"A competent board..." sounds wonderful, but I can't think of one anywhere in the tech industry. Some are less incompetent than others, but where is a good one?
Apple? Oracle? Less competent boards, rather competent CEOs.
If true, this is a great example of where the classification system fails. Why in hell would something like that need to be classified? Oh right, to save someone's reputation/feelings.
There is something to be done here, but banning things from China is a simplistic action that is more style than substance. “We can not solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them”. Of course, I've seen little evidence that solving the problem is the goal here.
And you lose by being too simplistic and "solving" the wrong problem.
I thought the most insightful exchange was the one in the article - it isn't about ads. Ads, and ad blocking are merely symptoms. It's about choice, or control. I want a say in whether I see an ad or not. I'm a significant part of the interaction. The idea of consumer that holds in the world of TV doesn't map well to the online world.
I have the ability to block ads. Using that ability doesn't make me immoral, dishonest, or any other disparagement I've see thrown around. It levels the playing field. Advertisers, website owners and I are informally negotiating a partnership of sorts, and I have much more say in the negotiation online than I do in other mediums. I'd be a fool to not use that power. Most importantly, I (and many others like me) *will* use that power.
The sites that figure out how to balance the control/dignity equation between their advertising partners and their viewer partners will do well.
It's not an easy problem to solve, but it is *the* problem. Not ad blocking.
(clearly highly intimidating threats otherwise guards wouldn't be called in)...
That isn't clear at all. Could be an overreaction, or an outright publicity stunt.
The newspaper had a public forum that they controlled (or so they thought) and they could publish the "map" without a penalty. Well, turns out they weren't as insulated from their decision as they had hoped.
Not quite. The Amedment doesn't grant a right - it prohibits the Government from infringing on a right we already posess. Much discussion on this matter sems to be from the unspoken point of view that we get rights from our government, like a gift.
Our constitution was written to restrict the power of the federal government.
They aren't opposed to people linking to them, they just want money anytime someone does. This is an attempt to prop up a poor business on their part by legislation.
The people who did this to that kid are the ones who need to be arrested -- every last one of them. Stripped of their ranks, stripped of their certifications, their badges taken away, and relegated to flipping burgers at McDonald's for the rest of their pathetic little lives, because people who straight-facedly make such poor decisions as these have NO BUSINESS BEING IN POSITIONS OF AUTHORITY, period.
Agreed - but it's not gonna happen. Heck, once you are in any position of authority in the public sector, the next exercise is a constant striving to make sure you can't get fired for any reason. Period. This incident is about making sure the school and police can't even get criticized (getting criticized for over-reacting doesn't count). This reads like a classic case of CYA.
What is lacking here is leadership. As usual, the person with the least protection/power pays the price for that lack.
and all to the benefit of *men*. It has to do about who is currently in power, and how to best maintain that arrangement. Gender plays an important role world-wide. The west has (unwillingly) made more advancement, mostly due to WWII. Once the women got out into the workforce, that genie wasn't going back into the bottle.
Things like "tradition" and "religion" are more about maintaining control than they are about anything else.To ignore that observable social behavior is folly
We *have* made up our minds. We aren't at war. We just haven't quite figured out how to get the congress to pull back some of this made-up "executive power". The systems of Checks-and-balances isn't functioning as well as we need.
CIA prosecuting an undeclared war at the direction of the President. That didn't work out too well for us the last time we tried it, now that I think of it.
I'm still unable to find a ultra book that 1/2 the price of an Air. I can find cheaper, but not 50% cheaper. I just looked at the Asus ZenbookPrime on Amazon and it's the same price. I can find something like hp's Folio 13 for $823. Again, cheaper, but not 50% cheaper than the closest-spec'd Air.
Focus on "Properly packing" the Servers and workstations. Properly packing in this context is retaliative, but I bet servers and workstations are more sensitive to getting banged around in the back of a u-haul than ip phones, printers, and wireless gear. Your network gear is probably in group 2 - more important than the "Phones, printers, and Wireless gear"
Like the cognitive dissonance displayed by a CTO who regularly witnesses unacceptable behavior in their organization/company but somehow thinks they aren't to blame?
Lay those folks off. You're the CTO, so you have some pull, I would think. If it's that much of an issue for you, get rid of them and bring folks whose work habits are more to your liking. You must understand they are going where you're leading them.
You have outlined 2 different issues:
1. Network security. Sounds like you got that one nailed down
2. You see subordinates spending too much time "goofing off". This is what seems to be really bugging you, and that isn't unusual for a technologist. I submit that you can *and should* do something about it - besides complaining about "where did the work ethic go?".
Corporate Leadership spends too much time whining about employee bad behavior, and not enough time addressing it directly through timely feedback. Hard conversations, difficult decisions and consequences are required to help people develop. If there is no consequence, then why wouldn't someone waste time at work? Leadership includes holding folks accountable. You aren't doing that. Just focusing on the technology isn't enough. Expecting people to hold themselves accountable to *your* expectations without any direct, regular, feedback (termination is certainly a form of feedback) isn't very effective in my experience.
You've solved the technology problems, but completely fail in leading your organization because you won't hold yourself and your organization to a high standard. They goof-off. You refuse to address that effectively. If people aren't your forte, either start improving your skills or hire people to work for you who are good at it.
You're a CTO, so you're a leader. So stop half-assing it and start leading those people (and yourself) where you want to go.
Greater transparency would enable meaningful oversight not only by appellate courts but also by Congress and the general public.
