I thought I saw a TV news segment back in the 1980's that the GRiD Compass laptop was designed to withstand being run over by a tank. With an $8,150 USD price tag and sold mostly to the government, the case should be quite sturdy.
Stanford doesn't tend to graduate CS majors who aren't pretty smart, and Google doesn't tend to hire them. There are exceptions, but they're very rare.
Google founders Sergey Bring and Larry Page must have been the exceptions.
The answer is that at Google I don't have to deal with idiots. It's possible my co-workers think I'm the idiot (though they hide it well, if so), but that's their problem. Also, being below average at Google pays better than being a star most other places.
I ran into quite a few idiots while working the Google help desk in 2008. The most memorable idiot was a new hire from Stanford University who was shocked — shocked! — that he had to press the power button on his workstation. He actually wanted someone to come out to his desk to turn on his computer. I explained to him that a corporate cubicle farm wasn't a university computer lab.
I don't know how you define any of those words, so I don't know what that means, but I couldn't know even if you explained it.
You've offended me with a childhood name calling that I haven't heard in 40+ years. I didn't like it then as a child, I still don't like it now as an adult. Everything you said after Humpty Dumpty meant you lost the ability to convince me that your argument was valid. Plus repeatedly misrepresenting what I wrote to advance your argument also offended me. Hence, you lost the argument and my respect.
I had a 2006 Black MacBook that ran flawlessly for many years. The CPU fan and battery died in 2012. I took my vintage laptop into the Apple Store, got replacement parts, and, because the tech wasn't careful putting the keyboard top back in, got a new keyboard top. The CPU fan died in 2014 and I let it be, as too many software packages I used were dropping 32-bit support.
I managed to convince a user to give up their nine-year-old PC with Windows ME for a modern PC with Windows XP. I brought the old system back to my cube, popped open the case, and found a grapefruit-sized dust bunny in the bottom of the case. An almost perfect sphere of accumulated dust. Now that was a conversation piece.
I asked you about the relevance. Instead you simply restated your original erroneous claim.
No, you made an erroneous — and quite narrow presumption — of what I meant by management.
Sales, finance, business operations, partner and customer account managers, HR, tech writers project managers and legal are just some of the categories of non-managerial, non-engineering regular employees that I've worked with.
I include those people into my definition of management. Many Silicon Valley companies strive to outsource as many functions as possible to limit amount of compensation to regular employees and keep the bean counters happy. However, the core functionality of the business is always kept in house. This is known as management or the management layer.
But I'm still wondering how this relevant to the question of whether it's problematic or beneficial to know one another's compensation.
It can be problematic when a company is structured between regular employees (1%) and contractors (99%). Most contractors realized that they're not going any extra compensation. Whenever discussion of Google's compensation comes up, I love to point out that not everyone at Google is so richly compensated. Some people find that relevant, others do not.
I used to work at a leading network company in Silicon Valley that refuses to train and certified workers in the company's products because they might leave and make more money at a competitor. Because the company wasn't providing any training and certitifcation, many employees took it upon themselves (sometimes using company resources), left the company and made more money at a competitor. As my manager explained it to me, he could train me but it would be a waste of his time. This level corporate dysfunction is par for the course.
Regular employees are managers and engineers. Everyone else are contractors. It's a distinction that most people overlook when talking about compensation at Google.
Keep in mind that employees who earn "total compensation" are either managers or engineers. Everyone else works for contractor agencies that provides a paycheck and a standard benefits package. If someone is fretting about the current stock price, they're not a contractor.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe I should dust off the cobwebs of a 64-player Quake 2 DM level that I spent ten years (1997-2007) turning into a sprawling mess? Nah...
So the merging black holes gone from suck to blow?
You need to go to the southern hemisphere to look it up in the Indus constellation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASASSN-15lh
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_(constellation)
You're dissing the founders of Google and Stanford University. Let me guess... You're a Cal Berkeley graduate?
I thought I saw a TV news segment back in the 1980's that the GRiD Compass laptop was designed to withstand being run over by a tank. With an $8,150 USD price tag and sold mostly to the government, the case should be quite sturdy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grid_Compass
Stanford doesn't tend to graduate CS majors who aren't pretty smart, and Google doesn't tend to hire them. There are exceptions, but they're very rare.
