They're trying to force you to "buy into" the company's values. Study what management wants all you can. Then if you have something to contribute to their goals (including discussing about the company's goals), raise them with your manager. If he/she is actually interested in the company and not just in saving face, they'll listen to you. If they're just about prideful self-advancement, you may want to consider working elsewhere.
"If the gold rusts, what will happen to the iron?" - Chaucer
I am a big fan of working for yourself. (I'm religious, so I would also add working for God in there, too.) This means structuring your own work as much as you can so you won't have people breathing down your neck. This means doing research on your own and taking initiative to lead your own work and contribute to the company. In my job, I live with whatever constraints I have to live with and restructure everything else according to my liking. Remember, your boss isn't your teacher or God; what they say is meant to make themselves money, not help you do your job better. Stand up for yourself and read about what can make you a better worker. You shouldn't let yourself be treated like a slave.
But hey, I'm leaving IT to become a doctor, so what do I know?
The paradigm doctors are taught in med school in the US is that of evidence-based medicine. Doctors consult with each other via evidence and make a rational decision. Thus, there is a science to it. The experimentation occurs in controlled studies by research groups and in reports from doctors across the country.
I will grant you that this is not based in something like the First Principles of physics. And I will grant you that there is a business side to it; unfortunately, as recent reports are confirming, many studies (e.g., COX-2 inhibitors) are not objective but biased in favor of a business's vision. Nevertheless, to call it an art-form insults the field.
Just who is this John Tierney, anyway?
He's a NYTimes columnist, a guy with far more power and influence than you could ever dream of. His argument is economic - and if you're able to reason in economic terms (a skill you probably haven't developed), you'd realize that there's some serious weight behind it. Hacking costs society serious money, and we ought to focus on how to deter it.
The death penalty is just a way of attracting attention; he even discounts the idea himself. Nevertheless, the threat of serious punishment may pay huge dividends, at least in the millions if not in the billions of dollars. I'd take that for a bonus in my salary, wouldn't you? Oh wait, you probably don't know how to count money.
You should come out from behind your computer terminal and open your eyes to the real world. You might learn a thing or two.
If people would actually use this link, they would see that many of their fears are unsubstatiated. Tierney admits that the death penalty is a problem, and then proproses other proposals to deter future crimes. Nevertheless, his basic thesis - that hackers are a huge economic problem to society and that serious steps are needed to thwart them - should be heeded.
He cites research claiming that deterring a mere 0.2% of hacking crimes would save society $100 million. That's huge. We might not like regulation, but if we can't police our own bad behavior, steps need to be taken. Money talks.
It's too bad this forum is way too geeky to check the sources and to think critically about it's own culture.
2) Gaps There are 100's of Millions still in dire poverty and extreme education. If the middle class and the rich get too far ahead of the rest of the country, I think there will be a lot of social unrest.
The sad thing is that India doesn't have their humans rights equation correct. They have 160 million Dalits ("untouchables") in forced poverty, unable to provide their country a decent life. Unless they take care of their poor, they will not be able to succeed over the long haul.
Working in a major university research lab, I'm in an environment which thrives off of innovation. Of course, there is no substitute for surrounding oneself with talented people. Nevertheless, creativity can be stimulated by reading and researching ideas.
For example, I recently had trouble with an interface I'm working on, so I read a leading book on interface design. Not only did this fix my problem, but it also gave me several more ideas I plan to implement in the interface. Expanding one's worldview will always accomplish the task of enhancing creativity.
This is pedantic, but virii is misspelled. It is viri. Latin replaces the singular suffix -us with -i. The -ii suffix comes from -ius.
Slashdot needs a bit of Latin grammar every now and then...;-)
I was intending to make a comment on the provincialism (i.e., lack of breadth) of Computer Scientists and nothing more. I proudly use MS products and believe in their engineering. MS's design process as a whole seems to emphasize the end-user more than other operations. This makes their design superior. Please take this as a compliment, not as a critique.
In my university research lab, I run into computer scientists who know little outside of computer science, little about how the rest of the world works. This hurts product design. MS understands users' needs and has superior product design. That's all I was trying to say, and I think a rereading of my entry will yield such a reading.
This is caused by computer programmers knowing too much computer science and too little about the end-users' needs. This is why companies like MS succeed. If techies spent more time reading about the world at large, the technical community would be a better place as a whole.
Learning German at Princeton, one of the most beneficial things we did was reading German newspapers on the web, forcing us to translate them. If this is a native-speaking Japanese school, reading a sophisticated newspaper may be one of the best vocabulary and grammar builders around. I know the NYTimes is great for me. Or make them surf the web utilizing their Japanese skills, to do research projects or to price items.
The answer is entwined in getting to the next level. If you aspire to teach college, ensure that you can get into a top-tier graduate program. If you aspire to go into industry, get the experience relevant to the jobs you seek. If you can't do that at your current school, transfer; if you can, stay and have fun.
No one cares about where a bachelors is from decades from now, no one who is worth much. Look at the current Commerce Sect., who came from a Monterrey Tech. in Mexico. He worked his way up in Kellog's. It's about the character of hard work, self-discipline, etc. that matter in the long-term.
