If you haven't studied general management theory, you're most likely working with a warped ideology of what management is about. This is basically the Dilbert style of management, which nobody who has studied and understands modern management theory, would actually do.
For instance, you're looking to motivate while controlling costs.
I suggest you look at developing a strategic planning process which defines the relationship between the employees, the company and their performance.
I suggest you choose the most influential person in the group, who wants to exceed in the business, and define them as the lead/senior developer. Use this person to handle all of the project specific details.
Remember, a manager's (I prefer to say leader) job is to help other people work. This does not imply that you walk them through their job.
This brings me to leadership theory. You need to understand that during change people tend towards uncertainty, it's your job to quell that uncertainty, and help them get independent again. For instance if we're using the situational leadership theory, we're looking to bring someone from an R1 state to an R4 state.
Don't control what they do, unless they abdicate to you, however never do their work for them.
If you want more information on this sort of thing, I suggest you either start studying an MBA in your part time, or get some business journals and start reading. I really like the harvard business review, and specifically you might like the "HBR Answers" it's a bunch of topic and associated articles which give you a good perspective on those topics.
Either way, if you want feel free to email me if you'd like to talk about this more, or reply to this post.
... people aren't busy 100% of the time, and attempting to force people to be busy 100% of the time, is more destructive than letting it go.
Wow. Who would have thought?
Seriously, this has been known for quite some time, and any businesses that think they can improve productivity by reducing other options, needs to go back to business school and study leadership and general motivation theory.
Monitoring and punishing people to get them to work harder is industrial revolution style management. We've come a long way since then... baby.
Well if the Admin said "it's free" (when he could have paid for a slightly more prioritized service) and then said "they never go down", then he wasn't doing his job. Management doesn't want yes men, they want the right decision. (However, right is very subjective)
Additionally, companies make decisions based on all sorts of reasons, it's too simplistic to reduce it to such a linear stream of logic. Especially since, if it took you 5 seconds to walk through that, it also takes them 5 seconds, so why didn't they see this coming?
If you're talking about manging the short run with the long run (or should I say vs.), then that's a normative statement and it's going to be different for each organization and it's position, and so on.
Business isn't as simple and straight forward as people like to think it is.
I deal with this sort of infrastructure for my company. $50 per user is cheap.
Think about Internet costs, Power costs, Server costs, Cooling costs, Licenses, Backup costs, Redundancy costs, Rent costs, and Administration costs (Salary(-ies)).
The salary an "ok" sysadmin commands in Australia is around $60,000 a year. Which means based on that cost alone using Google Service I could support 1,200 users. This isn't even including the other costs.
The paid for version of Google Apps has the ability to do dual delivery. This means you can setup extra redundancy if you want. I believe you can do this 2 ways, through the Google Apps and, through Postini.
If you have such a critical email system, you should use this feature, and perhaps sign up for another email interface in the cloud (Maybe Microsoft's? So you're certain they aren't using the same infrastructure).
Then you can do dual delivery to that server, and you can also add in extra mail delivery servers in the case that Postini completely goes down.
That would be as secure and redundant as anything I have seen at my work place.
Which then means you need to take into account where you're driving too. I drive a reasonably VX Commmodore (Equivalent-ish to the Pontiac GTO) so it's a 5.7l LS1. When I initially got my car and was quite cash strapped, I began slowly accelerating, and was able to reduce my fuel consumption quite a lot. This was with what I would call slow acceleration (1500 - 2000 rpm) and quite a lot of highway driving. It certainly isn't fast (for my car) but it was just a little slower than most cars would accelerate.
However, I realized that (excluding flooring it), the amount I was paying for fuel would fluctuate at most by $10 per week. Considering I was working full time, this was not a very efficient use of my time and effort.
So now I don't really worry about it. If I want to put my foot down, I do, else I don't. I don't fill up on special days, and I always use BP Ultimate (which is ATM around 1.70 AUD).
The big differences I notice are weekends when I don't go out, or don't go out during the week. Not driving makes an okay difference, but driving differently, or buying a car to reduce fuel is a ridiculous notion.
LOL but I digress, my point originally was if you're doing country driving it doesn't matter either way, if you're doing city driving (stop-start driving) then accelerating fast would not likely improve your economy.
But overall, want to reduce the amount you spend on it? Sell your house, car, move into the city, and walk.
(Which is what I'm doing, but keeping the car and doing it up for fun days... LS1 twin turbo kit for the win!)
Sure this doesn't sound that bad, however he is a rareity. I don't and haven't had any lecturers who have been religious (eg, literal translation), I've had lecturers who have been "spiritual", but not religious.
