No. You see, we are human beings. We have developed written and spoken language, art, music, drama and culture which allows us to communicate. Rather well, in fact.
I really don't think there is a need for "throw shit at each other" as a way to communicate.
Of course we shouldn't go back to the moon. It's too expensive.
It's really too expensive to advance civilization. It's too expensive to search out scientific truth and to inspire entire populations. It costs far too much to invent new technology, and to work together to achieve a common goal.
It's also way too risky. What if we fail? What if our new technology doesn't work? What if we spend too much in the budget?
What if all these questions had prevented the great accomplishments of history? What kind of a sad, pathetic, hopeless world would we inhabit if we allowed bean-counters and pessimists to limit the yearning of the human spirit?
Hopefully this will generate a renewed interest in the show and bring it back permanently.
Television shows are less reliable than jobs. Producers, as a matter of routine, turn their backs on audiences numbering in the millions in exchange for a short-term ratings benefit or schedule change, then sit around and gripe because creative people refuse to work on television shows.
The tremendous amounts of money invested in building a market are usually wasted by some brilliant middle manager who has absolutely no idea why people like the show that is being cancelled.
This is twice as likely when it is science fiction.
Isn't it? The amount of time, effort and MONEY companies will invest in making sure some employee doesn't get an extra $117.42 on their minimum-wage paycheck.
Oh good. Well, I guess the Constitution doesn't apply then. We can rationalize the wholesale deprivation of another person their rights when it's someone who sends too much e-mail I guess.
So, go ahead and take everything they own. Hey, I guess it's a lot easier to ignore one of the founding documents of the country when it isn't even capitalized any more.
Does it have "Asshole mode" so that if the car is actually a Dodge Ram Truck, it will tailgate your ass with aircraft-landing-light-intensity headlights for several dozen freeway exits?
Does it have "soccer mom mode" so it will go 40 MPH over speed bumps for the 200 feet from the grocery store to the bank? Will it then be sure to park itself in two spaces so Mrs. Suburbia can spend 20 minutes getting her family of eight out of the car again so they can all go into the bank?
Does it have "lawn-mower-with-headlights dad mode" so SUVs will cruise at 75MPH on four-lane city streets and accelerate 0 to 60 in 5.5 seconds from every stoplight?
Does it have "Ms. Too-cool-for-you mode" so it will birddog people around corners and then swerve into the next lane at 65MPH so she can get to the next stoplight 2.3 seconds earlier?
If not, why, people might start driving with their heads out of their asses. Imagine that!
Every Joe in the country does not need his own second-level DNS domain.
Well, they want one, and there's no reason they shouldn't have one. They paid to build the fucking thing, they pay every month to access it, and they bought the fucking domain too. When someone puts good money on the table, they can have it their way. Yes, this is Burger King.
For those that believe they have a solid reason to have their DNS domain parented that far up the DNS hierarchy, they need to be aware that public registration is a requirement for that.
Yeah, he does. We all do. We're the voters. ICANN isn't an autocracy. Congress has primary jurisdiction over the laws, and we vote for Congress.
People should be able to control where their personal information is published.
Up next, Internet Domains become "a privilege" just like a driver's license, and another tiny piece of the Constitution is repealed without a vote. Oh, hooray.
If you want to make a dent in spamming, just take away their property(including house and car, in fact the food out of the fridge and their clothes too) and empty their bank accounts.
If you want to make a dent in spamming, just violate the first, fourth, fifth, sixth and eighth amendments. Simple!
Buy a house closer to work, or get a job closer to home. Don't cry about commuting because you have 100% control over that.
I don't cry about commuting. Ever notice how its always the employees who are crying? Employees are not allowed to seek improvement in their jobs, because then they are troublemakers and whiners.
Liar cheat fuck managers, of course, are free to seek "efficiency" and "shareholder value" (which are nice words describing 'mass unnecessary layoffs and destruction of careers') all they want and nobody ever says "don't cry about efficiency."
And I specifically mentioned that this phenomenon was new to white-collar workers.
Fine. People in my grandparents generation worked in manufacturing jobs. My grandfather worked the same job at the same facility for 41 years.
Your friends and acquaintances aren't a representative sample.
So I'm completely wrong and my friends and acquaintances, every single one of them, is a loser. Everyone else is employed, happy and driving with the top down in their new Mercedes convertible, right?
If not, then back to the Bureau of Labor Statistics: half of eligible workers are not in full-time permanent jobs. (that would be about 75 million people) Is that a representative sample?
