The idea of the two week severance is all that makes the cost of treating the risk non-zero. Organizations are not required to provide such severance packages to individuals who have provided their notice, and may (and most likely will) engage in indemnity-free firing of the individual in question. No risk, no cost. This is why it is an increasingly bad idea on the part of employees to give all but the most cursory notice of their departure. It is essentially of greater interest to the bottom line to terminate noticed employees instantly than to risk their potential financially damaging actions.
Having attempted the graceful and professional two-week-noticed withdrawl from employment several times, I have, 100% of the time, been fired within 24 hours of giving my notice. It has happened often enough that I am no longer inclined to provide notice prior to my resignation. The scenario of receiving two weeks severance as well as immediate effective dismissal was an amazingly lucky outcome on the part of the submitter. I would have to say that the smartest solution would probably be to plan to be let go the moment you give your notice, and prepare for a two-week vacation, but to give notice anyway on the off chance that you might receive a two-week severance. This is assuming that you are not changing jobs within two weeks or less; there is always the off-chance they might actually keep you on after you give notice, and it would be unprofessional to essentially promise two weeks of further work and then renege.
As someone who has playtested the Shadowrun 4th Edition rules for months prior to their release, I would have to say that I agree with Ichoran. I enjoyed the tactical utility of choosing when to employ combat pool for a particularly effective offensive maneuver, or when to reserve it for defense.
Edge is not more flexible. Its regeneration rate is slow enough that you can only use it, at most, 6 times per session, 7 if you are a human. It does provide some flexibility, but no more so than its predecessor, the Karma Pool, and certainly not more so than both Karma Pool and Combat Pool.
The major issue with Shadowrun 4th Edition is that it doesn't scale well. Advancement is heavily curtailed in order to keep gameplay within the power levels that work well enough. Players who were used to advancing their character continually over many sessions will find that they reach an absolute maximum fairly rapidly (they could actually start with maximum ability in a single area).
This will lead to an epidemic of characters who are equally good (all of them statistically the best in the world) at one thing, and just short of the best in the world at any number of other areas they are forced to develop into when they achieve the laudible "legendary" (or "elite") status in any given skill/attribute combination.
Overall, it makes it a different game. In previous editions, if your character really focused every ounce of their development along a certain path, they would continue to get better. They might reach a point where they're better than anyone they come across, but there's always the potential that somewhere, out there, is someone who is even better. That's just not possible in SR4. When you've got an augmented attribute at 9 and a skill at 7 with a specialization for 9 dice, you're done. There's nowhere left to go.
Plus, I'm displeased at how the Attribute+Skill mechanic has marginalized skill levels. A human melee combatant with "best in the world"(skill of 7) melee skill and above-average(attribute of 4) strength is actually inferior to a barely-trained(skill of 1) troll weightlifter with three levels of muscle replacement (strength 5 + troll modifier 4 + muscle replacement 3 = 12). The human rolls 11 dice, 7 of it skill. The troll rolls 13 dice, 1 of it skill. Despite what's supposed to be a lifetime of training and technique mastery on his side, the troll bulked up troll ganger with a shiv will defeat the human enlightened master handily.
Things like that break the immersion for me. Combined with the loss of tactical control that the combat pool and its ilk provided, it makes SR4 overall less fun for me in gameplay. The flexibility of character creation and the expanded contact rules are candy-coating, things that would be awesome in a system that I enjoy, but are just bitter reminders of what could have been in a system that ultimately disappoints.
One thing that I noticed from the screenshots they provided with the article is tha the pop-ups that are generated by these files are for adult-oriented sites, which may feature explicit images or naming conventions in their content. Now, when(and I say when, because it's sure to happen) an eleven or twelve year old downloads and opens one of these files, and is bombarded with adult content?
Someone has just furnished adult content to a minor, but who, specifically, is responsible for it? This is a criminal offense, and I'm surprised the company didn't consider this when they created the malware.
Check out the video card, the LCD resolution, any number of other aspects of this machine. I suspect that it integrates a large number of laptop components, rather than desktop components.
I, for one, believe in a sort of intellectually capitalist "marketplace of ideas", as was spoken of by some of the founders of the United States, and based off of widely accepted philosophical theory. Like a marketplace, you're going to find faulty products or products you have no interest in.
However, there exist many laws now to prevent faulty products and misleading claims from being made in the marketing of physical goods. Should the same sort of laws be applied to the marketing of ideas, the use of speech? To be honest, I'm not entirely sure. On one hand, you could argue that the laws apply to physical products, rather than ideas, because products are more concrete and life-affecting.
However, ideas are just as vital and dangerous if flawed or deceptively presented. Some degree of caveat emptor still applies in the physical marketplace, and I think that the marketplace of ideas might benefit from a purity from the sanitation its physical counterpart has endured.
Afterall, the safest environment of all is one where there is no life, no change, no variance from codeified laws and customs. I think danger is among the prices that must be paid for freedom, in speech or any other endeavor. Those willing to endure the danger should have the option to do so. Still, that leads to ideas like "free speech zones".
It's definitely a double-edged topic, that's for sure.
Yes, America is the devil for not embracing outsourcing and complaining about the loss of local jobs that result from it. I mean, unlike the enlightened body of all other nations but America, when outsourcing results in a friend losing his job, we get a little upset. In Australia, I bet, people can't [i]wait[/i] for the eventuality that their job is done by someone else, cheaper, offshore.
The following sarcasm has been brought to you by the letter 'S'. I would like to see a nation, any nation, whose populace by and large views outsourcing as a positive thing. The idea that only Americans complain about and dislike outsourcing is nationalist tripe. What's even more worrisome is that people seem to have "interesting" and "flamebait" mixed up in the parent.