However, do you really want someone who believes in the rapture handling the football?
Especially when tensions with Russia are increasing?
People that are able to say "Well, you don't get to judge me, only an invisible sky wizard judges me", so they can do what they want and not feel guilty, does not describe a good model for a president, in my opinion.
Quite possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard
on
Fire Your IT Boss
·
· Score: 1
We don't want managers who know how to manage, we want managers who want to do everything.
We don't want them to create processes so we do less work, and focus on allowing us to work, we want them to do our jobs for us.
End sarcasm.
This is a ridiculous notion. Managers sometimes don't know what's going on beneath them, but usually they have an overall idea of the projects direction, and how that benefits with the rest of the business.
A greater problem with IT is being promoted to fail also known as the Peter Principle.
A lot of people think management is easy, that developing processes which get things done, and making some of the harder decisions is a joke. However, these are usually the people who have had managers who think the same way, and so they think they can do a better job. Or they don't understand why he is doing what he is doing, because he doesn't communicate that to you.
Management is a specialization like all other disciplines. The business of business is business. It is more important to have a good grounding in business.
I shouldn't have to understand the low level of the system, that's your job, at the most I should want to understand how it basically works, and how it can benefit the business.
This has worked the best in organizations where I have worked. When the upper most IT executives think they understand the lowest levels of the system and could write it all, they tend to exert too much control on the system. However, when the upper most IT executives recognize that you specialize in doing this code, and they specialize in management, they leave you more to your devices and focus more on how you are working with others.
And the rest of your examples are due to... There was less infrastructure, there was less technology, there were crises happening. This is what created conditions for workers being maimed on the job, child labor and food riots. It is fine to say look at the problems they had, but to say it was due to a lack of regulation is ridiculous. It was due to the times they were living in and the problems of that era. If you were a child and could work and earn money for your family, you would have back in those days. However, regulation (welfare) which was to supply for these people, would have dragged more people down, if it weren't for the economy strengthening at the same time. Additionally privatized welfare is always the best kind of welfare.
As for the dustbowl's that was an unforeseen problem, and even if it was, those areas still probably would have wanted to have mined and farmed their land to death, because it was better than what they had at the time.
Cartels and monopolies do not exist for a significant period of time, except for when they are enforced by government. Look into The Prisoner's Dilemma.
The internet is slow because tards like the poster (Anti-Globalism) don't believe in free markets, or anarcho-capitalism. So they regulate markets, which reduces competition, financial incentives and innovation.
The same people complain about ISP's starting to limit their customers to 250gb per month, or complain about business doing things to stay competitive, such as shaping (Net Neutrality?) and similar.
There are a whole host of problems which lead to shortages in markets (or more accurately where total surplus (excluding government surplus) is not maximized) when you regulate markets.
I just find it funny that the same people who complain about the problems, are the ones causing them with their control (through government) of the system.
Want to know why?
It's because of you!
Re:Google Chrome HDD and CPU Usage
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
That worked perfectly. Thanks for the info.
I really want to run the anti-phishing/malware option, however until they get this fixed, at least I can use it for my 24/7 apps.
Re:Google Chrome HDD and CPU Usage
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
Nah it's definitely the anti-phishing/malware setting.
When I turn it on it thrashes my drive, when I turn it off it stops.
Either way, I'm glad I can now use it for my 24/7 apps. However, I am desperately looking for AdBlock/NoScript/TabMixPlus so i can make this my full time browser.
Re:Google Chrome HDD and CPU Usage
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
Yeah definitely. It was happening to me every 30 minutes or so. Though to me some times seemed closer together.
It became unbearable to have it running. I uninstalled and filled out their feedback information leaving details about it, and asking them to contact me via my email for other info if they want.
Besides the lack of plugins (which I am sure will change in the future) and this problem it is an awesome browser. I really like it.
Re:Google Chrome HDD and CPU Usage
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
Sweet, thanks! I'll give this a try.
Google Chrome HDD and CPU Usage
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
Has anyone else noticed Chrome thrashing their hard drive? I find Chrome is doing a lot of reading and wrinting to my hard drive (specifically the main thread, and chrome.dll), so much so that it increases my CPU usage to 20%.
I loved Chrome, but when it started freaking out like this, I can't afford to run a browser with that.
I was planning on running Chrome for Gmail/Gcal/Gdocs, and FireFox for everything else, so I can restart FireFox with no problems at all, and because FireFox has the plugins (AdBlock and NoScript) that I need.
However, I can't do that until this issue is resolved.
