts rewarding his wife for having sex with him, let's say by taking out the garbage, or by buying her expensive presents (just like in "Everybody loves Raymond"), he will be unwittingly conditioning her to only see sex as a chore, and a payment for a transaction -- not something to be done for its own intrinsic value. That is one of the reasons I believe that so many married couples in the United States eventually stop having sex with each other. In the US, sex for women is being portrayed as a currency of trade, or as a way to make babies, and not something to be done for its own sake.
For any idea they use they'll pay you 10% of the money saved, capped at $1 million. This is actually fairly common, and most plants have a history of large payouts.
Ideas are cheap. What you need to pay for is the idea *and* the drive to get it implemented. And where it comes to implementation, you need to reward the entire group/team, not just the individual, otherwise people will be working on ideas in isolation from each other, and your colleagues will be more interested in shooting down your ideas than helping you with them.
Just imagine our k-12 educational system, the children with ideas get rewarded by the teachers, but they have to work in isolation from each other, and often their classmates won't help them -- their classmates will ignore them, or even worse ostracize them, for trying so hard. Now compare this to a team sport for instance, like American football, when a student helps win a trophy for his team/his school, the entire school benefits, but everyone on that team/school knows who is, or who are, the individual(s) of the team that helped get the school that trophy, so that/those individual(s) get rewarded by increased personal prestige and increased social status (at least, within the microcosm of that school).
In Japan, this is essentially how Edward Demings taught it, and this is essentially how the Japanese have implemented it. Toyota workers do not get rewarded individually. The team gets rewarded first, then whoever came up with the idea gets recognized as the super-star (at least, within his team/group). Now this does not mean that competition doesn't play an important role in there either, it indeed does, but that competition and that recognition is often promoted between the teams and between the groups, and never between individual members of the same team.
i think they are using the word "blackberry" the way some people use "xerox": that is, like the word xerox has become a rough synonym for copying a piece of paper
That's not what those two words mean, at least not in Europe.
In Europe, the blackberry is known as a CIA/NSA email recorder. Since all the blackberry emails in Europe get routed through the UK for what seems to be no good reason, and since the UK has an agreement to share intelligence surveillance with the United States, everyone in Europe simply assumes that the blackberry is synonymous with the American NSA Echelon Program (or some sort of American-controlled UK-implemented MI-6 industrial espionage program).
The same goes for Xerox, the noun xerox means it's a CIA microfilm recorder, its original meaning comes from the 60s when it was used against the communists, and the verb "to xerox" is office European jargon for spreading your cheeks on a Xerox machine glass pane window and taking a photocopy of your ass.
You mean the invisible armoring spray that they put under your car? Damn! That stuff is expensive! You've got to love your cables as much as you love your car to pay for that stuff.
"First, it wouldn't be slander, it would be libel. Slander is spoken. Libel is written."
I've always thought that was a silly distinction for the law to make.
It's even sillier considering the fact that the law doesn't actually say that. According to Black's Law Dictionary, which is the definitive reference on these matters, slander can also be written -- not just spoken. Unfortunately, common dictionaries often contradict Black's Law Dictionary, and since Black's Law Dictionary is not freely available on the internet, I don't expect anyone to seriously believe me unless/until they checked it out for themselves.
But, again, maybe one of those 'industry moguls' in the arena of cloud computing can explain what the problem actually seems to be.
The problem is that some guy at Joyent, probably one of the numerous co-owners, thought that their service was being seen as a commodity (which is not true by the way, you can't be seen as a commodity if your service is down all the time). So he wrote an article saying: no, no, we're not a commodity, we're 10% faster, we're 20% more secure, pppphhhllllllllleeeazzzeeeee don't leave us!!!!
The article was not very clear, plus Joyent was a lousy example to use. Joyent has big names associated with it, because it was started by many well-known independent developers, but it's actually pretty unreliable as far as most hosts are concerned.
Whatever it is. Do not make assumptions. Yes, you're probably right, but this detail still needs to be investigated by the slash mob. For all we know, the RIAA may have made a bigger error than usual, or better yet a more embarrassing glaring error than usual (which is hard to believe I know, but still let's be ready for anything -- even something that's even more absurd than it usually is).
