It may well be the first time that a marketing department did this by covering a third of the usable space with an empty white column. I wonder if the method has been patented.
Since this is a beta, presumably the 'glass limits a policeman's field of view to some arbitrarily narrow fixed width and further obscures that with an empty white column that covers 1/3 of the restricted viewable space and continues empty to infinity. When the policeman attempts to obtain identification of a suspect, all pertinant details are obscured for no reason, especially the license numbers. And all NYPD police reports will now be doublespaced.
Bad "ux" if you ask me. But the NYPD is corrupt and does parallel investigation for the NSA. So
First off, thanks for daring to participate in the discussion directly.
Your UI developer should be in here too to explain what (s?)he is is trying to achieve. I really want to understand how the endless vertical column of nothingness makes for a good "UX". Maybe we'll both "learn".
You are currently redirecting 1/4 of your non-logged-in traffic to a site that is, at best, broken. Many of us, even a majority, arrive logged out for a variety of reasons. So nearly 1/4 of your users arrive pissed off. The rest are presented with these announcements that either piss us off or remind us of how pissed off we should be. Make it stop.
I won't even get into the whole contributers != users bit, but you should think about it hard.
The beta feels like an early alpha right now. It's either actually borken, or not feature complete. Your "beta testers" are telling you to kill it with fire.
You can't please everyone, but you can help the rational ones to understand. Many of us have built websites and understand interface design - telling use that a traveler from the future told you that the site would look like a crumudgeon magnet in 2018 really doesn't sell it. WTF are you trying to accomplish? Why now and not 2018?
Do better. We deserve it. Honestly, you deserve better too.
There are three things you can do that will make me believe you are serious about listening to feedback.
1 - On the (alpha), in the banner, add the word "classic" (in plain view) so we don't have to guess about how to get to the working site. The footer is too far away and you know it. 1a - Yeah sure, add a similar link from the working site to the (alpha). Maybe put that in the footer if you believe in footers so much. 2 - Stop sending traffic to the broken site. Your testers have told you that the site is broken until the comment UI is feature complete. Fix it first. When you think it's done, have a poll. (is it done?, yes, no, cowboyneal does my UI) Address the issues highlighted. Then, and only then, try this redirect shit. With volunteers. 3 - Take your time, and explain just what you are trying to do. Include details. Like why you can't make it work without javascript. Like just which users you are particularly hoping to please. And why it's worth pleasing them instead of me.
Complain to investor relations. If this is how Dice manages holdings, the company will be worthless soon. Investor relations should warn everyone to get out now.
Yes Jennifer, you have a responsibility to warn the investors.
Jennifer Bewley VP, Investor Relations
Phone: 212-448-4181 or 515-313-2086 E-Mail: IR@dice.com
IQ != intelligence. The very idea that you can measure someone's intelligent with a simple number and simplistic, specific, one-size-fits-all tests is pseudoscience at best.
We measure virtually everything with a simple number these days. What's your credit score?
If you are against tenure, you are against the following:... (3) due process,...
(3) This story is in fact about due process at work. The people filing suit are against tenure and are using due process to fight it.
I really can't speak for California, but in the Northeast US ( Pensylvania and North ), Tenure == Due Process.
In my area, a new teacher ( 3years in some states, 5 in others) can be fired or "non-renewed" without a stated reason. In practice, new teachers are given good reviews mid-year and booted without comment or useful feedback. Such would-be teachers are almost unemployable after this, and the lack of feedback means that they can't work to address preceived flaws in case they do find a way to work again.
Experienced teachers can be dismissed for any legal reason. This is usually some combination of illegal activity (bank robbers can't be teachers usually), immoral behavior (porn stars are not encouraged to continue a teaching career), incompetence (yep, you can lose your job for incompetence), and insubordination (boss tells you to be on time, you aren't...). Of course, cause has to be documented. And except for the first two (illegal, immoral), a single incident is generally not sufficient grounds for action. This is good, a single parent complaint should not end a teacer's career.
