I'm thinking the same way. IT for 20+ years is getting boring. When this current gig ends I'll probably do something entirely different.
I may flip homes. I'm pretty handy with my hands and general home construction stuff. Also I like the feeling of being personally involved with my investments. Its also cool to create something that makes people happy.
If not that I'll dust off my commercial pilot's license and get a job doing freight runs in small aircraft. The solitude of that work would be fun.
1. I don't want to carry a separate mp3 player for casual use or travel. I have a Motorola SLVR that holds 100 songs with is pretty good for me though I would like to store more.
2. I was looking at a video iPod for more entertainment options as I travel. The limited memory on the iPhone compared to the iPod (8 gig vs 80 gig) may not make it a viable replacement but I'll give it a try.
3. I've used Nextel for years. iDen phones are always behind the curve and the Nextel coverage is pretty weak. As lame as Cingular may be for some people, it is a step up for me.
4. If this could be a new paradigm for mobile computing, I want first hand experience with it.
You make a lot of assumptions based on very little information. First the small startup I work for would be out of money by now if we had used US or European resources. (Great idea but not a whole lot of funding.) So the choice isn't US vs Bangalore developers, its Bangalore developers or close shop.
Also the reason I want someone to stay is I do want some loyalty. I take care of my team, help them grow in their profession, pay more than the prevailing wages, etc. I want them to gel as a team, a short timer won't do that.
But anyway, sorry about whatever experiences gave you such a hateful disposition. I hope things improve.
I maintain a development team in Bangalore. If a candidate has been with his or her previous employer for less than a year, they better have a good reason or I'll pass. If they've jumped to a couple jobs are more in the last year, forget it. I won't waste my time.
The US doesn't have to kill tens of millions. We could just pull out and let them do it to themselves. If they don't then Saudi Arabia and Iran will when they use Iraq as their battle ground.
What I've found that works better is remote staffing. A US company works with a small Indian company to hire programmers, testers, etc. on their behalf. For all practical purposes these people work for the US company. The US company works with the Indian team just like they would with a local team.
With remote staffing there is better visibility into the process and staff stay with the company instead of jumping from project to project across multiple companies. This improves accountability and builds domain experience in the team. Changing requirements can be handled easier, etc.
Just make sure you have strong technical leadership onsite.
Adaptation doesn't necessarily mean moving from location to location or job to job. A person could figure out what it means to be the "go to guy or gal" in their company, figure out what their company values, find a mentor in management to get career advice, keep up on the latest technologies, take projects that move them closer to the client or customer, study up on relevant domain knowledge for your company, network with others in the industry, etc.
A person can do a lot to manage his or her career in a positive way. Even if you do end up losing a job, you'll be in a better position to find new work.
That's a good point. Historically most 3rd world countries could only offer resources and unskilled labor. Now as they improve their infrastructure and education system they will be able to offer skilled and highly-educated labor.
"Another problem, and I think this is the biggest one, is the lack of national pride in the U.S."
I agree but it isn't just about cost. 30+ years ago "Made in the USA" meant quality. Does anyone see it that way today? Often people are willing to pay more for things produced overseas because of higher quality.
Offshoring and outsourcing (which is generally offshored though not always) both contribute to lost IT jobs in the US which I believe is the salient aspect of this discussion.
Disclaimer: I am an IT manager who sets up and runs IT groups in India. So I'm the "bad guy" I guess.
1. Outsourcing is not new. And the reaction by the IT industry is not new. The garment industry was outsourced, the steel industry, to a degree the automotive industry. It happens. The people directly impacted don't like it but as long as it make economic sense, outsourcing will happen. Adapt to survive and thrive.
2. Isolated protective measures to limit outsourcing will ultimately fail. If you put restrictions on US companies that increase their costs while overseas competitors have no such restrictions, US companies will be at a competitive disadvantage ultimately hurting their growth and their employees.
3. Outsourcing is not easy in the IT industry. I can point to as many failures as successes. Not every company in the US that needs IT resources will be candidates for outsourcing. Not every job will end up overseas. In fact even though my entire IT organization is in India I'll soon be looking for a Systems Engineer in the US because I'm not happy with what I find in India.
4. Salaries for IT candidates in India are increasing very rapidly (think Silicon Valley, 1999). Given the inherent inefficiency of dealing with people great distances away, the economics of outsourcing are getting worse.
5. Decimation means to kill off 10%, not 90% as some posts have said. From Wikipedia: The word decimation is derived from Latin meaning "removal of a tenth." So the article is correct, this is decimation.
I got a pilots license years ago but stopped flying. Until 9/11. After standing in security lines for hours for a 45 minute flight I realized I didn't need to do that. So I got my pilot's license up to date, bought an airplane and use that for flights under about 800 miles. Now I drive 5 minutes to my local airport instead of an hour to the airport that services airlines. No security lines, freedom to come and go as I please, and faster door-to-door times for shorter flights.