I guess her husband wasn't tech savvy enough to do the online research for her.;-)
He could have found her a cheaper local substitute (one of those models that can charge multiple types of phones), or he could have ordered one for a couple of dollars, and paid the extra fee to get it rushed delivered by Fedex or something (that would have still been cheaper that way). http://www.monoprice.com http://www.resellerratings.com/store/monoprice
Another solution (which is not as good but perhaps more immediately usable to some) is to trade proxy servers with someone who has access to ESPN. So if you're a student in the US for instance, you could trade ssh proxy access limited to live ESPN content to one person in Canada. And that person in Canada could give that student an ssh proxy access that can download torrents that can't normally be downloaded from outside Canada.
If you dont want to fight, retreat. If you keep retreating you will lose a war without a single battle being fought, a cowards way to go out.
Damn! You must be living in pure hell right now. I'm probably in complete denial, but I'm just glad I'm not sharing your head space right now.
I don't have Google Earth installed, hell I don't even have Quicktime installed because of its annoying updating library (something that was called "bonjour" or something that used to always run in the background in order for its updater to work), and of course, I don't even have any of the Macs/iPhones/iPods/iTunes/iBling toys that everybody else has, but believe me, I'm surviving just fine in my cowardly ways. With a little bit of research, I'm usually able to find an adequate substitute for most of my needs (the only exception being Microsoft Windows, that I couldn't let go quite completely -- although I do also have a Linux box).
In fact, I've saved quite a bit of money not being the coolest kid on the block, or being the earliest adopter, for instance my Sansa Fuze 8GB mp3/media player (of which I didn't install any of the DRM software that came with it) was much better value for my money compared to what I would have gotten with Apple for the same price (at that price, I would have probably gotten a Nano iPod of 2 GB with no video screen and no decent navigation of any kind, which is completely unbelievable if you ask me -- I actually love my Sansa Fuze).
So coming back to your alarmist "war" metaphor, I'd say pick the battles that can be won, or pick the battles that actually *need* to be won, and forget about the rest. Do some triage. You will be feeling that much more relaxed and that much more in control of your life once you start doing that.
The point that he demonstrated, rather well it seems, is that we in the west find the idea of us being subjected to the risk of malaria extremely offensive. On the other hand, how many of us are raising a protest about people in developing nations being subject to exactly the same disease? Hypocrites, all of us. Shame on us.
No, you don't get it. I've been to Asia and South-East Asia. And I've definitely been exposed to malaria-carrying mosquitoes.
For me, it's not the disease that would offend me. It would be some guy on a stage threatening me, with opening a jar of infected mosquitoes, that I'd find offensive. It wouldn't matter to me that the risk from such a show would be infinitely smaller than what I had already experienced. And it wouldn't matter to me that the guy was just bluffing, that he had just lied about their infection, and it wouldn't matter to me that he ended up not releasing any mosquito that night.
It's just that I easily get offended when someone threatens my life -- in order just to make a point. And it doesn't matter how small that threat actually is. Bill could have just as well pointed a fake black rubber gun at his audience. And if the gun looked real enough, I would have expected the audience to be offended by it just as well.
And it's not that no one has every pointed a gun at me before, it's just that when someone points a gun to me as a joke, or if someone points a gun at me to try to make a point, that's when I'll start getting offended.
For instance, in garbage collection I grew up with unlimited garbage collection.
Garbage collectors do not advertise on television and do not give out free trial DVDs like some ISPs do (at least, not where I live). Garbage collection agreements are usually negotiated at the city level, or at the district level. Things negotiated at that kind of scale almost always get spelled out in detail.
And even when I do go to the dump, my car gets weighed in and my car gets weighed out, and I just pay for the difference in weight.
Anyway, don't think that the reason they're giving you for cutting services is the real reason they did it for. There could be a million and one reasons, and they're only going to give you a reason that you can't really verify and that you can't really fight them on (They would be stupid to do anything else).
Scroll down a bit. The second post is on the topic that he's talking about. Either, the guy doesn't realize what a permalink is, or he made a cut and paste error. And/or like the other poster said, he doesn't realize that our slashdot signatures don't get indexed by search engines anymore.
It would also be nice if minimum yellow time could be put into federal law.
More laws won't work. There is already a Federal law on the books which says that the anticipated revenue from moving/parking violations can not be included as part of a local government's standard operating budget. And do you think that this law is being followed, hell no! This revenue stream is now an integral part of those budgets, in fact they'll even increase the ticket amounts whenever there is a budget shortfall.
