Are you being purposely obtuse? It's time to jump ship when a company won't invest in their employees. If a company is willing to invest in me, then it shows me that they care about a long term benefit. It also states pretty clearly that I have a higher chance of job security. If you aren't willing to invest in me, why should I care about the company? Why should I even have to explain this entire thought process and reasons behind it that is clear to just about everyone else in this topic?
Sounds like it's time to jump ship. Good companies know how to spend their money. If it's required for the business to grow the business, they shouldn't be afraid to invest in their employees. It's not hard to draw up a contract that says you stay for x amount of time, if not, you repay y.
No level of "professionalism" will make most people understand how badly they screwed up when they screwed up badly. I have personally tried the professional route numerous times, only for the message to not get across. At that point your subordinates think you're a push over and that the problem wasn't that serious. Do what Linus did here when it's important and only when its important and you will accomplish two things. The first of course is getting your point across clearly. The second is that you don't tolerate any BS when someone has clearly screwed up.
I second this notion. This should have been thought out more carefully. The video about a very weird incident is fine. The rest of the text below the video is fine. Merging them into the video and having the text below the video is not fine.
Remove the text from video and make it more clear what "hide/show transcript" really is (rename it or some such) and you're good to go.
That is a pretty bold statement right there. I care about being to run my programs and I use STEAM. I realize there are tradeoff's for convenience. In the amount of time I have used STEAM the inconvenience that I have received from this service has been marginal at the most.
First and foremost, copyright infringement doesn't necessarily mean theft. There are a lot of factors to look at. If people were passing off your work as theirs, you'd have a sticking point, but only for that subset of infringement. The reason is that at that point they are stealing people who would have been paying customers of yours.
Most "pirates" have no desire to profit from your work. Your work could not be easily accessible, reasonably priced, they want to sample before they buy, or they very well are freeloaders. These are the four main reasons why copyright infringement happens in this day and age.
Personally, I like to sample things before I buy them. I have bought a lot of stuff because I was able to do this, whether is was through legal means or not. There is a small percentage of the time that I just simply do not like the price - sometimes I don't even bother sampling if I see the price is not in an acceptable range. There's an even smaller percentage that I'm just being a freeloader. The last two are corrected over time if I like the product enough - by this I mean that I will eventually pay for it.
Now, concerning the bulk of what you have written, It's sort of clear that you have some understanding of the underlying reasons why people may pirate your work. You will never ever ever eliminate piracy from your work, and you will never know how many people fit the roles of paying customer vs different types of pirates. The only thing you'll ever know is that X amount of people paid for product Y.
I don't buy the idea that you have no clear route of making income from your work due to piracy. You have a lot of different avenues at your disposal. How you choose to utilize them is up to you. Since you've been trying to compare piracy to physical theft, this analogy should work for you. Store owners don't complain they have no clear route of making money due to theft at their stores. They realize it's a part of business and they do what they reasonably can to limit as much as they can.
Yes and No. As you touched upon, the people who teaches the school are what makes the education worthwhile. I have known many people who went to a school like ITT and hated it, taking away nothing. I have met those who feel the same about community college.
As an ITT grad myself, I feel as if I wouldn't have learned more going to a community college. While I can learn through books, I learn best through hands on training. I would not have received nearly as much of that at a community college. I also had really exceptional teachers while I attended ITT. Of the people on my team other than me, 1 guy is currently attending ITT, two are grads. The two grads tell me they learned nothing (and it often shows as I have to constantly review concepts with them to get them onto the next step). The third guy is currently attending and has an upbeat attitude about it. He'll at least learn something from the program. He claims to have gone to a community college and did not like the program they had there.
I don't discount the community colleges. They are considerably cheaper. They have their places, as do schools like ITT. I do think ITT could ease up on their costs. I would almost instantly recommend them over ITT had I not had a good experience. I instead explain to people the pros and cons of both type of schools.
Considering that Tristram is where the series started, it's one of those places you should spell correctly. The area has a huge importance on the series as a whole.
What if you hire a contractor to do some work to your house, a house that you currently live in. They promise they will be done in one week. Sure, they get done in that one week, but for three of the hours a day that they're there they actually aren't doing any work. You're telling me that what they're doing is none of my business. I call bullshit on that idea.
You would be infuriated that this person wasn't working. In that 5 day work week, that's an extra 15 hours sooner the job would have been done and that they would have been out of your house. Once you see someone that you're paying screwing off, your opinion rapidly changes. It also brings up some other issues, like their dedication to customer service, their seriousness, and quality concerns. You would also feel the same way about a car garage. When I'm paying, whether it's hourly or contract, what you do is my business. Fortunately most businesses operate in that mindset that it is my business and that I'm allowed to "audit" them as I please. They understand customer service is key.
