I'm just too stupid to understand their "OpenID for Dummies" web site.
Nope. I went there a few weeks ago because I finally found a need for an openID. The site was laughably bad. It's a nice looking site, but heavy on graphics and hype, and skimpy on facts. It was slow. And the "How do I get an OpenID" linked to a few sites I know and many that I wouldn't trust enough to lend them a dead raccoon. When I tried to log in with what they claimed was my openID, the site timed out. I gave up. Screw it, if they can't even authenticate me with the account they told me was a valid openID, then they obviously have no clue.
It's a good idea badly implemented. That website is a pile of steaming crap. Maybe they should skip all the crap on the page about "The OpenID Foundation membership has approved OpenID Provider Authentication Policy Extension 1.0 as an OpenID specification " and other crap nobody cares about and tell me, in a concise fashion, why I'd want an openID and how I can get one. Then back that up with a site that, you know, works.
Yeah, story is a waste of time. Several of the 15 slides are, by admission of the author, unrelated. Then there are like five variations of the same thing. Oh, and MSFT BOB. See, it's witty if you are 1337 enough to know about BOB.
I should have trusted my prejudice against "articles" than span 15 ad-ridden pages. What a complete waste of time.
The linked articles do not really raise any cause for concern. The title sure has a ZOMG!!! factor to it, but in reality it's just a bunch of what-ifs. Move along, nothing to see here.
well, now that you put it like that...I think I'm going home for the day, comrade:)
You are talking about people who are able to get the job done without working too hard. Nothing wrong with that because you are getting the job done, after all. Or maybe, some creative genius who cannot play by the man's rules and ends up making the world a better place even though he can't keep a job.
The guy I was talking about (and I suspect most people who would concoct a scheme to take a high paying job and do nothing for as long as possible) wasn't exactly saving humanity and he wasn't even doing any percentage of his job. He was just some dude who was too lazy to work and instead "delegated" his job to his underlings, and enforced this "delegation" by threats and bullying. Worse, what he lacked in things like coming to work and doing the stuff for which he was paid, he made up for with yelling at his employees and treating them like total crap. Nobody was sad to see him go. Everyone who worked for him was too afraid to rat him out. He was a thug.
Like I said, last I heard he is working at Home Depot driving a forklift for $10/hour and that's the fate he deserves.
In another thread of this discussion, someone criticized me for being anti company-loyalty. I am not exactly advocating working your butt off for some corporation hoping for some grand reward in the end. All I am saying is that if you are paid to do a job then do it. Failure to do so is dishonest and will most likely catch up with you. If you are inspired to do so, put your heart and soul into your work, just know you'll probably end up with nothing for it. But just do what you are being paid to do. That's just social order.
You don't go buy a gallon of milk and get home and have a half empty jug, because the dairy plant and the store knows you'll not come back and but that product. You don't pump 15 gallons of gas into your car and oh! someone tricked you and put water in the gas reservoir. You'd sue that gas station for ruining your engine. And if you are being paid $X per year to do a job, and you stay home and play with Mr. Dilly all day or fly kites or whatever, you deserve what's coming to you.
I have worked in the corporate world long enough to know that all too often the hard workers get nothing but frustration and grief while the slackers do well. I just started working for a nonprofit, and while I have no expectations of some utopian meritocracy, it is quite a bit nicer than the corporate world. There is a lot less pressure, and pressure makes people do all kinds of nasty things to each other.
OP said: "That's because you're a "web developer". If you did anything of significance (ie not in HTML), you'd know that complex programming/hardware projects require significant overtime."
That's not an implication that web development isn't a lesser skill set?
I see what you are saying, but you are assuming developing a web site/application through the full cycle isn't my job. It is my job. Doing the SQL to the UI is all my job. That's the point. If you have to create all of those layers, you need to be good at a lot of things.
Some places have total separation of concerns where everyone is specialized. I have worked at these places, and it sucks. On paper this separation of concerns is good, because it's hard to find decent people who can do a variety of things well. In reality it's a total hindrance to communication and productivity.