Hey man,
Take care of this. Clean this up. If you don't know what's broken with your ability to find a job, and if you suspect it's bad references, you've got to investigate it.
Job-hunting is important. Think of it like a full-time job. But do pair up with someone, either someone else who is also looking for a job but who can get things done, or a professional friend you respect who can act as your adviser and who's not afraid to get on your case if you don't make progress on your own stuff.
The writer almost sounds disappointed that the suspect didn't beam himself out of the store;)
Well, I'm kind of disappointed he didn't try to get away in a cloaked vehicle, or may be he did. Either way, this story would make good fodder for a Reno-Nevada 911 episode.
What I see here is a house cleaning, they're finding the flakes, and even the decent people, but naturally, any company out there wants the best, so they set a number, and try to categorize their best people in that number, anyone who isnt in it, gets cut out. Given the flop that Vista was (and what a piece of shit it was, I can run windows 7 on "legacy" hardware just fine where vista takes ages to boot) microsoft's layoffs are more than likely justified.
I agree with your observation about Vista, but it just seems to me that the leadership was at fault for the driver problems. If Ballmer hadn't pursued DRM so doggedly, then perhaps he would have allowed his employees to publish better information about their Vista drivers. If I was Ballmer right now, I would probably resign before the board fires me, and not just for that one bad decision -- but for the multiple bad decisions he's taken since he's had the full reins. Steve Balmer is not just going to be known for throwing chairs, but he's also going to be known as the classic example of an employee who got promoted to his own level of incompetence. Because I'm sure he was a great VP/business manager, he just wasn't a good CEO.
"damn we'd love to hire you, but we don't have any openings."
May be that's the problem, you have a "resume", and you're looking for an "opening". May be, you should just ditch your resume, ditch the nice folks in the HR Departments, and concentrate on finding ways for companies to make money -- or save money. In this market, very few companies would be willing to pass up on this kind of opening.
And you can't just dig up your past to find such examples of having made your company money or having saved your company money. Most likely, your new company will be too different or too unique from your past companies for them to be sure that your experience is completely transferable (although, those experiences do help if you genuinely have had them). That being said, there is nothing preventing you from thinking like a company, thinking like an owner, and guessing what they would do next if you were in their shoes. Because if you can honestly put yourself in their shoes, you can then easily work for them.
Of course, there is nothing preventing you from completely ignoring what I've said and/or not believing me. Perhaps you could even make a joke about how all the companies are just laying off workers and/or outsourcing abroad. And of course, if you chose to take what I've said in that light, you'd end up winning that argument for sure, because when I'm confronted with such sweeping rational arguments or when I'm confronted with such universal real life examples -- I know that I'm pretty much completely beat because I'm already resigned to the fact that I can be out-argued on this topic any time of the day by just about anyone. Either way, good luck with job-hunting, and take care.
Dams don't prevent flooding. They just move it somewhere else.
I think you were thinking of water levies. A water levy is essentially a Dam that's parallel to the water flow. Water levies are designed to push your problems down to your neighbors downstream, thereby amplifying exponentially the possible death toll and the destruction that's caused downstream, and also decreasing your neighbors ability to predict flooding based on historical data.
On the other hand, a Dam (at least the Chinese Dam on the Min River that survived that earthquake) was built to intersect the river and dampen the spikes in its water flow. And even when such a Dam overflows, it still saves lives, because it delays the flooding that's about to come by giving an advanced warning. In that case, it increases predictability and the ability to save lives.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, research seems to contradict your findings.
For instance, when a confession gets thrown out by a judge, and the judge instructs the jury to disregard that specific confession, research found that when there is no other piece of evidence against the accused, such a confession is still effective enough to secure a conviction in a jury trial anywhere from 60 to 70% of the time (please forgive the round number, I do not actually remember the exact percentage).
In other words, your assumption that a jury, as a group, will listen very obediently to what a judge will tell them is very much mistaken. As a group, a jury will make up its own mind, and then its members (because they're not as stupid as you think) will know to keep the exact reasoning they used to themselves -- because they know that what they say could invalidate their decisions completely.
