okay, fine: not vegetable, therefore animal or mineral. funny how you object to having the same sort of underhanded tactic used against you.
Care to address the substance of the response? Specifically, when you read the actual complaint, it is a prison labor camp. The question of whether his claims are supported is a different issue.
What kind of bias is motivating you to accept one person's accusation without a shred of evidence?
Who needs evidence? You're arguing that the claims are without merit by comparing the described conditions to something legal - whether they're true or whether the complainant is on crack, the described conditions are that of a prison labor camp.
go read the complaint - people who tried to leave without permission were punished, people who left were captured, returned, and punished, no personal freedom, no free communications, brainwashing, etc. This was nothing more than a prison camp.
If guards were to testify that they were trained to keep people from leaving, rather than to keep people safe from outsiders, we may have evidence of a crime. So far, though, we just have one man's unsubstantiated claims.
This
(BTW: the word to describe people who lack skepticism is "gullible")
And this stand in stark contrast. Maybe you're just a scientologist plant - who really knows. You can't really prove that you aren't and it's convenient to claim that you are.
My banking site decided that 2 factor auth meant that I had to type my info into a flash widget that analyses the typing style - I sort of doubt this is even half a factor. The CC sites I use demand I have 2 passwords - 1.1 factor auth. Basically, I'm saying that it's crap.
Why should I be disregarded because I'm the CTO of a small software company?
Because you're the CTO and that's different from being a developer. C level positions tend to have more responsibility and also more pay
Why do you say they apparnetly want to add a new obligation 'for free'? It simply sounds like the contractor agreed to a contract and didn't realize his/her commitments or else is unhappy about that decision now.
It actually sounds (from the other comments with unverified sources) like the employer converted an employee to contractor without a written contract and continued to treat them like an employee. I'm sure you know how that would be a very bad thing.
I'm not the one doing the hiring, and the ones I've seen are specifically looking for someone to do a job and get out of the way. There's no real ethics, just asscovering and no vision beyond the next earnings statement.
I've got news for you: if you're in the US, you have no particular protections as an engineer and probably aren't one legally unless you build things like bridges. If I were a lawyer, at least I'd be able to rely on the state bar to keep a minimum standard.
Your NDA forbids mentioning where you work? That's absurd.
It's the same thing as when I was on jury duty. I was supposed to hand in the notification sheet at the beginning of the murder trial, but I told my employer I would only be handing it in after it was all over, to avoid the possibility of anyone searching for news about it and either accidentally saying something I wasn't supposed to hear about the case, or bugging me about details
You're a grade A moron or a troll. Jury tampering is a felony and your coworkers aren't children.
People are innately curious, so not identifying the employer by name is the easiest way to avoid problems. Nobody can ask - "Hey, you used to work for XYZ - we know they can do this - how did you handle it there?" Do you say, in which case you're an untrustworthy jerk, or do you refuse, in which case you just look like a jerk?
You use your judgement: either the question is a standard practice thing or trade secret, and the difference should be clear. I'll gladly talk about how my last job ran its dev process/org, but I won't tell you how they arrange things in the warehouse or what their transaction volume is.
Well, not to put too fine a point on it, but looking the other way isn't illegal, only covering up after the fact. Also, as much as we would like to be engineers, we aren't, we don't have the legal backing for it, and if ethics get us fired and BKed, we have little recourse.
Currently taxpayers have already paid for this, sometimes multiple times over, and the money ends up vanishing along with the latest snake oil salesman company that takes the money then spins the responsibilities off.
I'm starting with the government having already buried some lines in their right of way. why would they let someone else use that right of way to bury their own wires?
If a company wants to use the government poles and easements, they could theoretically pay the government for them - at a much lower cost than they'd pay to use the government's own wires.
What motivation does the government have to offer this?
Maybe it was always fascist, after all. Even our Founding Fathers kept slaves (disenfranchised class) and committed endless massacres against native peoples.