As a developer, I don't want to admin my server, and I am certainly no DBA. I don't want to mess with that cause I don't do it well. I need to have a DBA, like you, who knows what the heck is going on to make my app run well. I am a developer, I write code.
In my opinion the easiest way to distinct the two classes is the following
Meh, I don't know about that. That's a bit of a one size fits all approach, don't you think?
The data defines the UI and the UI defines the data. Sometimes all the requirements you have are UI related and you've gotta work backwards. Sometimes, it's the opposite. I think you should be able to work and think in a variety of ways.
Besides, contrary to what appears to be popular belief here, the UI is not secondary. Without users, you'd have no need for an app. Therefore, focus on the user's needs and build from there. Building a UI is just as hard, maybe harder, than building the back end data structures.
Then again, if I think about it, I do prefer to start with the DB and work outward. It's just sometimes this isn't always possible.
I guess I prefer making the information accessible and easy for people to consume. The plumbing is important, for sure. But I'd rather design the faucet, so to speak.
Plus, it's been so long since I have written any C it'd be like learning all over again. But I think all web developers should have experience with C or something similar. Anything to get you exposed to algorithims and some classical programming problems is a good thing. I think that's in part why web developers get a bad rap, not being exposed to those things. Even after you forget the syntax to [insert lower level language] the thinking sticks with you.
Being honest gets you ahead, if only in the long term. Plus, I believe it's the right thing to do. That's not the same thing as blind company loyalty, which agreed, is foolishness. I think you know the difference.
Working your 40 hours a week, sometimes more and sometimes less is fulfilling your obligation and being honest. Not showing up for a year or two and collecting a paycheck is just plain stealing and catches up with you in the end anyhow.
I wouldn't put the popup on the site. What I would do to workaround IE depends on the IE bug. For things like min-width and min-height you usually see javascript inserted into the CSS. I found a better hack that uses IE's busted box model to make min-width/height work. To me, some javascript hack is the last resort. All bets are off for IE, though, when it comes to working around bugs. In the end, if something works that what has to be done.
I can't design graphics to save my life. Photoshop, Fireworks, the Gimp, etc...voodoo if you ask me. Like, time to get out the dead chickens and perform arcane rituals.
Sure, you are correct. It's modded as flamebait because because it states that web development is *not* really software engineering.
If OP had said what you just said, he wouldn't be marked as flamebait. He wouldn't be marked as insightful, either. Now, maybe if there were a "+0 Duh" moderation you'd be in business.
"That's okay, they'll let you go and replace you with a 23-year-old straight from college who is willing to work 18 hour days for 3-4 months. No exaggeration on that - I saw it happen. Fortunately, it is usually not THAT bad."
Then I say let 'em have what they deserve. To quote a poster in my financial planner's office: "If you think a professional is expensive, wait till you hire an amateur."
Fair enough...I guess what I don't like about unions is that it's one more layer of invincibility for do-nothings. Plus in my experiences, many (and I say many because I'd be wrong to make a generalization) union folks have a sense of entitlement. Yes, that can occur anywhere but it seems that unions engender that.
Case in point: the automotive unions. They are so unwilling to bend on anything they are partially (and I say partially, you've gotta put equal oarts blame on crappy product, lack of vision, and corrupt leadership) responsible for bankrupting the US automakers. Many union workers, and yes, I have spoken with some recently, are unwilling to bend. Now, I can understand sticking up for yourself, but there has to be some spirit of compromise. At the current rate, the US automakers will be needing another handout in a few more years. Hopefully the economy will be stronger so that it can withstand the loss of jobs. Then Detroit can reap the rewards of gross ineptitude. And the union auto workers will be out on the streets having to earn a buck based on their own merits like everyone else.
"Maybe you're just not working at the right place. Granted, 'rightsize' is a terrible and contrived buzzword, but some people do feel a sense of pride and involvement beyond the means-to-an-end of their paycheck."
I see what you are saying, believe me. I do take pride in and enjoy my work, I like my co-workers, and I like the place I work for (recently made the switch to a nonprofit and loving it), and I can support my family. That said, I also recognize that any company will get rid of you if you ever become too expensive.