So if you ask me, this presumption of innocence does not work, and not because it's too lenient (well, it is too lenient to some extent for the people who already know how to play the system), but because the perceived protection that a court offers an accused seems so freaking high and at times so freaking unfair -- that when someone is accused -- the average jury member will try to counterbalance the perceived unfairness anyway he/she can.
In California for instance, another piece of evidence that the system is so warped, is that cops in training are taught at the academy *NOT* to read the Miranda rights to someone they really need a confession from. In other words, extracting a real confession out of someone is not easy, and it's far easier to make the person they arrest talk to them first, ask them a bunch of what-if scenarios, and then label whatever they say in response as a so-called "confession" -- this way -- since the confession is sure to be thrown out -- and since the defense lawyer can not cross-examine it (at the risk of getting it admitted officially into evidence)-- cops know that the so-called confessions they extract in this way will never be questioned afterwards, will never make it into the official court records, and yet will still have a pretty good likelihood of getting a solid conviction out of it.
So in other words, the system is indeed flawed, but your perception of the flaw is not helping -- it's only making the system more flawed than it already is -- because by assuming one extreme -- you're automatically taking the other extreme by default.
This guy doesn't sound like the typical average consumer. If the IRS starts putting ideologues in jail who ride bicycles and dumpster-dive for a living, then it will be reaching a point of diminishing returns.
We do too, if you live in the US. Depending on which State/Country/jurisdiction you live in, porno actors are often registered with our government, certified to be above a certain age, tested for STDs, and must often include samples of their work to make sure that no underage lookalike takes over their identity.
That's the problem with starting to financially reward people for their ideas, or to financially reward people for a job well done. Once you start doing it, you better keep doing it, otherwise the entire thing will fall apart. People will often complain at not getting raises, but it's infinitely worse if you give someone a raise one year, even if you carefully call it a bonus, and then if you stop paying that "bonus" that following year. So what was done by the employee for its own intrinsic value one year is only then done for its external reward -- every year after.
It's just like sex for instance, if a husband starts rewarding his wife for having sex with him, let's say by taking out the garbage, or by buying her expensive presents (just like in "Everybody loves Raymond"), he will be unwittingly conditioning her to only see sex as a chore, and a payment for a transaction -- not something to be done for its own intrinsic value. That is one of the reasons I believe that so many married couples in the United States eventually stop having sex with each other. In the US, sex for women is being portrayed as a currency of trade, or as a way to make babies, and not something to be done for its own sake.
Ideas are cheap. What you need to pay for is the idea *and* the drive to get it implemented. And where it comes to implementation, you need to reward the entire group/team, not just the individual, otherwise people will be working on ideas in isolation from each other, and your colleagues will be more interested in shooting down your ideas than helping you with them.
Just imagine our k-12 educational system, the children with ideas get rewarded by the teachers, but they have to work in isolation from each other, and often their classmates won't help them -- their classmates will ignore them, or even worse ostracize them, for trying so hard. Now compare this to a team sport for instance, like American football, when a student helps win a trophy for his team/his school, the entire school benefits, but everyone on that team/school knows who is, or who are, the individual(s) of the team that helped get the school that trophy, so that/those individual(s) get rewarded by increased personal prestige and increased social status (at least, within the microcosm of that school).
In Japan, this is essentially how Edward Demings taught it, and this is essentially how the Japanese have implemented it. Toyota workers do not get rewarded individually. The team gets rewarded first, then whoever came up with the idea gets recognized as the super-star (at least, within his team/group). Now this does not mean that competition doesn't play an important role in there either, it indeed does, but that competition and that recognition is often promoted between the teams and between the groups, and never between individual members of the same team.
That's not what those two words mean, at least not in Europe.
In Europe, the blackberry is known as a CIA/NSA email recorder. Since all the blackberry emails in Europe get routed through the UK for what seems to be no good reason, and since the UK has an agreement to share intelligence surveillance with the United States, everyone in Europe simply assumes that the blackberry is synonymous with the American NSA Echelon Program (or some sort of American-controlled UK-implemented MI-6 industrial espionage program).
The same goes for Xerox, the noun xerox means it's a CIA microfilm recorder, its original meaning comes from the 60s when it was used against the communists, and the verb "to xerox" is office European jargon for spreading your cheeks on a Xerox machine glass pane window and taking a photocopy of your ass.
