The PC market (excepting Apple) has been shrinking by mid single- to low double-digit percentages for most of the last seven years. That doesn't seem like something you'd see from an industry that's "doing fine".
You are presumably talking about desktop PCs only. Amazingly, computer manufacturers are not prohibited by law froom producing laptops, netbooks, tablets or whatever if they want to.
That happened a LONG time ago. WW I, the New Deal, and the creation of the Federal Reserve did it. The cancer has been growing since and, after a long and painful illness, it is finally killing the patient.
Life was so much easier back when a man just had his rifle and his wits to pit against the wild woods.
Like all reactionsries, your biew of the past is based on smeary sentimentalism.
For everyone apart from a few Robber Barons who could earn fortunes and pay effectively no tax, life is much, much better now than it was a hundred years ago. And now even the rich are pretty much back to paying relatively little in tax.
Here in the UK no one I've ever heard of takes any time off for voting, but then our polling stations open from 7am to 10pm so you've not really got an excuse for not voting.
Just like he murdered an Afghan citizen (Osama bin Laden) in Pakistan. Murder is murder irrespective of nationality. If you can justify killing OBL you can equally well justify killing some of his lieutenants who happen to be US citizens.
This is regardless of whether the idea of killing OBL was right or not. I'm just saying that there is no logical reason to approve of one and not the other.
Please, let's stop pretending that Bush started anything. His predecessors were hardly any better.
Yeah, Clinton with his 3.5% unemployment, 3 years of balanced budgets and 8 years averaging 3.7% GDP growth really sucked. I'm glad those days are gone.
[/sarcasm]
Yes but Clinton had non-penetrative sex with someone who wasn't his wife. So the Bible says he will go to hell.
It did look strange when CNN called Ohio a win or Obama when the numbers showed Romney ahead. What they did is inlude projections from to be reported counties based on historical voting record.
I think anyone could have just read out the latest numbers and left viewers to form their own (as it turned out erroneous) conclusions.
The whole point of having experts who can make accurate predictions based on all the information available is that they are experts who can make accurate predictions based on all the information available and not just news anchors reciting figures from an autocue.
I'm not sure all of those are good ideas (were toxic assets really sold to unsuspecting persons? And nationalizing banks? Really?), but that's definitely moving in the right direction.
Unless you nationalise banks, they will be run to make a profit, when at least in the retail and small business sector they should just be a public service like roads or water, i.e. somewhere to keep your money safely and get small affordable loans.
The wankmeisters, sorry investment bankers and traders, who are speculating trillions on derivatives of derivatives of derivatives of bits of paper should just be disbanded and made illegal. I doubt the real world economy would notice much.
Yeah, there were a lot of good issues that Romney could have picked up on, but he kept pounding away saying how bad Obama was for the economy.
The fact that they are good issues for you doesn't mean they're good issues for a party that has to pander to a fairly extreme right wing element. Those people care more about denying women's and gay rights than they do about liberty, unless you mean the freedom not to pay tax if you're rich.
The only thing that differentiate America from the rest of the world is the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The only two things that differentiate America from the rest of the world are the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and an almost fanatical devotion to the gun.
with the IRS you're often presumed guilty unless you can prove you're innocent
That's what people guilty of tax evasion always say. If the IRS find out you've been in receipt of undeclared income (e.g. you are a drug dealer driving a Ferrari who claims to be unemployed) why the fuck shouldn't they presume you are guilty?
Yes, it is their business to hunt for income to tax. If they just relied on the honour system, only the poor honest suckers would pay any tax, and the rich and criminal would pay even less than they do now.
Unfortunately, they stuck that word "unreasonable" in there. All you have to do is assert reasonableness, and the whole thing goes away.
Well, if it had said "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against any searches and seizures, shall not be violated" you'd not be able to have much in the way of law enforcement, would you?
In development, individual productivity differs widely; there's a far greater difference between a barely competent developer and a great developer than between a barely competent steelworker and a great steelworker.
Then you say:
Often a company may employ a single digit number of developers. 100 people threatening to strike at once because they are made to work 80 hour weeks are a lot harder to replace than 4.
That is illogical.
If developers are such precious individual snowflakes then four of them leaving should be a fucking disaster. But, of course, they'll just be replaced by other more or less equally skilled developers.
You people need to get over yourselves, you're not film stars.
You seem to think that (a) all firearms are held by capitalists and (b) ordinary peiople will be on the side of capital even if it involves them starving to death.