...and the executive branch will pitch a fit. We would benefit from congress actually asserting itself a bit more in this area. I'm not interested in living in a monarchy
Slashdot Mirror
"A competent board..." sounds wonderful, but I can't think of one anywhere in the tech industry. Some are less incompetent than others, but where is a good one? Apple? Oracle? Less competent boards, rather competent CEOs.
Control
If true, this is a great example of where the classification system fails. Why in hell would something like that need to be classified? Oh right, to save someone's reputation/feelings.
There is something to be done here, but banning things from China is a simplistic action that is more style than substance. “We can not solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them”. Of course, I've seen little evidence that solving the problem is the goal here.
hp isn't dead?
I thought the most insightful exchange was the one in the article - it isn't about ads. Ads, and ad blocking are merely symptoms. It's about choice, or control. I want a say in whether I see an ad or not. I'm a significant part of the interaction. The idea of consumer that holds in the world of TV doesn't map well to the online world.
I have the ability to block ads. Using that ability doesn't make me immoral, dishonest, or any other disparagement I've see thrown around. It levels the playing field. Advertisers, website owners and I are informally negotiating a partnership of sorts, and I have much more say in the negotiation online than I do in other mediums. I'd be a fool to not use that power. Most importantly, I (and many others like me) *will* use that power.
The sites that figure out how to balance the control/dignity equation between their advertising partners and their viewer partners will do well.
It's not an easy problem to solve, but it is *the* problem. Not ad blocking.
This I like. "You owe companies nothing".
This is /. -Not reading the article is always implied, if not outright assumed.
The Chinese aren't communists...
Social security is already ruined, and it wasn't the obese that did it.
(clearly highly intimidating threats otherwise guards wouldn't be called in) ...
That isn't clear at all. Could be an overreaction, or an outright publicity stunt.
The newspaper had a public forum that they controlled (or so they thought) and they could publish the "map" without a penalty. Well, turns out they weren't as insulated from their decision as they had hoped.
I'm enjoying the spectacle
Not quite. The Amedment doesn't grant a right - it prohibits the Government from infringing on a right we already posess. Much discussion on this matter sems to be from the unspoken point of view that we get rights from our government, like a gift. Our constitution was written to restrict the power of the federal government.
They aren't opposed to people linking to them, they just want money anytime someone does. This is an attempt to prop up a poor business on their part by legislation.
The people who did this to that kid are the ones who need to be arrested -- every last one of them. Stripped of their ranks, stripped of their certifications, their badges taken away, and relegated to flipping burgers at McDonald's for the rest of their pathetic little lives, because people who straight-facedly make such poor decisions as these have NO BUSINESS BEING IN POSITIONS OF AUTHORITY, period.
Agreed - but it's not gonna happen. Heck, once you are in any position of authority in the public sector, the next exercise is a constant striving to make sure you can't get fired for any reason. Period. This incident is about making sure the school and police can't even get criticized (getting criticized for over-reacting doesn't count). This reads like a classic case of CYA.
What is lacking here is leadership. As usual, the person with the least protection/power pays the price for that lack.
agreed. Everyone making shit up to cover their asses. Bureaucracy at work.
Right. That always works so well for the masses
Things like "tradition" and "religion" are more about maintaining control than they are about anything else.To ignore that observable social behavior is folly
Except schools are notoriously cheap - no way they are going to all that trouble.
This comes across as a standard GOP platform-plank.
That was my first thought as well
CIA prosecuting an undeclared war at the direction of the President. That didn't work out too well for us the last time we tried it, now that I think of it.
I'm still unable to find a ultra book that 1/2 the price of an Air. I can find cheaper, but not 50% cheaper. I just looked at the Asus ZenbookPrime on Amazon and it's the same price. I can find something like hp's Folio 13 for $823. Again, cheaper, but not 50% cheaper than the closest-spec'd Air.
Focus on "Properly packing" the Servers and workstations. Properly packing in this context is retaliative, but I bet servers and workstations are more sensitive to getting banged around in the back of a u-haul than ip phones, printers, and wireless gear. Your network gear is probably in group 2 - more important than the "Phones, printers, and Wireless gear"
Lay those folks off. You're the CTO, so you have some pull, I would think. If it's that much of an issue for you, get rid of them and bring folks whose work habits are more to your liking. You must understand they are going where you're leading them.
You have outlined 2 different issues:
1. Network security. Sounds like you got that one nailed down
2. You see subordinates spending too much time "goofing off". This is what seems to be really bugging you, and that isn't unusual for a technologist. I submit that you can *and should* do something about it - besides complaining about "where did the work ethic go?".
Corporate Leadership spends too much time whining about employee bad behavior, and not enough time addressing it directly through timely feedback. Hard conversations, difficult decisions and consequences are required to help people develop. If there is no consequence, then why wouldn't someone waste time at work? Leadership includes holding folks accountable. You aren't doing that. Just focusing on the technology isn't enough. Expecting people to hold themselves accountable to *your* expectations without any direct, regular, feedback (termination is certainly a form of feedback) isn't very effective in my experience.
You've solved the technology problems, but completely fail in leading your organization because you won't hold yourself and your organization to a high standard. They goof-off. You refuse to address that effectively. If people aren't your forte, either start improving your skills or hire people to work for you who are good at it.
You're a CTO, so you're a leader. So stop half-assing it and start leading those people (and yourself) where you want to go.
Greater transparency would enable meaningful oversight not only by appellate courts but also by Congress and the general public.