Morale of the story: don't use your social media accounts for any type of authentication
I just finished up at a company that creates mobile apps for clients (under contract). Pretty much every app being made now (by all companies not just the one I worked at) uses at least one of your social media accounts to log in. It saves them from having to create and manage their own authentication mechanism. It also saves them from lawsuits etc if and when someone hacks their user database and steals the information because they don't want to spend the money to create a reliably safe user/security system themselves (or on the other hand if they just aren't bright enough to).
So good luck with that, at least for now. And the truth is, most users aren't bright enough to understand the consequences of allowing any and every app out there access to their social media accounts and potentially a tonne of their personal data. That, with only the trust of the company that build the app's integrity because they said they might have one in the copy on the page. Meanwhile the one thousand line user agreement designed to cover their ass no matter what they do says they can change their mind without telling you. Or after you are so committed to it that psychologically you can't break free... kind of like Google wanting to suddenly use all your profile information in advertisements. Now I understand why they wanted so much to get people to change their usernames to their real names. It wasn't for protection. Glad I didn't change mine.
They used to do that in Ontario too. You would affix it to your bike using the same or similar kind of metal straps they use to seal containers for customs/duty purposes, so that it would stay with the bike as long as you owned it. It was kind of cool as a kid to go license your bike. It was like hey, this is the first official thing that is mine, not my parents!:)
I think personal productivity are being confused with the overall productivity of the company. It's like when people say 'practice makes perfect', which is in fact wrong. 'Correct practice makes perfect' is the right way. So if you are able to do a lot of work at home because you are not being disturbed, if it is not work that integrates well with what others are doing because of miscommunication, then you are actually not being very useful or helping the company to be productive. This is the crux of the issue that I see.
yet such continuing mishaps and 'small mistakes' are becoming a pattern at the facility
The most troublesome thing is that this pattern is continuing from before the tsunami even hit. Otherwise there wouldn't be any problem right now. And the fact it goes so far back and they're still letting those stooges run things.
Sure. The coal mining oligarchs were nice enough to set up company towns with company script for money, and would pay barely enough to live. And if you were sick your whole family would be on the street. They sure looked after their people. And while not every oligarch/family were like this, they all had the same attitude and would do it if they could. The good old days were not that good. The 1950's, 1960s, and 1970s were probably the best era in terms of what you are talking about, but even much of that was marred by civil rights abuses.
I worked on a contract at a major telco in the U.S. that had a lot of telecommuting. They were implementing new ordering, billing, provisioning... systems. They had so many issues during that time, mostly because the left hand never knew what the right hand was doing. My impression was it was caused by people not being in the same office or campus. I worked on a similar project at another telco that didn't telecommute and things went far smoother. People were able to actually walk to someone else's desk and confer. And face to face meetings always had the result of better communicating ideas than in chat windows and even phone calls. It also helped blow walls in the silos between teams when you could go to the area where the other team sat. Or call meetings with people in the same room. Telecommuting is nice for the workers, and I too like it, but is absolute shit for creating quality work in a timely manner. Slag at this all you want, but that is my perspective from two projects implementing the same system using two different management policies: telecommuting versus 'no telecommuting'. And 'no telecommuting' produced better work.
Sad as this is, we see time and again that helicopter parents today always scream at anyone in authority when their child is disciplined for doing something wrong. Because of course, their child never does anything wrong, and there should never be any consequences to their actions.
So you are assuming the only costs Walmart has are from store labour? You know there are other aspects of the business don't you? Like rent, utilities, management, and that is just at store level. Then there is how many thousands they have to pay at head office in Arkansas. Then there are things like warehouses and distribution costs, and the cost of the goods they buy from CHINA. And I am sure there is a lot of other stuff that I am missing. Use your freakin' head, labour doesn't come out of profit, profit comes after ALL those other things, including labour, are taken into account against income earned.
Look, I have nothing against the argument that if you have no skills and never tried to get any (including dropping out of school), you shouldn't complain too much about low wages. On the other hand, if you never were given or never had the opportunity because of circumstances, well then I have some sympathy... not everyone's life is easy. But please don't shoot shit like that out your ass and ask us to believe it reflects reality.