The "problem" is that when ANYBODY is terminated for cause, their terminaion can be appealed in the state courts. This is not unique to teachers, but unions are in a good position financially to challenge these terminations, and so they do so nearly every time. Ex-employees of private firms generally cannot afford the legal fees to do this, and so generally don't challenge. The union provides the resources to access "due process".
The legal appeals process favors the district if the situation is well documented and if all of the rules were followed. The key to this is making sure that you have administrators with time to spend on process. A solid HR staff can help backstop this. Of course, the only thing that voters and unions agree on is that administration is a waste. And HR looks like more administration. Districts lose these cases a lot because administrators have other priorities and so don't do a great job with documentation or process.
In my current state, employees terminated for cause are not permitted to collect unemployment insurance. Private employers are more likely not to name a cause and accept the bump in their unemployment costs. This also tends to discourage lawsuits ( a bird in the hand...). School systems don't usually have this option with tenured (due process enabled) staff.
Big private companies tend to have the middle managment, HR types, and processes in place to cover themselves when they want to terminate for cause and contest unemployment. Small companies do not, but don't contest.
Libertarians are... whatever they say they are. They don't need to be defined by you; certainly they do not need to be defined into a corner as you are attempting to do here. Yes, the ideas you've discussed have been promulgated by those who would call themselves Libertarians, but these ideas are not necessarily true of all, or even most modern would-be (l)ibertarians.
The Libertarian Party has adopted questionable policy perspectives in part because they have never had a serious chance of participating in government. (l)ibertarians who have wanted to govern (in the USA...) have had to, by necessity, find a place in one of the parties that were willing and able to do so. With the expansion of programs like the NSA's data collection, with the emergence of private data, with the expansion of all of government, it's really not surprising that more people would want a third option. It may be possible for another party to participate.
You could call them Democrats who feel that Obama and co. are guilty of massive overreach. You could call them Republicans who feel that Bush and co. were guilty of the same. Democrats will probably call them backwards racists. Republicans will probably call them anarchists. But if they all start to call themselves (L)ibertarians, watch out.
Also, If he hadn't stayd his ruling, the NSA would have rushed to the appeals court and gotten an emergency stay. And it would have been granted too. By staying his own ruling, he is just doing the reasonable thing. Whatever the collective opinion of slashdot, this is a ruling that would require a substantial change on (relatively) longstanding POLICY. The appeals court WILL want to look at this. They will write opinions. They may send it back to him on a technicality, but it will go back to the appeals court again either way. It WILL be appealed to the supreme court.
Staying his ruling gives his opinion a better chance of standing on appeal. He appears reasonable, decisions by unreasonable people are easy to overturn, & the reverse is true as well. And I'm sure even appeals judges remember if they have to miss an important event to rule on an emergency stay made necessary by an unreasonable judge.
Failing to stay the ruling would have been a dick move and would not have made any diference. Unfortunately.
Just getting parental consent to "use the internet" or "use Google Apps" is not enough.
I suspect that it is. This is incredibly specific really. If the school tells the parents that the student will be using Google Apps, the parents can research what the service does in detail if they wish.
Unless the parents are explicitly giving their consent to the disclosure of identifying information
What does that mean though? Every school consent form I've seen in the past few years includes 'may lead to the disclosure of personal information' someplace in the body text. What level of consent is needed in your view?
No. In the summary, OP said that this was being done 'without informing the students' parents of what is at stake'. That is, in the opinion of OP, the parents don't really understand this 'cause if they did they'd be as alarmist as he is.
The real problem is software that is being used to automate so much of HR task. Writing a resume to get past an HR drone is easy. "Check all that apply" then "penalty of perjury", that's harder.
SS is almost self funding. If you assume that the SS fund balance invested in loans to the Treasury will be paid, SS still shows a deficit on the 20-30 year time scale unless something comes along to knock off the 'boomers' early. SS can probably be made self funding with some tweaks to how the payroll taxes are done, but there is no political will to fix it and 20-30 years is a long way off in the land of politics. Of course, the longer they wait, the harder it gets.