I guess it depends on how you define loyalty. It's good to be loyal in a relative sense, but at the same time you can be loyal to your own detriment. Not trying to play semantics with you.
I don't think you are belittling anything. Oh yes, absolutely COBOL programmers are making cash.
That said, I doubt they are doing anything new. I like web dev, because you get to work with emerging technologies and do new stuff. I'd be bored to death working with that old technology like that. Maybe some folks get off on writing business apps that process payroll and so on, but that isn't me.
Sure, I agree. There is plenty of built in functionality in HTML and CSS to take advantage of.
My rule is if a layer has some built in functionality, don't use another layer to simulate it. Don't use Javascript to style things that CSS can do, don't use CSS to make things that HTML already does (like classing divs to look like h1 elements) and the list goes on.
Depending on the audience and purpose of the site, make your site fail gracefully if the user agent doesn't understand javscript. Case in point, a site I did recently, http://ampedia.redbeartrading.com/ works this way. The menu is a folder tree. If you have javascript + cookies turned on then the site will remember which folders you had open and reopen them for you when you return. If no javascript, then everything will be expanded by default. Sure, you lose the convenience but you can get to the content. If you want convenience stop being a luddite and get a user-agent that does javascript. The markup on that site is semantic, so if your user-agent doesn't understand CSS the info will still be relatively well organized. How is this possible? By using default behaviour for each layer to the extent possible.
An experienced web dev knows how the layers fit together, and that's sort of to my original point: there are lot of layers that you have to know well in order to be a good web developer. HTML and CSS is the foundation of web development. But just as there is more to a house than the foundation, there is much much more to web development.
Anyone who thinks web development entails only HTML is probably still writing COBOL or RPG on some big iron. And if you think this way you definitely have penis envy about not understanding that whole "innernet" thing that all the kids are raving about these days.
As a web developer, I know how to and on a daily basis write HTML, CSS, Javascript, XSL, PHP, ASP, JSP, and SQL (several different flavors). I know how to design a database and tweak it so that it performs well. I know how to design a UI. And all that stuff in between? Yep, I know how to do that too. I know how to set up and configure a web server on Windows or *nix. So that makes me something of an sysadmin, though I do not claim to be an expert SA.
What I don't know how to do is write some lame command line program that nobody understands how to use, or some fat client app that requires an install CD and a fat manual to use. (And actually I do know how to do these things, since I cut my teeth on C, I just choose not to.)
Kind of makes your little COBOL skills or whatever you have seem kind of...well, how *do* you stay employed with so little going for you? And if you are employed, don't get too comfortable.
I don't normally reply to troll ACs, but the misconception that web development is somehow a lesser skillset is just plain obtuse and needs to stop.
I hate unions. I would never want to work at a place that has IT people in a union. I would never want to work for a union. In IT, the success of a project depends on everyone involved. If you have a bunch of lazy schlubs who are basically unfireable, then you have some sucky co-workers. That impacts you directly.
I think you are mischaracterizing non-profits. I recently started working for a nonprofit, and the people who work there are very savvy. In fact, I'd say more-so than at any large corporation I have worked for. Why? Because there seems to be more latitude at a nonprofit. Large corporations are scared of OSS and anything new. Nonprofits often have to get things done cheaply, which means exploring OSS and other newer stuff rather that blindly adhering to lame-brained technology standards (this is a.NET shop! We don't tolerate that hippie PHP stuff here!) It's easy for someone incompetent to hide at a large corporation. It's not so easy to do this at a smaller place, and nonprofit are usually much smaller than corporations.
I am in favor of part time work, but that is admittedly a real problem. The answer I have for that: a *good* IT person enjoys what he does. As such, he probably spends *some* time at home learning, hacking, reading, etc. So you don't have the time to do that at work anymore. Learning will still happen if you want it to, just maybe not as much.
I assume (and hope) you were joking. But at a place I used to work (giant telco), there was a guy who worked in IT and did just as you described.