Neither are true. It just depends how bad things get.
Today, unions exist to protect jobs - meaning that a poorly performing worker is protected and cannot be fired.
I suppose if enough of you right wing twats keep saying this to each other you'll believe it's true.
Here's another one. If you're in a union, it is the law that if you kill someone, your boss has to take the blame and kill himself as a scapegoat. Talk about rewarding evil-doing!
Why would I want to belong to a union when the most of the power is on the developer's side? There's not enough developers to go around and thus plenty of job availability. Unions are meant to solidify workers rights in a situation where labor is plentiful, but that's nowhere near the case. Companies fight over us. I just made a decision between 3 offers this week to accept a new job. The power was in my hand.
Yes, and Apple and Google's share prices and market valuations will go on increasing to infinity. Life is always good and can only get better.
I hope you're some graduate fresh out of college who is immensely pleased with his fabulous degree, witty facial hair and conventionally unconventional tastes in fashion and music.
Youthful optimism is a wonderful thing, make the most of it before your bubble's burst.
Really? I don't know where you live, but in most countries you can't practise as either without belonging qualified and belonging to the relevant professional associations, which are unions in all but name.
Imagine a process where seniority and not coding ability determines who works on a project.
If you're senior (either in terms of years of experience or job title) that sounds entirely reasonable to me. What does "coding ability" mean? If you're senior, you've proved what you can do, or else you wouldn't still be doing it.
Life is not about how brilliantly you did in your fucking high school maths exams.
Slashdot Mirror
The PC market (excepting Apple) has been shrinking by mid single- to low double-digit percentages for most of the last seven years. That doesn't seem like something you'd see from an industry that's "doing fine".
You are presumably talking about desktop PCs only. Amazingly, computer manufacturers are not prohibited by law froom producing laptops, netbooks, tablets or whatever if they want to.
As he's just called for a revolution on twitter, couldn't he be arrested as a potential terrorist and locked up in Guantanamo Bay for a few years?
you're so happy that you even bothered to use the shift key. truly a sea change
In many ways latino voters align more naturally with Republicans, they generally oppose abortion and are more religious, for example.
So why did they mostly vote for Obama? Just because his name sounds more Spanish than Romney?
And so ends america as our fathers knew it.
That happened a LONG time ago. WW I, the New Deal, and the creation of the Federal Reserve did it. The cancer has been growing since and, after a long and painful illness, it is finally killing the patient.
Life was so much easier back when a man just had his rifle and his wits to pit against the wild woods.
Like all reactionsries, your biew of the past is based on smeary sentimentalism.
For everyone apart from a few Robber Barons who could earn fortunes and pay effectively no tax, life is much, much better now than it was a hundred years ago. And now even the rich are pretty much back to paying relatively little in tax.
Here in the UK no one I've ever heard of takes any time off for voting, but then our polling stations open from 7am to 10pm so you've not really got an excuse for not voting.
he murdered two American citizens in Yemen
Just like he murdered an Afghan citizen (Osama bin Laden) in Pakistan. Murder is murder irrespective of nationality. If you can justify killing OBL you can equally well justify killing some of his lieutenants who happen to be US citizens.
This is regardless of whether the idea of killing OBL was right or not. I'm just saying that there is no logical reason to approve of one and not the other.
Sticking your dick in a willing intern's mouth is not a crime, unlike organising a burglary, genius.
Clinton only got in trouble because the ridiculous puritanism of the religious right in America meant he had to lie about a trivial indiscretion.
Can you say Telecom explosion? Clinton prospered because our ability communicate went supernova.
That's "ability to communicate". Are you making some satirical point that is over my head, or are you just illiterate?
Yeah, Clinton with his 3.5% unemployment, 3 years of balanced budgets and 8 years averaging 3.7% GDP growth really sucked. I'm glad those days are gone.
[/sarcasm]
Yes but Clinton had non-penetrative sex with someone who wasn't his wife. So the Bible says he will go to hell.
It did look strange when CNN called Ohio a win or Obama when the numbers showed Romney ahead. What they did is inlude projections from to be reported counties based on historical voting record.
I think anyone could have just read out the latest numbers and left viewers to form their own (as it turned out erroneous) conclusions.
The whole point of having experts who can make accurate predictions based on all the information available is that they are experts who can make accurate predictions based on all the information available and not just news anchors reciting figures from an autocue.