Google founders Sergey Bring and Larry Page must have been the exceptions.
The Wayback Machine
http://archive.org/web/
I never update my code, so this is not a problem.
Unfortunately, most of us don't write perfect code.
No, that's a Slashdot link. ;)
That's assuming that your code doesn't change in 5/10/20 years from now.
The answer is that at Google I don't have to deal with idiots. It's possible my co-workers think I'm the idiot (though they hide it well, if so), but that's their problem. Also, being below average at Google pays better than being a star most other places.
I ran into quite a few idiots while working the Google help desk in 2008. The most memorable idiot was a new hire from Stanford University who was shocked — shocked! — that he had to press the power button on his workstation. He actually wanted someone to come out to his desk to turn on his computer. I explained to him that a corporate cubicle farm wasn't a university computer lab.
I usually put the URL into a comment when I use a particular piece of code from Stack Overflow. More so for future reference than attribution.
I don't know how you define any of those words, so I don't know what that means, but I couldn't know even if you explained it.
You've offended me with a childhood name calling that I haven't heard in 40+ years. I didn't like it then as a child, I still don't like it now as an adult. Everything you said after Humpty Dumpty meant you lost the ability to convince me that your argument was valid. Plus repeatedly misrepresenting what I wrote to advance your argument also offended me. Hence, you lost the argument and my respect.
That wasn't name-calling, it was a characterization of your decision to redefine common words.
Sorry, you lost the argument. You also lost my respect.
I had a 2006 Black MacBook that ran flawlessly for many years. The CPU fan and battery died in 2012. I took my vintage laptop into the Apple Store, got replacement parts, and, because the tech wasn't careful putting the keyboard top back in, got a new keyboard top. The CPU fan died in 2014 and I let it be, as too many software packages I used were dropping 32-bit support.
I managed to convince a user to give up their nine-year-old PC with Windows ME for a modern PC with Windows XP. I brought the old system back to my cube, popped open the case, and found a grapefruit-sized dust bunny in the bottom of the case. An almost perfect sphere of accumulated dust. Now that was a conversation piece.
Diving into old code just to tidy it up brings its own set of risks, and they may simply outweigh any 'niceness' advantage.
This is where unit tests come in. Refactor and test is a good way to clean up code.
One line at a time.
Ah, you should have mentioned that your name is Humpty Dumpty.
When you resort to name calling, it means you lost the argument.
How this one distinguish itself from the others?
This is Microsoft. There are no others.
Especially since the proper spelling on Slashdot is Micro$oft.
I asked you about the relevance. Instead you simply restated your original erroneous claim.
No, you made an erroneous — and quite narrow presumption — of what I meant by management.
Sales, finance, business operations, partner and customer account managers, HR, tech writers project managers and legal are just some of the categories of non-managerial, non-engineering regular employees that I've worked with.
I include those people into my definition of management. Many Silicon Valley companies strive to outsource as many functions as possible to limit amount of compensation to regular employees and keep the bean counters happy. However, the core functionality of the business is always kept in house. This is known as management or the management layer.
But I'm still wondering how this relevant to the question of whether it's problematic or beneficial to know one another's compensation.
It can be problematic when a company is structured between regular employees (1%) and contractors (99%). Most contractors realized that they're not going any extra compensation. Whenever discussion of Google's compensation comes up, I love to point out that not everyone at Google is so richly compensated. Some people find that relevant, others do not.
I used to work at a leading network company in Silicon Valley that refuses to train and certified workers in the company's products because they might leave and make more money at a competitor. Because the company wasn't providing any training and certitifcation, many employees took it upon themselves (sometimes using company resources), left the company and made more money at a competitor. As my manager explained it to me, he could train me but it would be a waste of his time. This level corporate dysfunction is par for the course.
Regular employees are managers and engineers. Everyone else are contractors. It's a distinction that most people overlook when talking about compensation at Google.
Keep in mind that employees who earn "total compensation" are either managers or engineers. Everyone else works for contractor agencies that provides a paycheck and a standard benefits package. If someone is fretting about the current stock price, they're not a contractor.