Straw man. Doesn't have anything to do with lying to police or not telling them the truth or not telling them anything. Wouldn't you want someone who can prove them innocent to speak up? What if they lie to police and said they didn't see anything that can prove them innocent? What if they just don't want to get involved. That is the point. I don't know where your 'deserve a lawyer' stuff comes from. I'm talking about people who witness stuff. The guy from NZ said it is OK to lie to police there. Not saying you saw anything is lying in my books, even by omission. And yes I played the emotion card because sometimes people hear want to get too abstract. They forget it is about real people. Granted some will never be able to 'get it' (aspergers and all), but it is about people, and some people won't or more importantly don't want to 'get it' and won't unless it hits close to home.
So say someone kills your mother and there is a witness who out of spite lies about what they saw (I didn't see anything). And their excuse is that they don't trust the police, won't talk to them without a lawyer, but can't afford one and because they aren't being arrested won't be appointed one. So they say, "I didn't see anything." So the killer goes off and kills someone else's mother or brother or father. You probably bitch about the government fomenting paranoia and here you are advocating it yourself with you 'police state' BS.
Is it just me or does Duane talk so fast he seems like a late night TV huckster? Either that or an auctioneer. People who talk that fast are usually out to overwhelm you with their ideas, not letting you have time to even think about what they are saying. What he is saying might be true, but I would start with a good bit of cynicism just for good measure.
This is another way of saying the lawyers and law makers (who are mostly lawyers) have gamed the system by making law so complex and worded in such a way that in order to understand it you have to study it for nearly a decade after which you are proclaimed a lawyer. Now turn the money machine on.
Lying to the police in general, yeah, shouldn't be a crime. Lying to the police while they are asking questions relating to and during the investigation of a crime, that would be shit. And if you see nothing wrong with that, in my books it shows a complete lack of moral character. If someone has harmed society or an individual and you have information that can help catch the culprit(s) and you lie to the people investigating it, then I feel OK judging you as a piece of shit who shouldn't have any rights or privileges of that society; since you are maliciously acting against it. And really if you don't look after the individual or individual group, then whoever did it is free to go after others. I can't believe people would even think it is OK to lie during a police investigation. Want to live by the "don't snitch rule" in your part of society, then fuck you, the police should just let your neighborhood rot. And if you say, "they already do," then maybe you should ask why... I bet it is really because of that mentality in those places. And I don't blame them.
And I do understand not being cooperative if police are just power tripping and/or going on fishing expeditions. I'm still for people's right to privacy and reasonable cause, etc.
Hell, I forgot about the suburbanite moderators with monster SUVs. You know, I actually had one woman (without asking while at a car display) justify her SUV because she said, 'I live in the suburbs'. That was in Saint Louis.
I find that NPR reporting is probably the most neutral of all the broadcast news. Now before you start freaking out about commy liberal pinkos, I will say yes, there are individual commentators that have a liberal slant. But these are more like newspaper columnists. We know their perspective and can factor that in. But as far as the actual news reporting, it seems to be pretty factual. Strangely enough, I find that a lot of Fox news website stories have pretty decent reporting too; but then again I have avoided political stories there. But their TV broadcasts are total right wing shilling shite. Come to think of it, most of the print/website stories from most news orgs are decent. It is the broadcast stuff where essentially non-journalist commentators get involved where you find the various leanings.
The $5 is a brokerage fee. I have ordered stuff from the states plenty and have never heard of anyone having to pay $10 for doing their own brokerage. I have only ever paid a $5 fee. And that is why I only have stuff shipped via USPS and Canada Post if I am buying from the U.S. It beats the $50 dollars and higher "broker fees" that FedEx and UPS rip you off with (it seems to be based on the value of your package with a minimum of around $50 to $60). And I don't give a rat's ass if they open the parcels I order, but I doubt they do that much. They don't have the kind of manpower to open every package that comes across the border. They would need far more people. Note that whenever I have lived really close to the border (like within a half hour drive) I sometimes get things shipped to a company that will receive packages for you on the American side and then bring it back myself. But that is only if it is time dependent or they won't ship using USPS. And when I live further from the border it is USPS or nothing.
In the mid to late 90's my favourite video game was Harpoon, a naval command sym game based on work by Clancy and others. It was rather plain looking in terms of UI, but probably the best of this type of game I've played. I wish they had created something as good lately. But since this doesn't involve all sorts of cools graphics, I guess it's no wonder.
Slashdot Mirror
I just finished up at a company that creates mobile apps for clients (under contract). Pretty much every app being made now (by all companies not just the one I worked at) uses at least one of your social media accounts to log in. It saves them from having to create and manage their own authentication mechanism. It also saves them from lawsuits etc if and when someone hacks their user database and steals the information because they don't want to spend the money to create a reliably safe user/security system themselves (or on the other hand if they just aren't bright enough to).
