Chickenshit. I've been out of work for three years.
Currently ATT, IBM, and HP have been busy off-shoring (BTW, after the Nov. election, Sun and MS will be joining that in a BIG way if my friends from these companies are being honest).
And you find no problem with this?
Think about what is lacking out there that you can develop and sell.
Won't be long before there's nobody with a paycheck left to buy whatever we develop.
The Starbucks employess where I live make about $24K per year on average (along with partial benefits)
Shit wage. Fragrant, running, sticky shit.
Starbucks has spent approx. $60 million in a year to open new stores (hundreds at a time) while their employees are paid shit, have shit schedules, shit benefits, shit working conditions, shit advancement, shit opportunities, etc.
The definition of "real boss" is that the real boss has no boss.
The real boss can issue policies like:
"If a meeting is scheduled which involves more than three people and lasts longer than a half hour, everyone in the meeting is fired."
The real boss can simply not hire middle managers, thereby solving all possible problems with bullshit liar fuck bastards, office politics, wasted money, engineers who can't do their jobs, etc. with a simple two sentence policy.
To paraphrase Mel Brooks: it's good to be the real boss.
There are no plans to reduce staff following the merger.
How would you treat this information if you heard it in your current company?
I would give up that entire year's salary if the announcement was made in a meeting of an entire department (or three). I would fold my arms and say (at elevated volumes):
"thanks for the information you lying cheat fuck bastard."
You missed the point. PHB's don't want to share the details with their people because soon, very soon, they will be making better, more informed decisions than the PHB. So, it's safer for their job to simply nod, feel good that they know more than you, and then completely ignore you.
This is the cause of every anti-progress, dishonest, treacherous anti-beneficial moment in business. The amount of knowledge, capital and time wasted and the amount of suffering caused by this is impossible to calculate.
We don't have the time to read blogs or address every silly detail in the same way as you do
Which makes it all the more curious when you contradict us and make wrong decisions that don't take our input into consideration. In fact, most managers go out of their way to belittle, trivialize and ignore their employees, precisely to remind them of just how worthless they really are.
We deal with the big picture (like making sure you get your salary next month
Really? I had zero managers who gave a shit if anyone got their salary except themselves.
and delegate the details for you to work them out.
Then argue with us when we come to the right conclusion.
When we want feedback from you we want it on a couple of slides.
With lots of bright colors, block letters and a xylophone soundtrack, right?
$18.8 million is a lot of revenue. They aren't making a profit, however...
Roxio said in December that it expects to significantly reduce Napster-related spending as its moves away from the launch quarter.
Sounds reasonable.
People will pay for data. They will pay for bits. They will pay for downloads of music. This is a fact. It is no longer an argument. iTunes is irrefutable proof that the business model works. Every Linux company is further proof. Game over. Close the book. End of story. Lower the curtain. Goodnight. Drive safely.
It's silly to spend more money on inferior technology just because it's space-based and therefor "must be cooler".
Tough to call "working right now" technology "inferior" to something that doesn't exist yet. By the way, I don't buy for a second that ground-based telescopes will ever have better imaging than Hubble. Sorry.
But then again, nobody listens to the engineers anyway...
Fair enough. There are problems with vehicles that are too large and too difficult to operate. What I observe is that in nearly every instance, it is someone who can barely be seen over the lower edge of the driver window driving like an idiot, and in the overwhelming majority of those cases, that person is a woman who is driving a car that is too difficult for them to operate properly. These are just observations.
Yes, because no limitation should affect any group unless it affects everyone. The land of the focus group.
If women didn't drive SUVs obnoxiously, they wouldn't be so obvious. Then perhaps I would have a different opinion. But I have never seen a 5'1" man do 40MPH out a parking lot driveway.
Or license class requirements for excessive vehicle weight or engine power for everyone, but apparently in your world only women need those restrictions.
Yeah, well, there are some vehicles 5'1" women shouldn't operate. It's a safety issue, not a women's issue.
The screaming illegal traffic hazards I see most often are 5'1" women driving impossibly huge room-for-ten TRUCKS that they have NO BUSINESS OWNING OR DRIVING. I never see men swerve into driveways at 30MPH and get a foot of air going over speed bumps. For that matter I almost never see men driving SUVs.
In New York state they're considering a bill to reclass large SUVs so that you'd have to stick to marked truck routes whenever possible or be fined, which is a more reasonable idea IMHO.
I'd bet they are just looking for another way to confiscate money from SUV owners. They can afford it, right? Who else has $60,000 to spend on a 10-passenger TRUCK?
Slashdot Mirror
I underwent a 5 month unemployment
Chickenshit. I've been out of work for three years.
Currently ATT, IBM, and HP have been busy off-shoring (BTW, after the Nov. election, Sun and MS will be joining that in a BIG way if my friends from these companies are being honest).
And you find no problem with this?
Think about what is lacking out there that you can develop and sell.
Won't be long before there's nobody with a paycheck left to buy whatever we develop.
The Starbucks employess where I live make about $24K per year on average (along with partial benefits)
Shit wage. Fragrant, running, sticky shit.
Starbucks has spent approx. $60 million in a year to open new stores (hundreds at a time) while their employees are paid shit, have shit schedules, shit benefits, shit working conditions, shit advancement, shit opportunities, etc.
Ultimately, it should be hoped that living costs will come down in those US cities It will never be possible to live on $11K a year. Never.
Funny how when its someone's money rather than just their signature, that support for these vague initiatives just dries up...