Yes it is more expensive. But owning and operating a car is more expensive than taking the bus. Anyone can get a pilots license in 50 to 60 hours of flight training. Check it out.
What is the moral framework under which a corporation operates? That's like asking what moral framework does an individual operate under. Individual freedom applies to corporations as well.
I ask this because your post implies they are doing something wrong. To make that determination requires a moral framework. But individual freedom implies that they can have any moral framework (or none at all within the bounds of law) they want.
Christians should believe killing is wrong because that's what the religion teaches. But you are still missing my point in two ways.
First, I'm saying the cartoon is justified because it conveys a perception that non-Muslims are starting to believe - that Islam is, as a religion or philosophical system, inherently violent and warring. It is appropriate for non-Muslims to tell others that they have that perception so that discussion can take place and perceptions modified. I'm not arguing that the perception is correct, only that it exists, that it should be discussed, and political cartoons are an appropriate means to initiate such discussions.
Second, I am in no way saying anything about Muslims. I'm saying the perception is about the religion, not the followers of the religion.
There are evil people everywhere. Evil people often use ideology to drive or at least justify their cause. Usually the ideology they use is religious but not always. Communism is a non-religious ideology but has supported its share of nuts.
With my second post the question I'm trying to raise is "is Islam, as a religious institution, able to critique evil behavior". I think the power of a religion is its ability to lead people in the right direction. This means it must have the philosophical or theological power to criticize those who head off in the wrong direction.
Yes, Christianity has been used justify all sort of atrocities. No religion eliminates evil people. But if someone uses Christianity in this fashion, it has the theological power to critique the behavior.
Evil Person: I am killing in the name of Christ.
The Religion: But Jesus says "Love your enemy" so how do you justify killing him?
The Religion: What part of "thou shalt not kill" don't you understand?
Of course the person can ignore what the religion says but then the actions become the deeds of the person and not the religion.
So the question in my second post was "can Islam (as a religion) offer a critique to the evil deeds of some of its followers?" I can't find a clear statement in the Koran or Islamic religious writings that says, for example, "thou shalt not kill." I do find things like "[Koran 5:32:] 'Whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men.'" This implies that it is ok to kill someone for "manslaughter or for mischief in the land." Whoa! I don't know of ANY religion that supports killing. For most religions life is special and should not be taken under any circumstance.
To reiterate, my original point was "the cartoon is an appropriate means to communicate a perception non-Muslims are increasing coming to believe." The appropriate response is for people to discuss and hopefully clarify the perception (much like you and I are doing).
Second, what power does Islam have to critique the evil behavior of some of it followers? I'm talking about the religion itself, not its followers. We can both come up with long lists of atrocities committed by followers of all religions (and non-religious ideologies). You have no argument from me there. I think Islam's power in this regard is limited because it does support the use of war and killing in some circumstances. By opening this door the actual use of violence becomes a subjective matter of interpretation.
It isn't questioning the people, I believe the cartoon was questioning the religion. Sure there are nasty Christians but anyone with a little background in Christianity can call the nasty behavior into question. For example, if someone (the person) claims to kill in the name of Christ one can rightfully point out that Jesus said "Love your enemy" (the religion).
Can the same thing be done in Islam? Don't know. But the perception is that Islam cannot make such critiques of this behavior. Perhaps the perception is wrong in which case we need dialog. Exactly what the cartoon would prompt in a civilized society.
The cartoon correctly expressed the perception that non-Muslims are increasingly coming to believe that Islam is violent and warring at its very core. It is an appropriate means to convey the message. The appropriate response is self-reflection and discourse.
Umpire 1: I call them the way they are.
Umpire 2: I call them the way I see them.
Umpire 3: The way I call them is the way they are.
Three branches of philosophy are represented by these three comments. For more info on the third, check out Speech Acts by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Searle
What concerns me are comet creatures we're going to really piss off. I'm thinking the dinosaurs had a space program and did something like this and you know what happened next.
I routinely install Gentoo on VIA EPIA systems in about 2 days. The machine does all the work and since I'm pretty good at multitasking, it doesn't take much of *my* time. YMMV
The source they released doesn't compile. Apparently it is the source that was released on the developer portal that became the basis for the unichrome driver. In other words what they released is older, buggier, and less secure than the existing open source driver.
Some are saying this is just VIA's way of dumping support for linux drivers on the OSS community while at the same time spouting how open source friendly they are.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm thinking the same way. IT for 20+ years is getting boring. When this current gig ends I'll probably do something entirely different.
I may flip homes. I'm pretty handy with my hands and general home construction stuff. Also I like the feeling of being personally involved with my investments. Its also cool to create something that makes people happy.