Slashdot Mirror
The idea of the two week severance is all that makes the cost of treating the risk non-zero. Organizations are not required to provide such severance packages to individuals who have provided their notice, and may (and most likely will) engage in indemnity-free firing of the individual in question. No risk, no cost. This is why it is an increasingly bad idea on the part of employees to give all but the most cursory notice of their departure. It is essentially of greater interest to the bottom line to terminate noticed employees instantly than to risk their potential financially damaging actions.
Having attempted the graceful and professional two-week-noticed withdrawl from employment several times, I have, 100% of the time, been fired within 24 hours of giving my notice. It has happened often enough that I am no longer inclined to provide notice prior to my resignation. The scenario of receiving two weeks severance as well as immediate effective dismissal was an amazingly lucky outcome on the part of the submitter. I would have to say that the smartest solution would probably be to plan to be let go the moment you give your notice, and prepare for a two-week vacation, but to give notice anyway on the off chance that you might receive a two-week severance. This is assuming that you are not changing jobs within two weeks or less; there is always the off-chance they might actually keep you on after you give notice, and it would be unprofessional to essentially promise two weeks of further work and then renege.
As someone who has playtested the Shadowrun 4th Edition rules for months prior to their release, I would have to say that I agree with Ichoran. I enjoyed the tactical utility of choosing when to employ combat pool for a particularly effective offensive maneuver, or when to reserve it for defense.
Edge is not more flexible. Its regeneration rate is slow enough that you can only use it, at most, 6 times per session, 7 if you are a human. It does provide some flexibility, but no more so than its predecessor, the Karma Pool, and certainly not more so than both Karma Pool and Combat Pool.
The major issue with Shadowrun 4th Edition is that it doesn't scale well. Advancement is heavily curtailed in order to keep gameplay within the power levels that work well enough. Players who were used to advancing their character continually over many sessions will find that they reach an absolute maximum fairly rapidly (they could actually start with maximum ability in a single area). This will lead to an epidemic of characters who are equally good (all of them statistically the best in the world) at one thing, and just short of the best in the world at any number of other areas they are forced to develop into when they achieve the laudible "legendary" (or "elite") status in any given skill/attribute combination. Overall, it makes it a different game. In previous editions, if your character really focused every ounce of their development along a certain path, they would continue to get better. They might reach a point where they're better than anyone they come across, but there's always the potential that somewhere, out there, is someone who is even better. That's just not possible in SR4. When you've got an augmented attribute at 9 and a skill at 7 with a specialization for 9 dice, you're done. There's nowhere left to go. Plus, I'm displeased at how the Attribute+Skill mechanic has marginalized skill levels. A human melee combatant with "best in the world"(skill of 7) melee skill and above-average(attribute of 4) strength is actually inferior to a barely-trained(skill of 1) troll weightlifter with three levels of muscle replacement (strength 5 + troll modifier 4 + muscle replacement 3 = 12). The human rolls 11 dice, 7 of it skill. The troll rolls 13 dice, 1 of it skill. Despite what's supposed to be a lifetime of training and technique mastery on his side, the troll bulked up troll ganger with a shiv will defeat the human enlightened master handily. Things like that break the immersion for me. Combined with the loss of tactical control that the combat pool and its ilk provided, it makes SR4 overall less fun for me in gameplay. The flexibility of character creation and the expanded contact rules are candy-coating, things that would be awesome in a system that I enjoy, but are just bitter reminders of what could have been in a system that ultimately disappoints.
One thing that I noticed from the screenshots they provided with the article is tha the pop-ups that are generated by these files are for adult-oriented sites, which may feature explicit images or naming conventions in their content. Now, when(and I say when, because it's sure to happen) an eleven or twelve year old downloads and opens one of these files, and is bombarded with adult content?
Someone has just furnished adult content to a minor, but who, specifically, is responsible for it? This is a criminal offense, and I'm surprised the company didn't consider this when they created the malware.
Check out the video card, the LCD resolution, any number of other aspects of this machine. I suspect that it integrates a large number of laptop components, rather than desktop components.
Very odd.
...stereotypes?
I, for one, believe in a sort of intellectually capitalist "marketplace of ideas", as was spoken of by some of the founders of the United States, and based off of widely accepted philosophical theory. Like a marketplace, you're going to find faulty products or products you have no interest in.
However, there exist many laws now to prevent faulty products and misleading claims from being made in the marketing of physical goods. Should the same sort of laws be applied to the marketing of ideas, the use of speech? To be honest, I'm not entirely sure. On one hand, you could argue that the laws apply to physical products, rather than ideas, because products are more concrete and life-affecting.
However, ideas are just as vital and dangerous if flawed or deceptively presented. Some degree of caveat emptor still applies in the physical marketplace, and I think that the marketplace of ideas might benefit from a purity from the sanitation its physical counterpart has endured.
Afterall, the safest environment of all is one where there is no life, no change, no variance from codeified laws and customs. I think danger is among the prices that must be paid for freedom, in speech or any other endeavor. Those willing to endure the danger should have the option to do so. Still, that leads to ideas like "free speech zones".
It's definitely a double-edged topic, that's for sure.
Yes, America is the devil for not embracing outsourcing and complaining about the loss of local jobs that result from it. I mean, unlike the enlightened body of all other nations but America, when outsourcing results in a friend losing his job, we get a little upset. In Australia, I bet, people can't [i]wait[/i] for the eventuality that their job is done by someone else, cheaper, offshore.
The following sarcasm has been brought to you by the letter 'S'. I would like to see a nation, any nation, whose populace by and large views outsourcing as a positive thing. The idea that only Americans complain about and dislike outsourcing is nationalist tripe. What's even more worrisome is that people seem to have "interesting" and "flamebait" mixed up in the parent.