And when exactly was this magic Golden Age? The 50s? 60s? 70s? If you think companies were any less rapacious back then, you need to read some history books.
Companies weren't firing people by the thousands chasing short-term stock bumps and "productivity gains" then. That's a fact. Corporate "downsizing" wasn't even invented until the 80s.
I know this because none of the people I know from my parents generation ever lost a job. Most worked at the same company, practically at the same DESK for eons compared to today.
I don't know ANYBODY today who has been gainfully employed without a layoff for more than about 18 months, if that. I had four jobs in ten months at one point. Each time, the company hired dozens of people, then fired them all a few weeks or months later, having accomplished nothing.
Also, I'm wondering what's 'unfair' about outsourcing. Please explain.
Because employers would never enter into the kind of agreement that employees are REQUIRED to agree to in order to have a job. Companies enter into agreements with contracts (especially ones that revenue depends on). Employees get a flimsy promise of a paycheck for a few weeks.
Employees also are never offered the pay cut, or part-time work, or any alternative to being fired. There are no negotiations. There is no way for employees to compete. They are just fired and thrown out the front door.
There is no sence in complaining about outsourcing.
Sure there is. It's irresponsible. It's unfair, and it is destroying careers, educations and communities.
If you are unemployed, stop reading Slashdot and find a way to be valuable to the economy.
There are hundreds of thousands of people who are "valuable to the economy" who get fired anyway. It isn't up to the employee whether they keep their job. It's up to some liar cheat fuck manager, which explains why everyone I know is either:
a) Unemployed b) Recently laid off and working 60 hour days trying to start a business c) Working, but earning just enough to accumulate debt
It also explains why HALF of the eligible workers in this country are:
a) Unemployed b) Out of the work force completely c) A temp d) Working part-time
That means that only half of the workers are in permanent full-time jobs. Only HALF.
The only moral issue is whether you are doing what you need to do to secure your job in the face of supporting a family or that BMW.
Like get a college degree and ten years of experience?
Secure your job? Yeah. Here's how to secure a job:
"Hey boss, I'd like you to sign this. It's a guaranteed contract. Five years. Salary increases of 10% cumulative each year. Written job description. Full benefits.
Sign it or I quit."
Anything less is probably a layoff right after escrow closes on the house.
Start by pressuring polititians to build better mass transportation so every man, woman and teenager in America doesn't need a car. Even the cheapest car costs alot.
How about asking employers to stop requiring every single employee to travel 20 miles one way five times a week to a particular building to do their work?
My parents' worked for people who gave a shit about something other than stuffing their pockets. They were aware of their responsibility to the community not to destroy a productive career for some short-term bullshit financial advantage.
where four figures are wasted every month: no equity, no tax benefits. No possibility of a mortgage or house, of course
heat, electricity, a dvd player, a decent size tv w/ cable, to go out to eat when you want, etc... and im sure you work in a comfortable air conditioned office
... five figures of debt, 28% interest, no savings, no raises, no wage growth, no promotions, few benefits, no ownership, no voice in running the company, and, the company can outsource the job any time they feel like it.
Would you rather work in a shoe factory for 70 hours a week and still hardly be able to afford food?
False dilemma.
Oh but the common argument is that our parents were SOOO much better off.
They were. My parents average time at their job was over 28 years.
The good ol' days were never as good as they seemed.
Were people in previous generations fired four times in ten months? No. 'nuff said.
I should point out again that the goal of a corporation is to make money.
You know, this particular phrase is getting REALLY old.
They will not follow "moral" guidelines
That's funny. They used to. People in my parents' generation had jobs for decades. It was never even suggested that they would be laid off and outsourced. Of course, this was back when the boss actually gave a shit about something other than stuffing their pockets.
Slashdot Mirror
No. You see, we are human beings. We have developed written and spoken language, art, music, drama and culture which allows us to communicate. Rather well, in fact.
I really don't think there is a need for "throw shit at each other" as a way to communicate.
Especially in the current economic climate.
You mean the one with eight quarters of growth, the best job numbers in 20 years, the Dow up 20% and the NASDAQ up 50%? That economic climate?
There ain't no recession no more.
Of course we shouldn't go back to the moon. It's too expensive.
It's really too expensive to advance civilization. It's too expensive to search out scientific truth and to inspire entire populations. It costs far too much to invent new technology, and to work together to achieve a common goal.
It's also way too risky. What if we fail? What if our new technology doesn't work? What if we spend too much in the budget?