Either that, or his dad was just having an affair. At least, that's what my dad tells his primary wife and his idiot son when he stays with them.
The slower they are. The scarier they are. At least, that's the way I've seen Zombies behave on TV.
You mean the invisible armoring spray that they put under your car? Damn! That stuff is expensive! You've got to love your cables as much as you love your car to pay for that stuff.
It's even sillier considering the fact that the law doesn't actually say that. According to Black's Law Dictionary, which is the definitive reference on these matters, slander can also be written -- not just spoken. Unfortunately, common dictionaries often contradict Black's Law Dictionary, and since Black's Law Dictionary is not freely available on the internet, I don't expect anyone to seriously believe me unless/until they checked it out for themselves.
The problem is that some guy at Joyent, probably one of the numerous co-owners, thought that their service was being seen as a commodity (which is not true by the way, you can't be seen as a commodity if your service is down all the time). So he wrote an article saying: no, no, we're not a commodity, we're 10% faster, we're 20% more secure, pppphhhllllllllleeeazzzeeeee don't leave us!!!!
The article was not very clear, plus Joyent was a lousy example to use. Joyent has big names associated with it, because it was started by many well-known independent developers, but it's actually pretty unreliable as far as most hosts are concerned.
Whatever it is. Do not make assumptions. Yes, you're probably right, but this detail still needs to be investigated by the slash mob. For all we know, the RIAA may have made a bigger error than usual, or better yet a more embarrassing glaring error than usual (which is hard to believe I know, but still let's be ready for anything -- even something that's even more absurd than it usually is).
I guess her husband wasn't tech savvy enough to do the online research for her. ;-)
He could have found her a cheaper local substitute (one of those models that can charge multiple types of phones), or he could have ordered one for a couple of dollars, and paid the extra fee to get it rushed delivered by Fedex or something (that would have still been cheaper that way).
http://www.monoprice.com
http://www.resellerratings.com/store/monoprice
Another solution (which is not as good but perhaps more immediately usable to some) is to trade proxy servers with someone who has access to ESPN. So if you're a student in the US for instance, you could trade ssh proxy access limited to live ESPN content to one person in Canada. And that person in Canada could give that student an ssh proxy access that can download torrents that can't normally be downloaded from outside Canada.
Damn! You must be living in pure hell right now. I'm probably in complete denial, but I'm just glad I'm not sharing your head space right now.
I don't have Google Earth installed, hell I don't even have Quicktime installed because of its annoying updating library (something that was called "bonjour" or something that used to always run in the background in order for its updater to work), and of course, I don't even have any of the Macs/iPhones/iPods/iTunes/iBling toys that everybody else has, but believe me, I'm surviving just fine in my cowardly ways. With a little bit of research, I'm usually able to find an adequate substitute for most of my needs (the only exception being Microsoft Windows, that I couldn't let go quite completely -- although I do also have a Linux box).
In fact, I've saved quite a bit of money not being the coolest kid on the block, or being the earliest adopter, for instance my Sansa Fuze 8GB mp3/media player (of which I didn't install any of the DRM software that came with it) was much better value for my money compared to what I would have gotten with Apple for the same price (at that price, I would have probably gotten a Nano iPod of 2 GB with no video screen and no decent navigation of any kind, which is completely unbelievable if you ask me -- I actually love my Sansa Fuze).
So coming back to your alarmist "war" metaphor, I'd say pick the battles that can be won, or pick the battles that actually *need* to be won, and forget about the rest. Do some triage. You will be feeling that much more relaxed and that much more in control of your life once you start doing that.
No, you don't get it. I've been to Asia and South-East Asia. And I've definitely been exposed to malaria-carrying mosquitoes. For me, it's not the disease that would offend me. It would be some guy on a stage threatening me, with opening a jar of infected mosquitoes, that I'd find offensive. It wouldn't matter to me that the risk from such a show would be infinitely smaller than what I had already experienced. And it wouldn't matter to me that the guy was just bluffing, that he had just lied about their infection, and it wouldn't matter to me that he ended up not releasing any mosquito that night.
It's just that I easily get offended when someone threatens my life -- in order just to make a point. And it doesn't matter how small that threat actually is. Bill could have just as well pointed a fake black rubber gun at his audience. And if the gun looked real enough, I would have expected the audience to be offended by it just as well.