If not that I'll dust off my commercial pilot's license and get a job doing freight runs in small aircraft. The solitude of that work would be fun.
Shhhh. We mustn't let truth interfere with political rhetoric.
I'll probably buy one and here's why:
1. I don't want to carry a separate mp3 player for casual use or travel. I have a Motorola SLVR that holds 100 songs with is pretty good for me though I would like to store more.
2. I was looking at a video iPod for more entertainment options as I travel. The limited memory on the iPhone compared to the iPod (8 gig vs 80 gig) may not make it a viable replacement but I'll give it a try.
3. I've used Nextel for years. iDen phones are always behind the curve and the Nextel coverage is pretty weak. As lame as Cingular may be for some people, it is a step up for me.
4. If this could be a new paradigm for mobile computing, I want first hand experience with it.
YMMV
You make a lot of assumptions based on very little information. First the small startup I work for would be out of money by now if we had used US or European resources. (Great idea but not a whole lot of funding.) So the choice isn't US vs Bangalore developers, its Bangalore developers or close shop.
Also the reason I want someone to stay is I do want some loyalty. I take care of my team, help them grow in their profession, pay more than the prevailing wages, etc. I want them to gel as a team, a short timer won't do that.
But anyway, sorry about whatever experiences gave you such a hateful disposition. I hope things improve.
I maintain a development team in Bangalore. If a candidate has been with his or her previous employer for less than a year, they better have a good reason or I'll pass. If they've jumped to a couple jobs are more in the last year, forget it. I won't waste my time.
The US doesn't have to kill tens of millions. We could just pull out and let them do it to themselves. If they don't then Saudi Arabia and Iran will when they use Iraq as their battle ground.
Just my opinion of course.
What I've found that works better is remote staffing. A US company works with a small Indian company to hire programmers, testers, etc. on their behalf. For all practical purposes these people work for the US company. The US company works with the Indian team just like they would with a local team.
With remote staffing there is better visibility into the process and staff stay with the company instead of jumping from project to project across multiple companies. This improves accountability and builds domain experience in the team. Changing requirements can be handled easier, etc.
Just make sure you have strong technical leadership onsite.
Adaptation doesn't necessarily mean moving from location to location or job to job. A person could figure out what it means to be the "go to guy or gal" in their company, figure out what their company values, find a mentor in management to get career advice, keep up on the latest technologies, take projects that move them closer to the client or customer, study up on relevant domain knowledge for your company, network with others in the industry, etc.
A person can do a lot to manage his or her career in a positive way. Even if you do end up losing a job, you'll be in a better position to find new work.
That's a good point. Historically most 3rd world countries could only offer resources and unskilled labor. Now as they improve their infrastructure and education system they will be able to offer skilled and highly-educated labor.
The outcome will be most interesting.
"Another problem, and I think this is the biggest one, is the lack of national pride in the U.S."
I agree but it isn't just about cost. 30+ years ago "Made in the USA" meant quality. Does anyone see it that way today? Often people are willing to pay more for things produced overseas because of higher quality.
We only have ourselves to blame for that.
Offshoring and outsourcing (which is generally offshored though not always) both contribute to lost IT jobs in the US which I believe is the salient aspect of this discussion.
Disclaimer: I am an IT manager who sets up and runs IT groups in India. So I'm the "bad guy" I guess.
1. Outsourcing is not new. And the reaction by the IT industry is not new. The garment industry was outsourced, the steel industry, to a degree the automotive industry. It happens. The people directly impacted don't like it but as long as it make economic sense, outsourcing will happen. Adapt to survive and thrive.
2. Isolated protective measures to limit outsourcing will ultimately fail. If you put restrictions on US companies that increase their costs while overseas competitors have no such restrictions, US companies will be at a competitive disadvantage ultimately hurting their growth and their employees.
3. Outsourcing is not easy in the IT industry. I can point to as many failures as successes. Not every company in the US that needs IT resources will be candidates for outsourcing. Not every job will end up overseas. In fact even though my entire IT organization is in India I'll soon be looking for a Systems Engineer in the US because I'm not happy with what I find in India.
4. Salaries for IT candidates in India are increasing very rapidly (think Silicon Valley, 1999). Given the inherent inefficiency of dealing with people great distances away, the economics of outsourcing are getting worse.
5. Decimation means to kill off 10%, not 90% as some posts have said. From Wikipedia: The word decimation is derived from Latin meaning "removal of a tenth." So the article is correct, this is decimation.