Medicare has even bigger problems. [CNN] In ~12 years, any trust fund will be exhausted and incoming funds will fall short of expenses. One estimate that I have heard is that to make it self funding with existing benefits, we would need an additional 10-12% payroll tax on top of the current levy. Bear in mind too that medicare (and its bastard stepchild medicaid) generally under pay for services forcing costs to be shifted and creating additional costs in other places.
I am all for cutting a big slice out of military spending - we are far too willing to engage in wars at great distance for little benefit - but please do not ask me to pretend that the entitlement side of the federal ledger is in good order.
The technological reality is very different in the 21st century. I support individuals' rights to use strong crypto and to control their own computer hardware and software. But it's undeniable that these rights carry collateral damage.
The approach of law enforcers in the 21st century is to assert that nothing a person might do with digital technologies is protected by the need for reasonable searches. We see this with dragnet monitoring of cellular networks, with casual roadside searches of personal electronics, with the FBI attaching a f***ing tracking device to a car and asserting that this should be allowed without oversight, and so much more.
Law enforcers assert that theu need these powers to enforce the laws and to catch the law breakers... and they're right. Bad police behavior is simply more efficient. It allows the Bushes and the Obamas and Merkels (and Camerons and Blairs and Assads and Ahmadinejads too, but there's another place for that discussion.) to make more laws that would take more money to enforce reasonably and constitutionally. Since the money isn't there, the enforcers must get more efficient, which means rights and ethical behavior must go by the wayside.
I've moved beyond which laws we need or don't need when considering civil rights. I firmly believe that every time Congress passes a law or Obama signs an order, no matter how well meaning, civil rights are violated. It's just like the kitten meme - http://static.portent.com/images/2007/08/God-kills-kitten.png . This applies to state legislatures, governors, mayors, HOAs...
If we ban or regulate or protect less, our rights will be violated less. Think about it. Think of the children. Think of... the kittens. lol
1. knowingly and without authorization, harbors, either directly or indirectly 2. knowingly and without authorization, protects, either directly or indirectly 3. knowingly and without authorization, gives intelligence to, either directly or indirectly 4. knowingly and without authorization, communicates [with], either directly or indirectly 5. knowingly and without authorization, corresponds with, either directly or indirectly 6. knowingly and without authorization, holds any intercourse with the enemy [Woohoo! - kidding (same thought here...)], either directly or indirectly
There are really 12x OR cases here.
If Wikileaks were the enemy, that would be giving intelligence to the enemy 'directly' (meeting condition 3). If Wikileaks were not the enemy, but through them the enemy ultimately obtained the intelligence, that would be an 'indirect' giving (meeting condition 3).
Comma and operator delineated lists are sometimes difficult to parse in English. English Legalese is even more difficult as the commas and other operators are sometimes inferred. Please let me help.
'Corresponds' is cleverly concealed behind an 'or' operator and is therefor not necessary to satisfy the condition.
[Anyone who,] without proper authority, knowingly...gives intelligence to...the enemy...indirectly...shall suffer [as much as possible].
His best defense would be that he was too... stupid... to knowingly do anything. I suppose he could argue that he was sleepwalking the whole time, but I don't think it'll work. 'Indirectly' own him here.
I work in K-12 education. We are considering a large deployment in our 5-12 student space. Rationale is as follows:
--District already has "free" Google Apps for EDU; chromeOS 'just works' in this environment
--Hardware is mostly low maintenance
--Devices are at least as durable as ipads and similar devices
--Devices cost same or less than laptops, ipads, etc
--Devices have keyboards and so will be more useful for testing
--Google is a sturdy enough organization that it'd take years for them to fail if they did - probably longer than our hardware cycle.
These devices do not meet every need in every space, but if you want to put a browser, keyboard, office apps and internet literally into the hands of a large number of people, it may well be the best option.
Slashdot Mirror
It may well be the first time that a marketing department did this by covering a third of the usable space with an empty white column. I wonder if the method has been patented.
#iamslashdot
Well one problem is that about 1/4 is covered by an empty white column.
Since this is a beta, presumably the 'glass limits a policeman's field of view to some arbitrarily narrow fixed width and further obscures that with an empty white column that covers 1/3 of the restricted viewable space and continues empty to infinity. When the policeman attempts to obtain identification of a suspect, all pertinant details are obscured for no reason, especially the license numbers. And all NYPD police reports will now be doublespaced.