I'm not sure all of those are good ideas (were toxic assets really sold to unsuspecting persons? And nationalizing banks? Really?), but that's definitely moving in the right direction.
Unless you nationalise banks, they will be run to make a profit, when at least in the retail and small business sector they should just be a public service like roads or water, i.e. somewhere to keep your money safely and get small affordable loans.
The wankmeisters, sorry investment bankers and traders, who are speculating trillions on derivatives of derivatives of derivatives of bits of paper should just be disbanded and made illegal. I doubt the real world economy would notice much.
Yeah, there were a lot of good issues that Romney could have picked up on, but he kept pounding away saying how bad Obama was for the economy.
The fact that they are good issues for you doesn't mean they're good issues for a party that has to pander to a fairly extreme right wing element. Those people care more about denying women's and gay rights than they do about liberty, unless you mean the freedom not to pay tax if you're rich.
The only thing that differentiate America from the rest of the world is the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The only two things that differentiate America from the rest of the world are the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and an almost fanatical devotion to the gun.
with the IRS you're often presumed guilty unless you can prove you're innocent
That's what people guilty of tax evasion always say. If the IRS find out you've been in receipt of undeclared income (e.g. you are a drug dealer driving a Ferrari who claims to be unemployed) why the fuck shouldn't they presume you are guilty?
Yes, it is their business to hunt for income to tax. If they just relied on the honour system, only the poor honest suckers would pay any tax, and the rich and criminal would pay even less than they do now.
Unfortunately, they stuck that word "unreasonable" in there. All you have to do is assert reasonableness, and the whole thing goes away.
Well, if it had said "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against any searches and seizures, shall not be violated" you'd not be able to have much in the way of law enforcement, would you?
In development, individual productivity differs widely; there's a far greater difference between a barely competent developer and a great developer than between a barely competent steelworker and a great steelworker.
Then you say:
Often a company may employ a single digit number of developers. 100 people threatening to strike at once because they are made to work 80 hour weeks are a lot harder to replace than 4.
That is illogical.
If developers are such precious individual snowflakes then four of them leaving should be a fucking disaster. But, of course, they'll just be replaced by other more or less equally skilled developers.
You people need to get over yourselves, you're not film stars.
Now if people could threaten to move entire work groups to a competitor... that would be a negotiation I would like to see.
Yes, if only there were some way of organising collective bargaining.
You seem to think that (a) all firearms are held by capitalists and (b) ordinary peiople will be on the side of capital even if it involves them starving to death.
Neither are true. It just depends how bad things get.
Union jobs are set in contract
All jobs are set in contract. It's just that union ones aren't written entirely by the employer.
Today, unions exist to protect jobs - meaning that a poorly performing worker is protected and cannot be fired.
I suppose if enough of you right wing twats keep saying this to each other you'll believe it's true.
Here's another one. If you're in a union, it is the law that if you kill someone, your boss has to take the blame and kill himself as a scapegoat. Talk about rewarding evil-doing!
Why would I want to belong to a union when the most of the power is on the developer's side? There's not enough developers to go around and thus plenty of job availability. Unions are meant to solidify workers rights in a situation where labor is plentiful, but that's nowhere near the case. Companies fight over us. I just made a decision between 3 offers this week to accept a new job. The power was in my hand.
Yes, and Apple and Google's share prices and market valuations will go on increasing to infinity. Life is always good and can only get better.
I hope you're some graduate fresh out of college who is immensely pleased with his fabulous degree, witty facial hair and conventionally unconventional tastes in fashion and music.
Youthful optimism is a wonderful thing, make the most of it before your bubble's burst.
I don't see lawyer's unions or doctor's unions
Really? I don't know where you live, but in most countries you can't practise as either without belonging qualified and belonging to the relevant professional associations, which are unions in all but name.
Imagine a process where seniority and not coding ability determines who works on a project.
If you're senior (either in terms of years of experience or job title) that sounds entirely reasonable to me. What does "coding ability" mean? If you're senior, you've proved what you can do, or else you wouldn't still be doing it.
Life is not about how brilliantly you did in your fucking high school maths exams.
That reason is the general Union mentality that a degree is required to do anything high level.
That's right, all those HR and management people weeding potential staff out on the basis of irrelevant qualifications are in the pay of the unions!
Whatever you're smoking or ingesting, I'll have some, it must be fun in your world.