Additionally, what the hell is it doing? It does several hundred MBytes or reading and writing, and I have no idea what it's doing. I'm often not even using the browser.
I'll have to get FileMon to check it and force it to happen again. See what it's actually doing.
Has anyone else noticed that every now and then Google Chrome sits there and churns, reading and writing heaps to the hard drive (not sure what files yet) and using about 20% CPU (AMD 64 3ghz, 4gb of RAM).
This is the only reason I stopped using it.
Once this issue is fixed, I think I'll use it again.
Not sure if this is related or not, however a friend and I have both recently been done by trojans packed inside of legitimate warez. (Seperate rips)
This was odd for us since we looked at the comments, looked at the ratings, and looked at the seeds/peers, none of which suggested it was ilegitimate.
However, when we then went to install it, about 10 different "A virus has been detected" messages came up (I use mod32, he uses Kaspersky), however 1 always got through, and then you'd see a ridiculous amount of dos boxes running commands pop up.
From here I checked my firewall and noticed that I was now making connections to ports around the 688x mark and higher, while also sending heaps of icmp's and similar.
I think I might have been seeding the torrent which infected me, and this is why it looked quite legit.
Additionally since the installer/release looked legit, and launched a pile of trojans most of which were blocked but a few that got through. So my guess is they've developed a pack which no matter what 1 will get through.
My friend and I both found ourselves irreparibly infected. He even found that he was infected after a format (due to drives that were connected having auto run with viruses on them).
So we both had to reformat (I was due for it anyway) to fix these problems.
Additionally at work we've seen a huge increase of UPS spam with trojans attached and similar. We block most of them, however we had one employee who somehow got one (probably her private mail), and then proceded to try and infect the rest of the company.
Slashdot Mirror
I read TFA however I am not quite sure what this means.
Did we cause it? Or has this been happening and we just didn't know about it?
Does this affect climate change?
What are the repercussions of these holes?
Thanks!
If you haven't studied general management theory, you're most likely working with a warped ideology of what management is about. This is basically the Dilbert style of management, which nobody who has studied and understands modern management theory, would actually do.
For instance, you're looking to motivate while controlling costs.
I suggest you look at developing a strategic planning process which defines the relationship between the employees, the company and their performance.
I suggest you choose the most influential person in the group, who wants to exceed in the business, and define them as the lead/senior developer. Use this person to handle all of the project specific details.
Remember, a manager's (I prefer to say leader) job is to help other people work. This does not imply that you walk them through their job.
This brings me to leadership theory. You need to understand that during change people tend towards uncertainty, it's your job to quell that uncertainty, and help them get independent again. For instance if we're using the situational leadership theory, we're looking to bring someone from an R1 state to an R4 state.
Don't control what they do, unless they abdicate to you, however never do their work for them.
If you want more information on this sort of thing, I suggest you either start studying an MBA in your part time, or get some business journals and start reading. I really like the harvard business review, and specifically you might like the "HBR Answers" it's a bunch of topic and associated articles which give you a good perspective on those topics.
Either way, if you want feel free to email me if you'd like to talk about this more, or reply to this post.
... people aren't busy 100% of the time, and attempting to force people to be busy 100% of the time, is more destructive than letting it go.
Wow. Who would have thought?
Seriously, this has been known for quite some time, and any businesses that think they can improve productivity by reducing other options, needs to go back to business school and study leadership and general motivation theory.
Monitoring and punishing people to get them to work harder is industrial revolution style management. We've come a long way since then... baby.
Well if the Admin said "it's free" (when he could have paid for a slightly more prioritized service) and then said "they never go down", then he wasn't doing his job. Management doesn't want yes men, they want the right decision. (However, right is very subjective)
Additionally, companies make decisions based on all sorts of reasons, it's too simplistic to reduce it to such a linear stream of logic. Especially since, if it took you 5 seconds to walk through that, it also takes them 5 seconds, so why didn't they see this coming?
If you're talking about manging the short run with the long run (or should I say vs.), then that's a normative statement and it's going to be different for each organization and it's position, and so on.
Business isn't as simple and straight forward as people like to think it is.
We're not worried about the ISP's. We're worried about stupid Government, which doesn't directly feel the negative affects of stupid policies.
Shut your mouth!
I think you need to read some facts about Bruce Schneier!
http://geekz.co.uk/schneierfacts/
I deal with this sort of infrastructure for my company. $50 per user is cheap.
Think about Internet costs, Power costs, Server costs, Cooling costs, Licenses, Backup costs, Redundancy costs, Rent costs, and Administration costs (Salary(-ies)).