What if all these questions had prevented the great accomplishments of history? What kind of a sad, pathetic, hopeless world would we inhabit if we allowed bean-counters and pessimists to limit the yearning of the human spirit?
Deleting randomly?
/dev/null. After that, you stop using Mozilla for e-mail.
Yep.
Were you using a bleeding-edge release or something?
Nope.
That's crazy talk for a stable release.
That's nice. It still happens.
Most things like that are caused by user error, not random delete subroutines.
Uh huh. That works for the first eight times your entire e-mail system vanishes into
Which galaxy? The real galaxy?
Hopefully this will generate a renewed interest in the show and bring it back permanently.
Television shows are less reliable than jobs. Producers, as a matter of routine, turn their backs on audiences numbering in the millions in exchange for a short-term ratings benefit or schedule change, then sit around and gripe because creative people refuse to work on television shows.
The tremendous amounts of money invested in building a market are usually wasted by some brilliant middle manager who has absolutely no idea why people like the show that is being cancelled.
This is twice as likely when it is science fiction.
Isn't it? The amount of time, effort and MONEY companies will invest in making sure some employee doesn't get an extra $117.42 on their minimum-wage paycheck.
There should be at least 10 comments saying:
"Look, businesses just want to make money. This should be expected."
Along with the implied reasoning that it should be accepted, mainly because businesses want to make money.
Remember, folks. Managers never do anything wrong because they are in charge.
Oh good. Well, I guess the Constitution doesn't apply then. We can rationalize the wholesale deprivation of another person their rights when it's someone who sends too much e-mail I guess.
So, go ahead and take everything they own. Hey, I guess it's a lot easier to ignore one of the founding documents of the country when it isn't even capitalized any more.
Does it have "Asshole mode" so that if the car is actually a Dodge Ram Truck, it will tailgate your ass with aircraft-landing-light-intensity headlights for several dozen freeway exits?
Does it have "soccer mom mode" so it will go 40 MPH over speed bumps for the 200 feet from the grocery store to the bank? Will it then be sure to park itself in two spaces so Mrs. Suburbia can spend 20 minutes getting her family of eight out of the car again so they can all go into the bank?
Does it have "lawn-mower-with-headlights dad mode" so SUVs will cruise at 75MPH on four-lane city streets and accelerate 0 to 60 in 5.5 seconds from every stoplight?
Does it have "Ms. Too-cool-for-you mode" so it will birddog people around corners and then swerve into the next lane at 65MPH so she can get to the next stoplight 2.3 seconds earlier?
If not, why, people might start driving with their heads out of their asses. Imagine that!
Every Joe in the country does not need his own second-level DNS domain.
Well, they want one, and there's no reason they shouldn't have one. They paid to build the fucking thing, they pay every month to access it, and they bought the fucking domain too. When someone puts good money on the table, they can have it their way. Yes, this is Burger King.
For those that believe they have a solid reason to have their DNS domain parented that far up the DNS hierarchy, they need to be aware that public registration is a requirement for that.
Not unless the voters say it is.
You don't make the rules
Yeah, he does. We all do. We're the voters. ICANN isn't an autocracy. Congress has primary jurisdiction over the laws, and we vote for Congress.
People should be able to control where their personal information is published.
Up next, Internet Domains become "a privilege" just like a driver's license, and another tiny piece of the Constitution is repealed without a vote. Oh, hooray.
If you want to make a dent in spamming, just take away their property(including house and car, in fact the food out of the fridge and their clothes too) and empty their bank accounts.
If you want to make a dent in spamming, just violate the first, fourth, fifth, sixth and eighth amendments. Simple!
and staying at a job for more than a few years.
LOL
Like that's up to the employee. ROFL
Buy a house closer to work, or get a job closer to home. Don't cry about commuting because you have 100% control over that.
I don't cry about commuting. Ever notice how its always the employees who are crying? Employees are not allowed to seek improvement in their jobs, because then they are troublemakers and whiners.
Liar cheat fuck managers, of course, are free to seek "efficiency" and "shareholder value" (which are nice words describing 'mass unnecessary layoffs and destruction of careers') all they want and nobody ever says "don't cry about efficiency."
Isn't that interesting?
And I specifically mentioned that this phenomenon was new to white-collar workers.
Fine. People in my grandparents generation worked in manufacturing jobs. My grandfather worked the same job at the same facility for 41 years.
Your friends and acquaintances aren't a representative sample.
So I'm completely wrong and my friends and acquaintances, every single one of them, is a loser. Everyone else is employed, happy and driving with the top down in their new Mercedes convertible, right?