Long story short, it caught up with him eventually. Before too long, everyone was onto him, including his boss. It took a while to fire him because, well, that's how big companies work sometimes. Meanwhile, hundreds of people were aware of what he was doing. The damage he did to his reputation will surely outweigh any benefits he gained from his dishonesty. People move around from job to job. He now has ~200 people at various IT shops who know what kind of moral character he has. Last I heard, he is working at a Home Depot driving a forklift.
And if you *weren't* joking, well...you should be banned from giving advice for the rest of your life.
depends on the worker. I'd rather have a worker who works hard for three or four days a week than the guy who works 60 hours a week and screws off the whole time. Facetime is irrelevant, productivity is king.
Can we please dispense with the euphemisms, seeing as how this is slashdot and all? "Rightsize" is just a word companies came up with to save a little face when they cut jobs.
"Company loyalty" is false, some are just better than others at hiding the fact that the company they work for doesn't define the person. You go to work to pay the bills, provide for your family, and maybe if you are in the right industry, to make the world a better place. Company loyalty only exists to the extent that a company allows you to do these things. And that's not loyalty in the true sense of the word.
I used to work for a large telco corporation (think big!) On my team, there were two women who worked three days a week. They, AFAIK, had benefits and all, but made a lot less salary. It can happen, it's all in how you ask for it.
You have to make a case for it, and you have to have a reasonable boss. Reasonable bosses are usually what happens to people who get their work done and provide value (unless your boss is hopelessly inept and doesn't esteem people who are good employees.) If you are valuable, then they'll want to keep you. If that means keeping you at half time or three days a week or whatever, then that's better than losing you totally.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope. I went there a few weeks ago because I finally found a need for an openID. The site was laughably bad. It's a nice looking site, but heavy on graphics and hype, and skimpy on facts. It was slow. And the "How do I get an OpenID" linked to a few sites I know and many that I wouldn't trust enough to lend them a dead raccoon. When I tried to log in with what they claimed was my openID, the site timed out. I gave up. Screw it, if they can't even authenticate me with the account they told me was a valid openID, then they obviously have no clue.
It's a good idea badly implemented. That website is a pile of steaming crap. Maybe they should skip all the crap on the page about "The OpenID Foundation membership has approved OpenID Provider Authentication Policy Extension 1.0 as an OpenID specification " and other crap nobody cares about and tell me, in a concise fashion, why I'd want an openID and how I can get one. Then back that up with a site that, you know, works.
Yeah, agreed on the accident-resistant bit.
besides, build a crash-proof car and some idiot sending a text while driving will just build a better crash.
Yeah, story is a waste of time. Several of the 15 slides are, by admission of the author, unrelated. Then there are like five variations of the same thing. Oh, and MSFT BOB. See, it's witty if you are 1337 enough to know about BOB.
I should have trusted my prejudice against "articles" than span 15 ad-ridden pages. What a complete waste of time.
The linked articles do not really raise any cause for concern. The title sure has a ZOMG!!! factor to it, but in reality it's just a bunch of what-ifs. Move along, nothing to see here.
well, now that you put it like that...I think I'm going home for the day, comrade :)
You are talking about people who are able to get the job done without working too hard. Nothing wrong with that because you are getting the job done, after all. Or maybe, some creative genius who cannot play by the man's rules and ends up making the world a better place even though he can't keep a job.
The guy I was talking about (and I suspect most people who would concoct a scheme to take a high paying job and do nothing for as long as possible) wasn't exactly saving humanity and he wasn't even doing any percentage of his job. He was just some dude who was too lazy to work and instead "delegated" his job to his underlings, and enforced this "delegation" by threats and bullying. Worse, what he lacked in things like coming to work and doing the stuff for which he was paid, he made up for with yelling at his employees and treating them like total crap. Nobody was sad to see him go. Everyone who worked for him was too afraid to rat him out. He was a thug.
Like I said, last I heard he is working at Home Depot driving a forklift for $10/hour and that's the fate he deserves.
In another thread of this discussion, someone criticized me for being anti company-loyalty. I am not exactly advocating working your butt off for some corporation hoping for some grand reward in the end. All I am saying is that if you are paid to do a job then do it. Failure to do so is dishonest and will most likely catch up with you. If you are inspired to do so, put your heart and soul into your work, just know you'll probably end up with nothing for it. But just do what you are being paid to do. That's just social order.