Well, there might be some money for it if half the population wasn't working part-time stocking the paper towel shelf at Wal-Mart.
The definition of "real boss" is that the real boss has no boss.
The real boss can issue policies like:
"If a meeting is scheduled which involves more than three people and lasts longer than a half hour, everyone in the meeting is fired."
The real boss can simply not hire middle managers, thereby solving all possible problems with bullshit liar fuck bastards, office politics, wasted money, engineers who can't do their jobs, etc. with a simple two sentence policy.
To paraphrase Mel Brooks: it's good to be the real boss.
There are no plans to reduce staff following the merger.
How would you treat this information if you heard it in your current company?
I would give up that entire year's salary if the announcement was made in a meeting of an entire department (or three). I would fold my arms and say (at elevated volumes):
"thanks for the information you lying cheat fuck bastard."
Then I would walk out.
You missed the point. PHB's don't want to share the details with their people because soon, very soon, they will be making better, more informed decisions than the PHB. So, it's safer for their job to simply nod, feel good that they know more than you, and then completely ignore you.
This is the cause of every anti-progress, dishonest, treacherous anti-beneficial moment in business. The amount of knowledge, capital and time wasted and the amount of suffering caused by this is impossible to calculate.
They don't have any movies left.
A simpler statement would be that corporate environments are a pain in the ass.
of the kind of power games that VPs tend to play.
Which is why we have no VPs. They aren't even allowed in the building. We found one in the lobby once, but we had him escorted outside.
We don't have the time to read blogs or address every silly detail in the same way as you do
Which makes it all the more curious when you contradict us and make wrong decisions that don't take our input into consideration. In fact, most managers go out of their way to belittle, trivialize and ignore their employees, precisely to remind them of just how worthless they really are.
We deal with the big picture (like making sure you get your salary next month
Really? I had zero managers who gave a shit if anyone got their salary except themselves.
and delegate the details for you to work them out.
Then argue with us when we come to the right conclusion.
When we want feedback from you we want it on a couple of slides.
With lots of bright colors, block letters and a xylophone soundtrack, right?
third quarter revenue fell to $18.8m from $25.4m.
$18.8 million is a lot of revenue. They aren't making a profit, however...
Roxio said in December that it expects to significantly reduce Napster-related spending as its moves away from the launch quarter.
Sounds reasonable.
People will pay for data. They will pay for bits. They will pay for downloads of music. This is a fact. It is no longer an argument. iTunes is irrefutable proof that the business model works. Every Linux company is further proof. Game over. Close the book. End of story. Lower the curtain. Goodnight. Drive safely.
Stock price is up 400% in 12 months. Is that successful enough?
Pictures of Io, Neptune? Hubble is looking at stuff millions of light-years away. Hubble could watch a poker game on Io.
I don't see any ground-based telescope getting images as clear as the Hubble at equivalent distances.
Just as we were finally getting around to paying off the national debt
Not even close. We had balanced budgets for a few years, but we hadn't even started paying off the debt.
The deficit in the current budget will improve as the economy improves, since there will be more taxable revenue.
If you care about Hubble then vote for someone who will raise your taxes. One or the other.
This is called a "false dilemma." It is invalid reasoning.
We spend $40,000 an hour on interest payments, and hundreds of billions on Medicare and Social Security. The NASA budget is at best a footnote.
It's silly to spend more money on inferior technology just because it's space-based and therefor "must be cooler".
Tough to call "working right now" technology "inferior" to something that doesn't exist yet. By the way, I don't buy for a second that ground-based telescopes will ever have better imaging than Hubble. Sorry.
But then again, nobody listens to the engineers anyway...
Who listens to the engineers anyway?
Come on! This is the new new new economy! All we need is marketing!
</sarcasm>
(This is funny because it's true)
How there are never stories titled:
"Huge new manufacturing facility to be constructed in $US_STATE?"
or
"$BLOATED_CORPORATION to hire 12,000 new workers?"
Just driving an older car at 10PM is enough for a traffic stop.
plenty of men
Fair enough. There are problems with vehicles that are too large and too difficult to operate. What I observe is that in nearly every instance, it is someone who can barely be seen over the lower edge of the driver window driving like an idiot, and in the overwhelming majority of those cases, that person is a woman who is driving a car that is too difficult for them to operate properly. These are just observations.
Yes, because no limitation should affect any group unless it affects everyone. The land of the focus group.
If women didn't drive SUVs obnoxiously, they wouldn't be so obvious. Then perhaps I would have a different opinion. But I have never seen a 5'1" man do 40MPH out a parking lot driveway.
iPhoto
Or license class requirements for excessive vehicle weight or engine power for everyone, but apparently in your world only women need those restrictions.
Yeah, well, there are some vehicles 5'1" women shouldn't operate. It's a safety issue, not a women's issue.
The screaming illegal traffic hazards I see most often are 5'1" women driving impossibly huge room-for-ten TRUCKS that they have NO BUSINESS OWNING OR DRIVING. I never see men swerve into driveways at 30MPH and get a foot of air going over speed bumps. For that matter I almost never see men driving SUVs.
In New York state they're considering a bill to reclass large SUVs so that you'd have to stick to marked truck routes whenever possible or be fined, which is a more reasonable idea IMHO.
I'd bet they are just looking for another way to confiscate money from SUV owners. They can afford it, right? Who else has $60,000 to spend on a 10-passenger TRUCK?
One with a paycheck and no layoffs until we figure out how to use the phone.