Keep in mind that there was no way they'd be able to force the issue of slavery at that time. These were men, not gods.
I was just hoping someone could point out a two year period somewhere for me when America was not
We're getting better in lpaces and worse in others. Congrats, we're imperfect.
Then if a company thinks they can put in their own wires more cheaply, let 'em, and the company can do with those wires as they wish since no government money went into them.
If the government has lines going everywhere, why would they grant an easement to some other company? I could see allowing more lines in an existing conduit, but not some other company digging up the roads.
You know a lot of the problems with our internet would be solved simply by revoking ALL monopolies that Comcast, Cox, Time-warner, et cetera hold over local neighborhoods
Sure, but how is this relevant at the federal level?
Yes, but if it was a PCI card, we couldn't plug these into external JBOD arrays that combine 24 drives and allows volumes/LUNs to be carved out and served up to various servers...
Actually, it'd be nice if they made it SAS instead of SATA.
WTH is with high-end hardware using the low-performance ATA standard instead of SCSI nowadays, anyways?
Pretty much any hardware from the past 2 years does virtualization, especially poweredges. I second the big badass server, but I say get 2 in case one dies.
The perception that IE is lagging behind has nothing to do with a bad development cycle, it's more tied to... bad development and a not-very-good product.
And opening up the process with, perhaps, a chance to incorporate feedback early in the process is a great way to address this. You want to give people what they want? be more responsive and don't cast the featureset in stone based on whatthe product manager says.
Slashdot Mirror
damn socialists, trying to shut down our forced labor camps!
Care to address the substance of the response? Specifically, when you read the actual complaint, it is a prison labor camp. The question of whether his claims are supported is a different issue.
What kind of bias is motivating you to accept one person's accusation without a shred of evidence?
Who needs evidence? You're arguing that the claims are without merit by comparing the described conditions to something legal - whether they're true or whether the complainant is on crack, the described conditions are that of a prison labor camp.
go read the complaint - people who tried to leave without permission were punished, people who left were captured, returned, and punished, no personal freedom, no free communications, brainwashing, etc. This was nothing more than a prison camp.
If guards were to testify that they were trained to keep people from leaving, rather than to keep people safe from outsiders, we may have evidence of a crime. So far, though, we just have one man's unsubstantiated claims.
This
(BTW: the word to describe people who lack skepticism is "gullible")
And this stand in stark contrast. Maybe you're just a scientologist plant - who really knows. You can't really prove that you aren't and it's convenient to claim that you are.
Armed guards, security posts and 3 roll calls per day, but you can just leave any time. Yeah, good luck finding a judge that buys that.
One visible example is banking
My banking site decided that 2 factor auth meant that I had to type my info into a flash widget that analyses the typing style - I sort of doubt this is even half a factor. The CC sites I use demand I have 2 passwords - 1.1 factor auth. Basically, I'm saying that it's crap.
moreover, it is illegal to treat an IC like a regular employee and you can get all sorts of lovely fines from the IRS if you do so.
Why should I be disregarded because I'm the CTO of a small software company?
Because you're the CTO and that's different from being a developer. C level positions tend to have more responsibility and also more pay
Why do you say they apparnetly want to add a new obligation 'for free'? It simply sounds like the contractor agreed to a contract and didn't realize his/her commitments or else is unhappy about that decision now.
It actually sounds (from the other comments with unverified sources) like the employer converted an employee to contractor without a written contract and continued to treat them like an employee. I'm sure you know how that would be a very bad thing.
Heh, like they'd stay otherwise.
I'm having trouble reconciling union with what i assume is an independent contractor.
I'm not the one doing the hiring, and the ones I've seen are specifically looking for someone to do a job and get out of the way. There's no real ethics, just asscovering and no vision beyond the next earnings statement.
I've got news for you: if you're in the US, you have no particular protections as an engineer and probably aren't one legally unless you build things like bridges. If I were a lawyer, at least I'd be able to rely on the state bar to keep a minimum standard.