While I could have worded that better, I think you're missing my point. The person paying you wants their project done is as quickly as possible with as few hassles as possible. Paying you to do a lot of nothing is infuriating. You're expected to be productive, whether it's directly to that project or indirectly. And no, doing a crossword puzzle on my dime is not indirect productivity.
People working only as hard as is enough to keep a job are the consequence of the bad management.
I disagree with this. A lot of people have a predisposition before they even start a job. A lot of times that attitude can't be seen through an interview. Some people just do not want to conform to a companies standards. They act like entitled children. They have a complaint about everything and they feel they could run things better. They refuse to look at things from the companies perspective and every action towards them is negative, even when you're rewarding them!
Others just simply can't be motivated. They claim nice perks would better motivate them, but when you hand them those perks, it lasts for a month. Why should I keep rewarding you if you aren't going to keep working harder than the bare minimum?
Regardless of what your company is currently allowing you to do, why do you feel it's acceptable to get paid to do something that's entirely not related to work? This is what they're paying you to do. It's one thing to do indirect items that still assist the company, but it's another to do something that is entirely unrelated. Would you pay someone to do something completely unrelated? I highly doubt you would. The reason I say this is that I find most people only find it okay when they do certain things, but when the shoe is on the other foot, suddenly it's not cool anymore.
Bottom line, what you've done is highly unprofessional.
I'm a bit curious as to what your work experience is. The reason I ask is that most people only work hard enough to keep a job. Many people who post here will even claim as much. This really means that they rarely give it their all at any point in the week. After all, they're just doing the bare minimum. Anyone who has managed more than themselves will see this at some point in their career. Your whole position is either a deluded dream, or you work at a top tier company with top tier talent, something the majority will never see.
What if you were paying someone by a set rate to get a project done. Would you want to pay them for that 20% of the time that they would be using to do nothing towards your project? Personnel enrichment is fine as long as its focused. I have experience managing people. You can't trust everyone to do something that would ultimately benefit the company without some supervision.
Really? The people I've talked too about cellphones wouldn't know much of a difference between Android phones and an iPhone beyond that the iPhone is really popular.
This is actually a very excellent point. What freedoms would anyone be willing to give up to feel safer? Have you considered alternatives? Does the TSA need to be shut down or drastically reformed?
Slashdot Mirror
Are you being purposely obtuse? It's time to jump ship when a company won't invest in their employees. If a company is willing to invest in me, then it shows me that they care about a long term benefit. It also states pretty clearly that I have a higher chance of job security. If you aren't willing to invest in me, why should I care about the company? Why should I even have to explain this entire thought process and reasons behind it that is clear to just about everyone else in this topic?
Sounds like it's time to jump ship. Good companies know how to spend their money. If it's required for the business to grow the business, they shouldn't be afraid to invest in their employees. It's not hard to draw up a contract that says you stay for x amount of time, if not, you repay y.
No level of "professionalism" will make most people understand how badly they screwed up when they screwed up badly. I have personally tried the professional route numerous times, only for the message to not get across. At that point your subordinates think you're a push over and that the problem wasn't that serious. Do what Linus did here when it's important and only when its important and you will accomplish two things. The first of course is getting your point across clearly. The second is that you don't tolerate any BS when someone has clearly screwed up.
I've always taken the slogan differently. That if it's "news for nerds", then it falls in the "stuff that matters" category.
I second this notion. This should have been thought out more carefully. The video about a very weird incident is fine. The rest of the text below the video is fine. Merging them into the video and having the text below the video is not fine.
Remove the text from video and make it more clear what "hide/show transcript" really is (rename it or some such) and you're good to go.
I would say your mom, but her beard is bigger than Samzenpus'!
That is a pretty bold statement right there. I care about being to run my programs and I use STEAM. I realize there are tradeoff's for convenience. In the amount of time I have used STEAM the inconvenience that I have received from this service has been marginal at the most.
Do you use 4chan? Shit gets moderated there all the time.
Hey! Box cutters are scary! /joke
First and foremost, copyright infringement doesn't necessarily mean theft. There are a lot of factors to look at. If people were passing off your work as theirs, you'd have a sticking point, but only for that subset of infringement. The reason is that at that point they are stealing people who would have been paying customers of yours.
Most "pirates" have no desire to profit from your work. Your work could not be easily accessible, reasonably priced, they want to sample before they buy, or they very well are freeloaders. These are the four main reasons why copyright infringement happens in this day and age.
Personally, I like to sample things before I buy them. I have bought a lot of stuff because I was able to do this, whether is was through legal means or not. There is a small percentage of the time that I just simply do not like the price - sometimes I don't even bother sampling if I see the price is not in an acceptable range. There's an even smaller percentage that I'm just being a freeloader. The last two are corrected over time if I like the product enough - by this I mean that I will eventually pay for it.
Now, concerning the bulk of what you have written, It's sort of clear that you have some understanding of the underlying reasons why people may pirate your work. You will never ever ever eliminate piracy from your work, and you will never know how many people fit the roles of paying customer vs different types of pirates. The only thing you'll ever know is that X amount of people paid for product Y.