Bad "ux" if you ask me. But the NYPD is corrupt and does parallel investigation for the NSA. So
Fuckbeta!
First off, thanks for daring to participate in the discussion directly.
Your UI developer should be in here too to explain what (s?)he is is trying to achieve. I really want to understand how the endless vertical column of nothingness makes for a good "UX". Maybe we'll both "learn".
You are currently redirecting 1/4 of your non-logged-in traffic to a site that is, at best, broken. Many of us, even a majority, arrive logged out for a variety of reasons. So nearly 1/4 of your users arrive pissed off. The rest are presented with these announcements that either piss us off or remind us of how pissed off we should be. Make it stop.
I won't even get into the whole contributers != users bit, but you should think about it hard.
The beta feels like an early alpha right now. It's either actually borken, or not feature complete. Your "beta testers" are telling you to kill it with fire.
You can't please everyone, but you can help the rational ones to understand. Many of us have built websites and understand interface design - telling use that a traveler from the future told you that the site would look like a crumudgeon magnet in 2018 really doesn't sell it. WTF are you trying to accomplish? Why now and not 2018?
Do better. We deserve it. Honestly, you deserve better too.
There are three things you can do that will make me believe you are serious about listening to feedback.
1 - On the (alpha), in the banner, add the word "classic" (in plain view) so we don't have to guess about how to get to the working site. The footer is too far away and you know it.
1a - Yeah sure, add a similar link from the working site to the (alpha). Maybe put that in the footer if you believe in footers so much.
2 - Stop sending traffic to the broken site. Your testers have told you that the site is broken until the comment UI is feature complete. Fix it first. When you think it's done, have a poll. (is it done?, yes, no, cowboyneal does my UI) Address the issues highlighted. Then, and only then, try this redirect shit. With volunteers.
3 - Take your time, and explain just what you are trying to do. Include details. Like why you can't make it work without javascript. Like just which users you are particularly hoping to please. And why it's worth pleasing them instead of me.
Regards,
It's their fault. The PHB overlords! Fuckbeta!
http://www.investor.diceholdin...
Complain to investor relations. If this is how Dice manages holdings, the company will be worthless soon. Investor relations should warn everyone to get out now.
Yes Jennifer, you have a responsibility to warn the investors.
Jennifer Bewley
VP, Investor Relations
Phone: 212-448-4181
or 515-313-2086
E-Mail: IR@dice.com
fuckbeta!
Do you have any record of this?
IQ != intelligence. The very idea that you can measure someone's intelligent with a simple number and simplistic, specific, one-size-fits-all tests is pseudoscience at best.
We measure virtually everything with a simple number these days. What's your credit score?
If you are against tenure, you are against the following: ... (3) due process, ...
(3) This story is in fact about due process at work. The people filing suit are against tenure and are using due process to fight it.
I really can't speak for California, but in the Northeast US ( Pensylvania and North ), Tenure == Due Process.
In my area, a new teacher ( 3years in some states, 5 in others) can be fired or "non-renewed" without a stated reason. In practice, new teachers are given good reviews mid-year and booted without comment or useful feedback. Such would-be teachers are almost unemployable after this, and the lack of feedback means that they can't work to address preceived flaws in case they do find a way to work again.
Experienced teachers can be dismissed for any legal reason. This is usually some combination of illegal activity (bank robbers can't be teachers usually), immoral behavior (porn stars are not encouraged to continue a teaching career), incompetence (yep, you can lose your job for incompetence), and insubordination (boss tells you to be on time, you aren't...). Of course, cause has to be documented. And except for the first two (illegal, immoral), a single incident is generally not sufficient grounds for action. This is good, a single parent complaint should not end a teacer's career.
The "problem" is that when ANYBODY is terminated for cause, their terminaion can be appealed in the state courts. This is not unique to teachers, but unions are in a good position financially to challenge these terminations, and so they do so nearly every time. Ex-employees of private firms generally cannot afford the legal fees to do this, and so generally don't challenge. The union provides the resources to access "due process".