6. I could be wrong on any or all of the above.
I got a pilots license years ago but stopped flying. Until 9/11. After standing in security lines for hours for a 45 minute flight I realized I didn't need to do that. So I got my pilot's license up to date, bought an airplane and use that for flights under about 800 miles. Now I drive 5 minutes to my local airport instead of an hour to the airport that services airlines. No security lines, freedom to come and go as I please, and faster door-to-door times for shorter flights. Yes it is more expensive. But owning and operating a car is more expensive than taking the bus. Anyone can get a pilots license in 50 to 60 hours of flight training. Check it out.
Ok, color me stupid but I wasn't really sure what a virtual appliance was.
a q.html
http://www.vmware.com/vmtn/appliances/challenge/f
Basically a network appliance runing under a virtual machine.
What is the moral framework under which a corporation operates? That's like asking what moral framework does an individual operate under. Individual freedom applies to corporations as well. I ask this because your post implies they are doing something wrong. To make that determination requires a moral framework. But individual freedom implies that they can have any moral framework (or none at all within the bounds of law) they want.
Christians should believe killing is wrong because that's what the religion teaches. But you are still missing my point in two ways.
First, I'm saying the cartoon is justified because it conveys a perception that non-Muslims are starting to believe - that Islam is, as a religion or philosophical system, inherently violent and warring. It is appropriate for non-Muslims to tell others that they have that perception so that discussion can take place and perceptions modified. I'm not arguing that the perception is correct, only that it exists, that it should be discussed, and political cartoons are an appropriate means to initiate such discussions.
Second, I am in no way saying anything about Muslims. I'm saying the perception is about the religion, not the followers of the religion.
There are evil people everywhere. Evil people often use ideology to drive or at least justify their cause. Usually the ideology they use is religious but not always. Communism is a non-religious ideology but has supported its share of nuts.
With my second post the question I'm trying to raise is "is Islam, as a religious institution, able to critique evil behavior". I think the power of a religion is its ability to lead people in the right direction. This means it must have the philosophical or theological power to criticize those who head off in the wrong direction.
Yes, Christianity has been used justify all sort of atrocities. No religion eliminates evil people. But if someone uses Christianity in this fashion, it has the theological power to critique the behavior.
Evil Person: I am killing in the name of Christ. The Religion: But Jesus says "Love your enemy" so how do you justify killing him? The Religion: What part of "thou shalt not kill" don't you understand?
Of course the person can ignore what the religion says but then the actions become the deeds of the person and not the religion.
So the question in my second post was "can Islam (as a religion) offer a critique to the evil deeds of some of its followers?" I can't find a clear statement in the Koran or Islamic religious writings that says, for example, "thou shalt not kill." I do find things like "[Koran 5:32:] 'Whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men.'" This implies that it is ok to kill someone for "manslaughter or for mischief in the land." Whoa! I don't know of ANY religion that supports killing. For most religions life is special and should not be taken under any circumstance.
To reiterate, my original point was "the cartoon is an appropriate means to communicate a perception non-Muslims are increasing coming to believe." The appropriate response is for people to discuss and hopefully clarify the perception (much like you and I are doing).
Second, what power does Islam have to critique the evil behavior of some of it followers? I'm talking about the religion itself, not its followers. We can both come up with long lists of atrocities committed by followers of all religions (and non-religious ideologies). You have no argument from me there. I think Islam's power in this regard is limited because it does support the use of war and killing in some circumstances. By opening this door the actual use of violence becomes a subjective matter of interpretation.
It isn't questioning the people, I believe the cartoon was questioning the religion. Sure there are nasty Christians but anyone with a little background in Christianity can call the nasty behavior into question. For example, if someone (the person) claims to kill in the name of Christ one can rightfully point out that Jesus said "Love your enemy" (the religion).
Can the same thing be done in Islam? Don't know. But the perception is that Islam cannot make such critiques of this behavior. Perhaps the perception is wrong in which case we need dialog. Exactly what the cartoon would prompt in a civilized society.
The cartoon correctly expressed the perception that non-Muslims are increasingly coming to believe that Islam is violent and warring at its very core. It is an appropriate means to convey the message. The appropriate response is self-reflection and discourse.
The sig says it all...
Woah. Dance around a stage for a minute and out of breath. That dude is heading for an early coronary.
Three baseball umpires are talking.
Umpire 1: I call them the way they are.
Umpire 2: I call them the way I see them.
Umpire 3: The way I call them is the way they are.
Three branches of philosophy are represented by these three comments. For more info on the third, check out Speech Acts by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Searle
We shouldn't have pissed off the comet creatures with that deep impact thingy.
What concerns me are comet creatures we're going to really piss off. I'm thinking the dinosaurs had a space program and did something like this and you know what happened next.
I routinely install Gentoo on VIA EPIA systems in about 2 days. The machine does all the work and since I'm pretty good at multitasking, it doesn't take much of *my* time. YMMV
Some are saying this is just VIA's way of dumping support for linux drivers on the OSS community while at the same time spouting how open source friendly they are.