Your NDA forbids mentioning where you work? That's absurd.
It's the same thing as when I was on jury duty. I was supposed to hand in the notification sheet at the beginning of the murder trial, but I told my employer I would only be handing it in after it was all over, to avoid the possibility of anyone searching for news about it and either accidentally saying something I wasn't supposed to hear about the case, or bugging me about details
You're a grade A moron or a troll. Jury tampering is a felony and your coworkers aren't children.
People are innately curious, so not identifying the employer by name is the easiest way to avoid problems. Nobody can ask - "Hey, you used to work for XYZ - we know they can do this - how did you handle it there?" Do you say, in which case you're an untrustworthy jerk, or do you refuse, in which case you just look like a jerk?
You use your judgement: either the question is a standard practice thing or trade secret, and the difference should be clear. I'll gladly talk about how my last job ran its dev process/org, but I won't tell you how they arrange things in the warehouse or what their transaction volume is.
We write software - what review board? Sure, I have ethics and standards, but I don't live under the illusion of that sort of scrutiny.
Well, not to put too fine a point on it, but looking the other way isn't illegal, only covering up after the fact. Also, as much as we would like to be engineers, we aren't, we don't have the legal backing for it, and if ethics get us fired and BKed, we have little recourse.
Currently taxpayers have already paid for this, sometimes multiple times over, and the money ends up vanishing along with the latest snake oil salesman company that takes the money then spins the responsibilities off.
I'm starting with the government having already buried some lines in their right of way. why would they let someone else use that right of way to bury their own wires?
If a company wants to use the government poles and easements, they could theoretically pay the government for them - at a much lower cost than they'd pay to use the government's own wires.
What motivation does the government have to offer this?
Maybe it was always fascist, after all. Even our Founding Fathers kept slaves (disenfranchised class) and committed endless massacres against native peoples.
Keep in mind that there was no way they'd be able to force the issue of slavery at that time. These were men, not gods.
I was just hoping someone could point out a two year period somewhere for me when America was not
We're getting better in lpaces and worse in others. Congrats, we're imperfect.
Then if a company thinks they can put in their own wires more cheaply, let 'em, and the company can do with those wires as they wish since no government money went into them.
If the government has lines going everywhere, why would they grant an easement to some other company? I could see allowing more lines in an existing conduit, but not some other company digging up the roads.
You know a lot of the problems with our internet would be solved simply by revoking ALL monopolies that Comcast, Cox, Time-warner, et cetera hold over local neighborhoods
Sure, but how is this relevant at the federal level?
>>>The [Bush] administration gave this welfare to the telcos
Don't you mean Clinton? Also I'd like to see a citation of all these funds the telcos supposedly received. i.e. FACTS not some blogger's opinion.
Clinton actually demanded rural broadband. He didn't get it, but meh.
Yes, but if it was a PCI card, we couldn't plug these into external JBOD arrays that combine 24 drives and allows volumes/LUNs to be carved out and served up to various servers... Actually, it'd be nice if they made it SAS instead of SATA.
WTH is with high-end hardware using the low-performance ATA standard instead of SCSI nowadays, anyways?
If you take a look, they aren't all that far apart.
Pretty much any hardware from the past 2 years does virtualization, especially poweredges. I second the big badass server, but I say get 2 in case one dies.
IE is so tied to the internal of Windows that installing a nightly IE you are touching too many internals that could break easily.
Sounds like a good reason for not making it tied to windows. Ah, poetic justice, sort of.
little blue pills, natch. Go get some - I own stock in the company :)
The perception that IE is lagging behind has nothing to do with a bad development cycle, it's more tied to ... bad development and a not-very-good product.
And opening up the process with, perhaps, a chance to incorporate feedback early in the process is a great way to address this. You want to give people what they want? be more responsive and don't cast the featureset in stone based on whatthe product manager says.