The legal appeals process favors the district if the situation is well documented and if all of the rules were followed. The key to this is making sure that you have administrators with time to spend on process. A solid HR staff can help backstop this. Of course, the only thing that voters and unions agree on is that administration is a waste. And HR looks like more administration. Districts lose these cases a lot because administrators have other priorities and so don't do a great job with documentation or process.
In my current state, employees terminated for cause are not permitted to collect unemployment insurance. Private employers are more likely not to name a cause and accept the bump in their unemployment costs. This also tends to discourage lawsuits ( a bird in the hand...). School systems don't usually have this option with tenured (due process enabled) staff.
Big private companies tend to have the middle managment, HR types, and processes in place to cover themselves when they want to terminate for cause and contest unemployment. Small companies do not, but don't contest.
It's that simple.
Cause true libertarians believe
Libertarians are... whatever they say they are. They don't need to be defined by you; certainly they do not need to be defined into a corner as you are attempting to do here. Yes, the ideas you've discussed have been promulgated by those who would call themselves Libertarians, but these ideas are not necessarily true of all, or even most modern would-be (l)ibertarians.
The Libertarian Party has adopted questionable policy perspectives in part because they have never had a serious chance of participating in government. (l)ibertarians who have wanted to govern (in the USA...) have had to, by necessity, find a place in one of the parties that were willing and able to do so. With the expansion of programs like the NSA's data collection, with the emergence of private data, with the expansion of all of government, it's really not surprising that more people would want a third option. It may be possible for another party to participate.
You could call them Democrats who feel that Obama and co. are guilty of massive overreach.
You could call them Republicans who feel that Bush and co. were guilty of the same.
Democrats will probably call them backwards racists.
Republicans will probably call them anarchists.
But if they all start to call themselves (L)ibertarians, watch out.
But no True Scotsman expects that to happen.
Also, If he hadn't stayd his ruling, the NSA would have rushed to the appeals court and gotten an emergency stay. And it would have been granted too. By staying his own ruling, he is just doing the reasonable thing. Whatever the collective opinion of slashdot, this is a ruling that would require a substantial change on (relatively) longstanding POLICY. The appeals court WILL want to look at this. They will write opinions. They may send it back to him on a technicality, but it will go back to the appeals court again either way. It WILL be appealed to the supreme court.
Staying his ruling gives his opinion a better chance of standing on appeal. He appears reasonable, decisions by unreasonable people are easy to overturn, & the reverse is true as well. And I'm sure even appeals judges remember if they have to miss an important event to rule on an emergency stay made necessary by an unreasonable judge.
Failing to stay the ruling would have been a dick move and would not have made any diference. Unfortunately.
JEM?
Just getting parental consent to "use the internet" or "use Google Apps" is not enough.
I suspect that it is. This is incredibly specific really. If the school tells the parents that the student will be using Google Apps, the parents can research what the service does in detail if they wish.
Unless the parents are explicitly giving their consent to the disclosure of identifying information
What does that mean though? Every school consent form I've seen in the past few years includes 'may lead to the disclosure of personal information' someplace in the body text. What level of consent is needed in your view?
That's what tagging is for.
No. In the summary, OP said that this was being done 'without informing the students' parents of what is at stake'. That is, in the opinion of OP, the parents don't really understand this 'cause if they did they'd be as alarmist as he is.
OP is stirring the pot.
This. Exactly this.
Whoever modded parent insightful can't do math either.
11 Billion barrels is 11,000 Million. 11,000 Million / 19 Million per Month = 579 Months = 48 Years
News for Nerds!
The real problem is software that is being used to automate so much of HR task. Writing a resume to get past an HR drone is easy. "Check all that apply" then "penalty of perjury", that's harder.
SS and Medicare are self funding.
Sorry, that's wishful thinking.
SS is almost self funding. If you assume that the SS fund balance invested in loans to the Treasury will be paid, SS still shows a deficit on the 20-30 year time scale unless something comes along to knock off the 'boomers' early. SS can probably be made self funding with some tweaks to how the payroll taxes are done, but there is no political will to fix it and 20-30 years is a long way off in the land of politics. Of course, the longer they wait, the harder it gets.