So good luck with that, at least for now. And the truth is, most users aren't bright enough to understand the consequences of allowing any and every app out there access to their social media accounts and potentially a tonne of their personal data. That, with only the trust of the company that build the app's integrity because they said they might have one in the copy on the page. Meanwhile the one thousand line user agreement designed to cover their ass no matter what they do says they can change their mind without telling you. Or after you are so committed to it that psychologically you can't break free... kind of like Google wanting to suddenly use all your profile information in advertisements. Now I understand why they wanted so much to get people to change their usernames to their real names. It wasn't for protection. Glad I didn't change mine.
They used to do that in Ontario too. You would affix it to your bike using the same or similar kind of metal straps they use to seal containers for customs/duty purposes, so that it would stay with the bike as long as you owned it. It was kind of cool as a kid to go license your bike. It was like hey, this is the first official thing that is mine, not my parents! :)
I wonder what the cost per megawatt of electricity from the first large scale nuclear facility was in 2013 dollars.
Someone's going to start bitching about gila monsters catching cold because they don't have enough sunshine at ground level to bask in.
I think personal productivity are being confused with the overall productivity of the company. It's like when people say 'practice makes perfect', which is in fact wrong. 'Correct practice makes perfect' is the right way. So if you are able to do a lot of work at home because you are not being disturbed, if it is not work that integrates well with what others are doing because of miscommunication, then you are actually not being very useful or helping the company to be productive. This is the crux of the issue that I see.
And Darth Scalia... he is a force in his own right.
When you get a question wrong in a math test you still intentionally put the answer you did. And it is still a mistake.
The most troublesome thing is that this pattern is continuing from before the tsunami even hit. Otherwise there wouldn't be any problem right now. And the fact it goes so far back and they're still letting those stooges run things.
Sure. The coal mining oligarchs were nice enough to set up company towns with company script for money, and would pay barely enough to live. And if you were sick your whole family would be on the street. They sure looked after their people. And while not every oligarch/family were like this, they all had the same attitude and would do it if they could. The good old days were not that good. The 1950's, 1960s, and 1970s were probably the best era in terms of what you are talking about, but even much of that was marred by civil rights abuses.
I worked on a contract at a major telco in the U.S. that had a lot of telecommuting. They were implementing new ordering, billing, provisioning... systems. They had so many issues during that time, mostly because the left hand never knew what the right hand was doing. My impression was it was caused by people not being in the same office or campus. I worked on a similar project at another telco that didn't telecommute and things went far smoother. People were able to actually walk to someone else's desk and confer. And face to face meetings always had the result of better communicating ideas than in chat windows and even phone calls. It also helped blow walls in the silos between teams when you could go to the area where the other team sat. Or call meetings with people in the same room. Telecommuting is nice for the workers, and I too like it, but is absolute shit for creating quality work in a timely manner. Slag at this all you want, but that is my perspective from two projects implementing the same system using two different management policies: telecommuting versus 'no telecommuting'. And 'no telecommuting' produced better work.
Ummm, how about doing what they were doing at home, except at the office?
Sad as this is, we see time and again that helicopter parents today always scream at anyone in authority when their child is disciplined for doing something wrong. Because of course, their child never does anything wrong, and there should never be any consequences to their actions.
So you are assuming the only costs Walmart has are from store labour? You know there are other aspects of the business don't you? Like rent, utilities, management, and that is just at store level. Then there is how many thousands they have to pay at head office in Arkansas. Then there are things like warehouses and distribution costs, and the cost of the goods they buy from CHINA. And I am sure there is a lot of other stuff that I am missing. Use your freakin' head, labour doesn't come out of profit, profit comes after ALL those other things, including labour, are taken into account against income earned.
Look, I have nothing against the argument that if you have no skills and never tried to get any (including dropping out of school), you shouldn't complain too much about low wages. On the other hand, if you never were given or never had the opportunity because of circumstances, well then I have some sympathy... not everyone's life is easy. But please don't shoot shit like that out your ass and ask us to believe it reflects reality.