And it's not that no one has every pointed a gun at me before, it's just that when someone points a gun to me as a joke, or if someone points a gun at me to try to make a point, that's when I'll start getting offended.
Garbage collectors do not advertise on television and do not give out free trial DVDs like some ISPs do (at least, not where I live). Garbage collection agreements are usually negotiated at the city level, or at the district level. Things negotiated at that kind of scale almost always get spelled out in detail.
And even when I do go to the dump, my car gets weighed in and my car gets weighed out, and I just pay for the difference in weight.
Anyway, don't think that the reason they're giving you for cutting services is the real reason they did it for. There could be a million and one reasons, and they're only going to give you a reason that you can't really verify and that you can't really fight them on (They would be stupid to do anything else).
Scroll down a bit. The second post is on the topic that he's talking about. Either, the guy doesn't realize what a permalink is, or he made a cut and paste error. And/or like the other poster said, he doesn't realize that our slashdot signatures don't get indexed by search engines anymore.
More laws won't work. There is already a Federal law on the books which says that the anticipated revenue from moving/parking violations can not be included as part of a local government's standard operating budget. And do you think that this law is being followed, hell no! This revenue stream is now an integral part of those budgets, in fact they'll even increase the ticket amounts whenever there is a budget shortfall.
Hey man,
Take care of this. Clean this up. If you don't know what's broken with your ability to find a job, and if you suspect it's bad references, you've got to investigate it.
Check your references. Below is an article on ways to go about doing that.
http://asktheheadhunter.com/hareferences.htm
Job-hunting is important. Think of it like a full-time job. But do pair up with someone, either someone else who is also looking for a job but who can get things done, or a professional friend you respect who can act as your adviser and who's not afraid to get on your case if you don't make progress on your own stuff.
Well, I'm kind of disappointed he didn't try to get away in a cloaked vehicle, or may be he did. Either way, this story would make good fodder for a Reno-Nevada 911 episode.
I agree with your observation about Vista, but it just seems to me that the leadership was at fault for the driver problems. If Ballmer hadn't pursued DRM so doggedly, then perhaps he would have allowed his employees to publish better information about their Vista drivers. If I was Ballmer right now, I would probably resign before the board fires me, and not just for that one bad decision -- but for the multiple bad decisions he's taken since he's had the full reins. Steve Balmer is not just going to be known for throwing chairs, but he's also going to be known as the classic example of an employee who got promoted to his own level of incompetence. Because I'm sure he was a great VP/business manager, he just wasn't a good CEO.
May be that's the problem, you have a "resume", and you're looking for an "opening". May be, you should just ditch your resume, ditch the nice folks in the HR Departments, and concentrate on finding ways for companies to make money -- or save money. In this market, very few companies would be willing to pass up on this kind of opening.
And you can't just dig up your past to find such examples of having made your company money or having saved your company money. Most likely, your new company will be too different or too unique from your past companies for them to be sure that your experience is completely transferable (although, those experiences do help if you genuinely have had them). That being said, there is nothing preventing you from thinking like a company, thinking like an owner, and guessing what they would do next if you were in their shoes. Because if you can honestly put yourself in their shoes, you can then easily work for them.
Of course, there is nothing preventing you from completely ignoring what I've said and/or not believing me. Perhaps you could even make a joke about how all the companies are just laying off workers and/or outsourcing abroad. And of course, if you chose to take what I've said in that light, you'd end up winning that argument for sure, because when I'm confronted with such sweeping rational arguments or when I'm confronted with such universal real life examples -- I know that I'm pretty much completely beat because I'm already resigned to the fact that I can be out-argued on this topic any time of the day by just about anyone. Either way, good luck with job-hunting, and take care.
I think you were thinking of water levies. A water levy is essentially a Dam that's parallel to the water flow. Water levies are designed to push your problems down to your neighbors downstream, thereby amplifying exponentially the possible death toll and the destruction that's caused downstream, and also decreasing your neighbors ability to predict flooding based on historical data.
On the other hand, a Dam (at least the Chinese Dam on the Min River that survived that earthquake) was built to intersect the river and dampen the spikes in its water flow. And even when such a Dam overflows, it still saves lives, because it delays the flooding that's about to come by giving an advanced warning. In that case, it increases predictability and the ability to save lives.