Medicare has even bigger problems. [CNN] In ~12 years, any trust fund will be exhausted and incoming funds will fall short of expenses. One estimate that I have heard is that to make it self funding with existing benefits, we would need an additional 10-12% payroll tax on top of the current levy. Bear in mind too that medicare (and its bastard stepchild medicaid) generally under pay for services forcing costs to be shifted and creating additional costs in other places.
I am all for cutting a big slice out of military spending - we are far too willing to engage in wars at great distance for little benefit - but please do not ask me to pretend that the entitlement side of the federal ledger is in good order.
The technological reality is very different in the 21st century. I support individuals' rights to use strong crypto and to control their own computer hardware and software. But it's undeniable that these rights carry collateral damage.
The approach of law enforcers in the 21st century is to assert that nothing a person might do with digital technologies is protected by the need for reasonable searches. We see this with dragnet monitoring of cellular networks, with casual roadside searches of personal electronics, with the FBI attaching a f***ing tracking device to a car and asserting that this should be allowed without oversight, and so much more.
Law enforcers assert that theu need these powers to enforce the laws and to catch the law breakers... and they're right. Bad police behavior is simply more efficient. It allows the Bushes and the Obamas and Merkels (and Camerons and Blairs and Assads and Ahmadinejads too, but there's another place for that discussion.) to make more laws that would take more money to enforce reasonably and constitutionally. Since the money isn't there, the enforcers must get more efficient, which means rights and ethical behavior must go by the wayside.
I've moved beyond which laws we need or don't need when considering civil rights. I firmly believe that every time Congress passes a law or Obama signs an order, no matter how well meaning, civil rights are violated. It's just like the kitten meme - http://static.portent.com/images/2007/08/God-kills-kitten.png . This applies to state legislatures, governors, mayors, HOAs...
If we ban or regulate or protect less, our rights will be violated less. Think about it. Think of the children. Think of... the kittens. lol
1. knowingly and without authorization, harbors, either directly or indirectly
2. knowingly and without authorization, protects, either directly or indirectly
3. knowingly and without authorization, gives intelligence to, either directly or indirectly
4. knowingly and without authorization, communicates [with], either directly or indirectly
5. knowingly and without authorization, corresponds with, either directly or indirectly
6. knowingly and without authorization, holds any intercourse with the enemy [Woohoo! - kidding (same thought here...)], either directly or indirectly
There are really 12x OR cases here.
If Wikileaks were the enemy, that would be giving intelligence to the enemy 'directly' (meeting condition 3).
If Wikileaks were not the enemy, but through them the enemy ultimately obtained the intelligence, that would be an 'indirect' giving (meeting condition 3).
I suppose he can argue that he was authorized.
Comma and operator delineated lists are sometimes difficult to parse in English. English Legalese is even more difficult as the commas and other operators are sometimes inferred. Please let me help.
'Corresponds' is cleverly concealed behind an 'or' operator and is therefor not necessary to satisfy the condition.
[Anyone who,] without proper authority, knowingly...gives intelligence to...the enemy...indirectly...shall suffer [as much as possible].
His best defense would be that he was too... stupid... to knowingly do anything. I suppose he could argue that he was sleepwalking the whole time, but I don't think it'll work. 'Indirectly' own him here.
I work in K-12 education. We are considering a large deployment in our 5-12 student space. Rationale is as follows:
--District already has "free" Google Apps for EDU; chromeOS 'just works' in this environment
--Hardware is mostly low maintenance
--Devices are at least as durable as ipads and similar devices
--Devices cost same or less than laptops, ipads, etc
--Devices have keyboards and so will be more useful for testing
--Google is a sturdy enough organization that it'd take years for them to fail if they did - probably longer than our hardware cycle.
These devices do not meet every need in every space, but if you want to put a browser, keyboard, office apps and internet literally into the hands of a large number of people, it may well be the best option.
Crackers.
Already commented elsewhere here or would use mod points. Mod parent up!
The problem is not the diplomat's limo, but getting there. Equador doesn't have a private limo port that could be considered part of the embassy.