Straw man. Doesn't have anything to do with lying to police or not telling them the truth or not telling them anything. Wouldn't you want someone who can prove them innocent to speak up? What if they lie to police and said they didn't see anything that can prove them innocent? What if they just don't want to get involved. That is the point. I don't know where your 'deserve a lawyer' stuff comes from. I'm talking about people who witness stuff. The guy from NZ said it is OK to lie to police there. Not saying you saw anything is lying in my books, even by omission. And yes I played the emotion card because sometimes people hear want to get too abstract. They forget it is about real people. Granted some will never be able to 'get it' (aspergers and all), but it is about people, and some people won't or more importantly don't want to 'get it' and won't unless it hits close to home.
But the OP says that in New Zealand it is not against the law to lie to the police. That is the parent of this thread. Focus.
First they will try to figure out how to offshore it while getting the U.S. government to give them more tax breaks while doing so.
So say someone kills your mother and there is a witness who out of spite lies about what they saw (I didn't see anything). And their excuse is that they don't trust the police, won't talk to them without a lawyer, but can't afford one and because they aren't being arrested won't be appointed one. So they say, "I didn't see anything." So the killer goes off and kills someone else's mother or brother or father. You probably bitch about the government fomenting paranoia and here you are advocating it yourself with you 'police state' BS.
Is it just me or does Duane talk so fast he seems like a late night TV huckster? Either that or an auctioneer. People who talk that fast are usually out to overwhelm you with their ideas, not letting you have time to even think about what they are saying. What he is saying might be true, but I would start with a good bit of cynicism just for good measure.
This is another way of saying the lawyers and law makers (who are mostly lawyers) have gamed the system by making law so complex and worded in such a way that in order to understand it you have to study it for nearly a decade after which you are proclaimed a lawyer. Now turn the money machine on.
Lying to the police in general, yeah, shouldn't be a crime. Lying to the police while they are asking questions relating to and during the investigation of a crime, that would be shit. And if you see nothing wrong with that, in my books it shows a complete lack of moral character. If someone has harmed society or an individual and you have information that can help catch the culprit(s) and you lie to the people investigating it, then I feel OK judging you as a piece of shit who shouldn't have any rights or privileges of that society; since you are maliciously acting against it. And really if you don't look after the individual or individual group, then whoever did it is free to go after others. I can't believe people would even think it is OK to lie during a police investigation. Want to live by the "don't snitch rule" in your part of society, then fuck you, the police should just let your neighborhood rot. And if you say, "they already do," then maybe you should ask why... I bet it is really because of that mentality in those places. And I don't blame them.
And I do understand not being cooperative if police are just power tripping and/or going on fishing expeditions. I'm still for people's right to privacy and reasonable cause, etc.
Hell, I forgot about the suburbanite moderators with monster SUVs. You know, I actually had one woman (without asking while at a car display) justify her SUV because she said, 'I live in the suburbs'. That was in Saint Louis.
Automakers are gearing up their Monster SUV production lines to help suburbanites get their groceries up their driveways.
I find that NPR reporting is probably the most neutral of all the broadcast news. Now before you start freaking out about commy liberal pinkos, I will say yes, there are individual commentators that have a liberal slant. But these are more like newspaper columnists. We know their perspective and can factor that in. But as far as the actual news reporting, it seems to be pretty factual. Strangely enough, I find that a lot of Fox news website stories have pretty decent reporting too; but then again I have avoided political stories there. But their TV broadcasts are total right wing shilling shite. Come to think of it, most of the print/website stories from most news orgs are decent. It is the broadcast stuff where essentially non-journalist commentators get involved where you find the various leanings.
The $5 is a brokerage fee. I have ordered stuff from the states plenty and have never heard of anyone having to pay $10 for doing their own brokerage. I have only ever paid a $5 fee. And that is why I only have stuff shipped via USPS and Canada Post if I am buying from the U.S. It beats the $50 dollars and higher "broker fees" that FedEx and UPS rip you off with (it seems to be based on the value of your package with a minimum of around $50 to $60). And I don't give a rat's ass if they open the parcels I order, but I doubt they do that much. They don't have the kind of manpower to open every package that comes across the border. They would need far more people. Note that whenever I have lived really close to the border (like within a half hour drive) I sometimes get things shipped to a company that will receive packages for you on the American side and then bring it back myself. But that is only if it is time dependent or they won't ship using USPS. And when I live further from the border it is USPS or nothing.
In the mid to late 90's my favourite video game was Harpoon, a naval command sym game based on work by Clancy and others. It was rather plain looking in terms of UI, but probably the best of this type of game I've played. I wish they had created something as good lately. But since this doesn't involve all sorts of cools graphics, I guess it's no wonder.