I don't buy the idea that you have no clear route of making income from your work due to piracy. You have a lot of different avenues at your disposal. How you choose to utilize them is up to you. Since you've been trying to compare piracy to physical theft, this analogy should work for you. Store owners don't complain they have no clear route of making money due to theft at their stores. They realize it's a part of business and they do what they reasonably can to limit as much as they can.
How exactly are they a "fanboi"? I don't seem them blindly praising one thing or another with this post.
Strippers will coin the phrase, "making it hail".
Yes and No. As you touched upon, the people who teaches the school are what makes the education worthwhile. I have known many people who went to a school like ITT and hated it, taking away nothing. I have met those who feel the same about community college.
As an ITT grad myself, I feel as if I wouldn't have learned more going to a community college. While I can learn through books, I learn best through hands on training. I would not have received nearly as much of that at a community college. I also had really exceptional teachers while I attended ITT. Of the people on my team other than me, 1 guy is currently attending ITT, two are grads. The two grads tell me they learned nothing (and it often shows as I have to constantly review concepts with them to get them onto the next step). The third guy is currently attending and has an upbeat attitude about it. He'll at least learn something from the program. He claims to have gone to a community college and did not like the program they had there.
I don't discount the community colleges. They are considerably cheaper. They have their places, as do schools like ITT. I do think ITT could ease up on their costs. I would almost instantly recommend them over ITT had I not had a good experience. I instead explain to people the pros and cons of both type of schools.
Considering that Tristram is where the series started, it's one of those places you should spell correctly. The area has a huge importance on the series as a whole.
What if you hire a contractor to do some work to your house, a house that you currently live in. They promise they will be done in one week. Sure, they get done in that one week, but for three of the hours a day that they're there they actually aren't doing any work. You're telling me that what they're doing is none of my business. I call bullshit on that idea.
You would be infuriated that this person wasn't working. In that 5 day work week, that's an extra 15 hours sooner the job would have been done and that they would have been out of your house. Once you see someone that you're paying screwing off, your opinion rapidly changes. It also brings up some other issues, like their dedication to customer service, their seriousness, and quality concerns. You would also feel the same way about a car garage. When I'm paying, whether it's hourly or contract, what you do is my business. Fortunately most businesses operate in that mindset that it is my business and that I'm allowed to "audit" them as I please. They understand customer service is key.
While I could have worded that better, I think you're missing my point. The person paying you wants their project done is as quickly as possible with as few hassles as possible. Paying you to do a lot of nothing is infuriating. You're expected to be productive, whether it's directly to that project or indirectly. And no, doing a crossword puzzle on my dime is not indirect productivity.
People working only as hard as is enough to keep a job are the consequence of the bad management.
I disagree with this. A lot of people have a predisposition before they even start a job. A lot of times that attitude can't be seen through an interview. Some people just do not want to conform to a companies standards. They act like entitled children. They have a complaint about everything and they feel they could run things better. They refuse to look at things from the companies perspective and every action towards them is negative, even when you're rewarding them!
Others just simply can't be motivated. They claim nice perks would better motivate them, but when you hand them those perks, it lasts for a month. Why should I keep rewarding you if you aren't going to keep working harder than the bare minimum?
Regardless of what your company is currently allowing you to do, why do you feel it's acceptable to get paid to do something that's entirely not related to work? This is what they're paying you to do. It's one thing to do indirect items that still assist the company, but it's another to do something that is entirely unrelated. Would you pay someone to do something completely unrelated? I highly doubt you would. The reason I say this is that I find most people only find it okay when they do certain things, but when the shoe is on the other foot, suddenly it's not cool anymore.
Bottom line, what you've done is highly unprofessional.
I'm a bit curious as to what your work experience is. The reason I ask is that most people only work hard enough to keep a job. Many people who post here will even claim as much. This really means that they rarely give it their all at any point in the week. After all, they're just doing the bare minimum. Anyone who has managed more than themselves will see this at some point in their career. Your whole position is either a deluded dream, or you work at a top tier company with top tier talent, something the majority will never see.
That's easily countered with them learning a language that would benefit the company.
What if you were paying someone by a set rate to get a project done. Would you want to pay them for that 20% of the time that they would be using to do nothing towards your project? Personnel enrichment is fine as long as its focused. I have experience managing people. You can't trust everyone to do something that would ultimately benefit the company without some supervision.
Why would they prefer stakes over steak? Are they vampire hunters?
By now we all know that the editors don't do a lot of editing. I suggest that people start submitting summaries without spelling errors.
Really? The people I've talked too about cellphones wouldn't know much of a difference between Android phones and an iPhone beyond that the iPhone is really popular.
This is actually a very excellent point. What freedoms would anyone be willing to give up to feel safer? Have you considered alternatives? Does the TSA need to be shut down or drastically reformed?