The salary an "ok" sysadmin commands in Australia is around $60,000 a year. Which means based on that cost alone using Google Service I could support 1,200 users. This isn't even including the other costs.
For a business $50 per user is REALLY cheap.
The paid for version of Google Apps has the ability to do dual delivery. This means you can setup extra redundancy if you want. I believe you can do this 2 ways, through the Google Apps and, through Postini.
If you have such a critical email system, you should use this feature, and perhaps sign up for another email interface in the cloud (Maybe Microsoft's? So you're certain they aren't using the same infrastructure).
Then you can do dual delivery to that server, and you can also add in extra mail delivery servers in the case that Postini completely goes down.
That would be as secure and redundant as anything I have seen at my work place.
Which then means you need to take into account where you're driving too. I drive a reasonably VX Commmodore (Equivalent-ish to the Pontiac GTO) so it's a 5.7l LS1. When I initially got my car and was quite cash strapped, I began slowly accelerating, and was able to reduce my fuel consumption quite a lot. This was with what I would call slow acceleration (1500 - 2000 rpm) and quite a lot of highway driving. It certainly isn't fast (for my car) but it was just a little slower than most cars would accelerate.
However, I realized that (excluding flooring it), the amount I was paying for fuel would fluctuate at most by $10 per week. Considering I was working full time, this was not a very efficient use of my time and effort.
So now I don't really worry about it. If I want to put my foot down, I do, else I don't. I don't fill up on special days, and I always use BP Ultimate (which is ATM around 1.70 AUD).
The big differences I notice are weekends when I don't go out, or don't go out during the week. Not driving makes an okay difference, but driving differently, or buying a car to reduce fuel is a ridiculous notion.
LOL but I digress, my point originally was if you're doing country driving it doesn't matter either way, if you're doing city driving (stop-start driving) then accelerating fast would not likely improve your economy.
But overall, want to reduce the amount you spend on it? Sell your house, car, move into the city, and walk.
(Which is what I'm doing, but keeping the car and doing it up for fun days... LS1 twin turbo kit for the win!)
Am I the only one who read "IAN staff" as "I Am Not staff" and then thought I am not staff? That doesn't make sense. Fucking slashdot summary!
Ohhhhh... wait a minute... I.A.N... fucking slashdot abbreviations!
You sir, are a genious. /me runs off to cover my laptop in Goatse, TubGirl, LemonParty and similar.
Nah, I want an awesome chav accent to say naughty things to me like. "Wot u look'n' at twat!" and so forth. :-)
Sure this doesn't sound that bad, however he is a rareity. I don't and haven't had any lecturers who have been religious (eg, literal translation), I've had lecturers who have been "spiritual", but not religious.
However, do you really want someone who believes in the rapture handling the football?
Especially when tensions with Russia are increasing?
People that are able to say "Well, you don't get to judge me, only an invisible sky wizard judges me", so they can do what they want and not feel guilty, does not describe a good model for a president, in my opinion.
We don't want managers who know how to manage, we want managers who want to do everything.
We don't want them to create processes so we do less work, and focus on allowing us to work, we want them to do our jobs for us.
End sarcasm.
This is a ridiculous notion. Managers sometimes don't know what's going on beneath them, but usually they have an overall idea of the projects direction, and how that benefits with the rest of the business.
A greater problem with IT is being promoted to fail also known as the Peter Principle.
A lot of people think management is easy, that developing processes which get things done, and making some of the harder decisions is a joke. However, these are usually the people who have had managers who think the same way, and so they think they can do a better job. Or they don't understand why he is doing what he is doing, because he doesn't communicate that to you.
Management is a specialization like all other disciplines. The business of business is business. It is more important to have a good grounding in business.
I shouldn't have to understand the low level of the system, that's your job, at the most I should want to understand how it basically works, and how it can benefit the business.
This has worked the best in organizations where I have worked. When the upper most IT executives think they understand the lowest levels of the system and could write it all, they tend to exert too much control on the system. However, when the upper most IT executives recognize that you specialize in doing this code, and they specialize in management, they leave you more to your devices and focus more on how you are working with others.
Good points, however...
The depression was due to regulation of the money supply
And the rest of your examples are due to...
There was less infrastructure, there was less technology, there were crises happening. This is what created conditions for workers being maimed on the job, child labor and food riots. It is fine to say look at the problems they had, but to say it was due to a lack of regulation is ridiculous. It was due to the times they were living in and the problems of that era. If you were a child and could work and earn money for your family, you would have back in those days. However, regulation (welfare) which was to supply for these people, would have dragged more people down, if it weren't for the economy strengthening at the same time. Additionally privatized welfare is always the best kind of welfare.