Slashdot Mirror
They're trying to force you to "buy into" the company's values. Study what management wants all you can. Then if you have something to contribute to their goals (including discussing about the company's goals), raise them with your manager. If he/she is actually interested in the company and not just in saving face, they'll listen to you. If they're just about prideful self-advancement, you may want to consider working elsewhere. "If the gold rusts, what will happen to the iron?" - Chaucer
I am a big fan of working for yourself. (I'm religious, so I would also add working for God in there, too.) This means structuring your own work as much as you can so you won't have people breathing down your neck. This means doing research on your own and taking initiative to lead your own work and contribute to the company. In my job, I live with whatever constraints I have to live with and restructure everything else according to my liking. Remember, your boss isn't your teacher or God; what they say is meant to make themselves money, not help you do your job better. Stand up for yourself and read about what can make you a better worker. You shouldn't let yourself be treated like a slave.
But hey, I'm leaving IT to become a doctor, so what do I know?
The paradigm doctors are taught in med school in the US is that of evidence-based medicine. Doctors consult with each other via evidence and make a rational decision. Thus, there is a science to it. The experimentation occurs in controlled studies by research groups and in reports from doctors across the country. I will grant you that this is not based in something like the First Principles of physics. And I will grant you that there is a business side to it; unfortunately, as recent reports are confirming, many studies (e.g., COX-2 inhibitors) are not objective but biased in favor of a business's vision. Nevertheless, to call it an art-form insults the field.
Just who is this John Tierney, anyway? He's a NYTimes columnist, a guy with far more power and influence than you could ever dream of. His argument is economic - and if you're able to reason in economic terms (a skill you probably haven't developed), you'd realize that there's some serious weight behind it. Hacking costs society serious money, and we ought to focus on how to deter it. The death penalty is just a way of attracting attention; he even discounts the idea himself. Nevertheless, the threat of serious punishment may pay huge dividends, at least in the millions if not in the billions of dollars. I'd take that for a bonus in my salary, wouldn't you? Oh wait, you probably don't know how to count money. You should come out from behind your computer terminal and open your eyes to the real world. You might learn a thing or two.
If people would actually use this link, they would see that many of their fears are unsubstatiated. Tierney admits that the death penalty is a problem, and then proproses other proposals to deter future crimes. Nevertheless, his basic thesis - that hackers are a huge economic problem to society and that serious steps are needed to thwart them - should be heeded.
He cites research claiming that deterring a mere 0.2% of hacking crimes would save society $100 million. That's huge. We might not like regulation, but if we can't police our own bad behavior, steps need to be taken. Money talks.
It's too bad this forum is way too geeky to check the sources and to think critically about it's own culture.
The Masoretes would be proud of the preservation. I've seen the Dead Sea Scrolls digitally enhanced, so this should be very doable.
Reminds me a lot of Slashdot. Oops, did I say that?
Slavery was wrong, and so is caste-based discrimination. http://www.dalits.org/ The struggle persists.
2) Gaps There are 100's of Millions still in dire poverty and extreme education. If the middle class and the rich get too far ahead of the rest of the country, I think there will be a lot of social unrest. The sad thing is that India doesn't have their humans rights equation correct. They have 160 million Dalits ("untouchables") in forced poverty, unable to provide their country a decent life. Unless they take care of their poor, they will not be able to succeed over the long haul.
is this on slashdot???
Out of curiosity, what's the story, if you're free to share?
Working in a major university research lab, I'm in an environment which thrives off of innovation. Of course, there is no substitute for surrounding oneself with talented people. Nevertheless, creativity can be stimulated by reading and researching ideas. For example, I recently had trouble with an interface I'm working on, so I read a leading book on interface design. Not only did this fix my problem, but it also gave me several more ideas I plan to implement in the interface. Expanding one's worldview will always accomplish the task of enhancing creativity.
Mi casa, Picasa...
Two pics
This is pedantic, but virii is misspelled. It is viri. Latin replaces the singular suffix -us with -i. The -ii suffix comes from -ius. Slashdot needs a bit of Latin grammar every now and then... ;-)
I was intending to make a comment on the provincialism (i.e., lack of breadth) of Computer Scientists and nothing more. I proudly use MS products and believe in their engineering. MS's design process as a whole seems to emphasize the end-user more than other operations. This makes their design superior. Please take this as a compliment, not as a critique. In my university research lab, I run into computer scientists who know little outside of computer science, little about how the rest of the world works. This hurts product design. MS understands users' needs and has superior product design. That's all I was trying to say, and I think a rereading of my entry will yield such a reading.
This is caused by computer programmers knowing too much computer science and too little about the end-users' needs. This is why companies like MS succeed. If techies spent more time reading about the world at large, the technical community would be a better place as a whole.
Yes.
Learning German at Princeton, one of the most beneficial things we did was reading German newspapers on the web, forcing us to translate them. If this is a native-speaking Japanese school, reading a sophisticated newspaper may be one of the best vocabulary and grammar builders around. I know the NYTimes is great for me. Or make them surf the web utilizing their Japanese skills, to do research projects or to price items.
The answer is entwined in getting to the next level. If you aspire to teach college, ensure that you can get into a top-tier graduate program. If you aspire to go into industry, get the experience relevant to the jobs you seek. If you can't do that at your current school, transfer; if you can, stay and have fun.
No one cares about where a bachelors is from decades from now, no one who is worth much. Look at the current Commerce Sect., who came from a Monterrey Tech. in Mexico. He worked his way up in Kellog's. It's about the character of hard work, self-discipline, etc. that matter in the long-term.