If not, then back to the Bureau of Labor Statistics: half of eligible workers are not in full-time permanent jobs. (that would be about 75 million people) Is that a representative sample?
And when exactly was this magic Golden Age? The 50s? 60s? 70s? If you think companies were any less rapacious back then, you need to read some history books.
Companies weren't firing people by the thousands chasing short-term stock bumps and "productivity gains" then. That's a fact. Corporate "downsizing" wasn't even invented until the 80s.
I know this because none of the people I know from my parents generation ever lost a job. Most worked at the same company, practically at the same DESK for eons compared to today.
I don't know ANYBODY today who has been gainfully employed without a layoff for more than about 18 months, if that. I had four jobs in ten months at one point. Each time, the company hired dozens of people, then fired them all a few weeks or months later, having accomplished nothing.
You should quote sources for your numbers.
No problem. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2000.
Also, I'm wondering what's 'unfair' about outsourcing. Please explain.
Because employers would never enter into the kind of agreement that employees are REQUIRED to agree to in order to have a job. Companies enter into agreements with contracts (especially ones that revenue depends on). Employees get a flimsy promise of a paycheck for a few weeks.
Employees also are never offered the pay cut, or part-time work, or any alternative to being fired. There are no negotiations. There is no way for employees to compete. They are just fired and thrown out the front door.
That's unfair. Period.
There is no sence in complaining about outsourcing.
Sure there is. It's irresponsible. It's unfair, and it is destroying careers, educations and communities.
If you are unemployed, stop reading Slashdot and find a way to be valuable to the economy.
There are hundreds of thousands of people who are "valuable to the economy" who get fired anyway. It isn't up to the employee whether they keep their job. It's up to some liar cheat fuck manager, which explains why everyone I know is either:
a) Unemployed
b) Recently laid off and working 60 hour days trying to start a business
c) Working, but earning just enough to accumulate debt
It also explains why HALF of the eligible workers in this country are:
a) Unemployed
b) Out of the work force completely
c) A temp
d) Working part-time
That means that only half of the workers are in permanent full-time jobs. Only HALF.
The only moral issue is whether you are doing what you need to do to secure your job in the face of supporting a family or that BMW.
Like get a college degree and ten years of experience?
Secure your job? Yeah. Here's how to secure a job:
"Hey boss, I'd like you to sign this. It's a guaranteed contract. Five years. Salary increases of 10% cumulative each year. Written job description. Full benefits.
Sign it or I quit."
Anything less is probably a layoff right after escrow closes on the house.
Turns out that telecommuting never materialized. Why? Because management can't stand not being able to watch people like a hawk.
Unless those people are 11,000 miles away and working for minimum wage. Then they'll let the entire company telecommute.
Start by pressuring polititians to build better mass transportation so every man, woman and teenager in America doesn't need a car. Even the cheapest car costs alot.
How about asking employers to stop requiring every single employee to travel 20 miles one way five times a week to a particular building to do their work?
Ever hear of the "robber barons"?
Yes. Over 110 years ago.
My parents' worked for people who gave a shit about something other than stuffing their pockets. They were aware of their responsibility to the community not to destroy a productive career for some short-term bullshit financial advantage.
Share the misery.
... five figures of debt, 28% interest, no savings, no raises, no wage growth, no promotions, few benefits, no ownership, no voice in running the company, and, the company can outsource the job any time they feel like it.
a car,
With a five year loan
a nice apartment,
where four figures are wasted every month: no equity, no tax benefits. No possibility of a mortgage or house, of course
heat, electricity, a dvd player, a decent size tv w/ cable, to go out to eat when you want, etc... and im sure you work in a comfortable air conditioned office
Would you rather work in a shoe factory for 70 hours a week and still hardly be able to afford food?
False dilemma.
Oh but the common argument is that our parents were SOOO much better off.
They were. My parents average time at their job was over 28 years.
The good ol' days were never as good as they seemed.
Were people in previous generations fired four times in ten months? No. 'nuff said.
Not only that, but a large chuck of people living in the bottom "quintile" of income are living better than the middle class did 50 years ago.
Until they get fired.
I should point out again that the goal of a corporation is to make money.
You know, this particular phrase is getting REALLY old.
They will not follow "moral" guidelines
That's funny. They used to. People in my parents' generation had jobs for decades. It was never even suggested that they would be laid off and outsourced. Of course, this was back when the boss actually gave a shit about something other than stuffing their pockets.