As for the dustbowl's that was an unforeseen problem, and even if it was, those areas still probably would have wanted to have mined and farmed their land to death, because it was better than what they had at the time.
Cartels and monopolies do not exist for a significant period of time, except for when they are enforced by government. Look into The Prisoner's Dilemma.
You mean take it back to the times of heavily taxed and regulated Monarchies?
Perhaps better analogy would be early America, or perhaps parts of Hong Kong which weren't policed?
Both of which had their greatest growth in those periods.
The internet is slow because tards like the poster (Anti-Globalism) don't believe in free markets, or anarcho-capitalism. So they regulate markets, which reduces competition, financial incentives and innovation.
The same people complain about ISP's starting to limit their customers to 250gb per month, or complain about business doing things to stay competitive, such as shaping (Net Neutrality?) and similar.
There are a whole host of problems which lead to shortages in markets (or more accurately where total surplus (excluding government surplus) is not maximized) when you regulate markets.
I just find it funny that the same people who complain about the problems, are the ones causing them with their control (through government) of the system.
Want to know why?
It's because of you!
That worked perfectly. Thanks for the info.
I really want to run the anti-phishing/malware option, however until they get this fixed, at least I can use it for my 24/7 apps.
Nah it's definitely the anti-phishing/malware setting.
When I turn it on it thrashes my drive, when I turn it off it stops.
Either way, I'm glad I can now use it for my 24/7 apps. However, I am desperately looking for AdBlock/NoScript/TabMixPlus so i can make this my full time browser.
Yeah definitely. It was happening to me every 30 minutes or so. Though to me some times seemed closer together.
It became unbearable to have it running. I uninstalled and filled out their feedback information leaving details about it, and asking them to contact me via my email for other info if they want.
Besides the lack of plugins (which I am sure will change in the future) and this problem it is an awesome browser. I really like it.
Sweet, thanks! I'll give this a try.
Has anyone else noticed Chrome thrashing their hard drive? I find Chrome is doing a lot of reading and wrinting to my hard drive (specifically the main thread, and chrome.dll), so much so that it increases my CPU usage to 20%.
I loved Chrome, but when it started freaking out like this, I can't afford to run a browser with that.
I was planning on running Chrome for Gmail/Gcal/Gdocs, and FireFox for everything else, so I can restart FireFox with no problems at all, and because FireFox has the plugins (AdBlock and NoScript) that I need.
However, I can't do that until this issue is resolved.
Additionally, what the hell is it doing? It does several hundred MBytes or reading and writing, and I have no idea what it's doing. I'm often not even using the browser.
I'll have to get FileMon to check it and force it to happen again. See what it's actually doing.
Has anyone else noticed that every now and then Google Chrome sits there and churns, reading and writing heaps to the hard drive (not sure what files yet) and using about 20% CPU (AMD 64 3ghz, 4gb of RAM).
This is the only reason I stopped using it.
Once this issue is fixed, I think I'll use it again.
Not sure if this is related or not, however a friend and I have both recently been done by trojans packed inside of legitimate warez. (Seperate rips)
This was odd for us since we looked at the comments, looked at the ratings, and looked at the seeds/peers, none of which suggested it was ilegitimate.
However, when we then went to install it, about 10 different "A virus has been detected" messages came up (I use mod32, he uses Kaspersky), however 1 always got through, and then you'd see a ridiculous amount of dos boxes running commands pop up.
From here I checked my firewall and noticed that I was now making connections to ports around the 688x mark and higher, while also sending heaps of icmp's and similar.
I think I might have been seeding the torrent which infected me, and this is why it looked quite legit.
Additionally since the installer/release looked legit, and launched a pile of trojans most of which were blocked but a few that got through. So my guess is they've developed a pack which no matter what 1 will get through.
My friend and I both found ourselves irreparibly infected. He even found that he was infected after a format (due to drives that were connected having auto run with viruses on them).
So we both had to reformat (I was due for it anyway) to fix these problems.
Additionally at work we've seen a huge increase of UPS spam with trojans attached and similar. We block most of them, however we had one employee who somehow got one (probably her private mail), and then proceded to try and infect the rest of the company.
Oh, Hah, yeah I should have been more specific. Just replying to an Australian.
I've heard it's pretty bad in South Africa, and 299 South African rands = 45.6224956 Australian dollars, especially if that's the best you can do.
We have plans like that here, but they are basically rip offs, or it's because the person can't get any better.