You don't go buy a gallon of milk and get home and have a half empty jug, because the dairy plant and the store knows you'll not come back and but that product. You don't pump 15 gallons of gas into your car and oh! someone tricked you and put water in the gas reservoir. You'd sue that gas station for ruining your engine. And if you are being paid $X per year to do a job, and you stay home and play with Mr. Dilly all day or fly kites or whatever, you deserve what's coming to you.
I have worked in the corporate world long enough to know that all too often the hard workers get nothing but frustration and grief while the slackers do well. I just started working for a nonprofit, and while I have no expectations of some utopian meritocracy, it is quite a bit nicer than the corporate world. There is a lot less pressure, and pressure makes people do all kinds of nasty things to each other.
OP said: "That's because you're a "web developer". If you did anything of significance (ie not in HTML), you'd know that complex programming/hardware projects require significant overtime."
That's not an implication that web development isn't a lesser skill set?
I see what you are saying, but you are assuming developing a web site/application through the full cycle isn't my job. It is my job. Doing the SQL to the UI is all my job. That's the point. If you have to create all of those layers, you need to be good at a lot of things.
Some places have total separation of concerns where everyone is specialized. I have worked at these places, and it sucks. On paper this separation of concerns is good, because it's hard to find decent people who can do a variety of things well. In reality it's a total hindrance to communication and productivity.
As a developer, I don't want to admin my server, and I am certainly no DBA. I don't want to mess with that cause I don't do it well. I need to have a DBA, like you, who knows what the heck is going on to make my app run well. I am a developer, I write code.
Meh, I don't know about that. That's a bit of a one size fits all approach, don't you think?
The data defines the UI and the UI defines the data. Sometimes all the requirements you have are UI related and you've gotta work backwards. Sometimes, it's the opposite. I think you should be able to work and think in a variety of ways.
Besides, contrary to what appears to be popular belief here, the UI is not secondary. Without users, you'd have no need for an app. Therefore, focus on the user's needs and build from there. Building a UI is just as hard, maybe harder, than building the back end data structures.
Then again, if I think about it, I do prefer to start with the DB and work outward. It's just sometimes this isn't always possible.
All good points, to be sure.
I guess I prefer making the information accessible and easy for people to consume. The plumbing is important, for sure. But I'd rather design the faucet, so to speak.
Plus, it's been so long since I have written any C it'd be like learning all over again. But I think all web developers should have experience with C or something similar. Anything to get you exposed to algorithims and some classical programming problems is a good thing. I think that's in part why web developers get a bad rap, not being exposed to those things. Even after you forget the syntax to [insert lower level language] the thinking sticks with you.
honesty != Company loyalty.
Being honest gets you ahead, if only in the long term. Plus, I believe it's the right thing to do. That's not the same thing as blind company loyalty, which agreed, is foolishness. I think you know the difference.
Working your 40 hours a week, sometimes more and sometimes less is fulfilling your obligation and being honest. Not showing up for a year or two and collecting a paycheck is just plain stealing and catches up with you in the end anyhow.
I wouldn't put the popup on the site. What I would do to workaround IE depends on the IE bug. For things like min-width and min-height you usually see javascript inserted into the CSS. I found a better hack that uses IE's busted box model to make min-width/height work. To me, some javascript hack is the last resort. All bets are off for IE, though, when it comes to working around bugs. In the end, if something works that what has to be done.
web design != web development
I can't design graphics to save my life. Photoshop, Fireworks, the Gimp, etc...voodoo if you ask me. Like, time to get out the dead chickens and perform arcane rituals.
Design is but a small part of web development.
Sure, you are correct. It's modded as flamebait because because it states that web development is *not* really software engineering.
If OP had said what you just said, he wouldn't be marked as flamebait. He wouldn't be marked as insightful, either. Now, maybe if there were a "+0 Duh" moderation you'd be in business.
"That's okay, they'll let you go and replace you with a 23-year-old straight from college who is willing to work 18 hour days for 3-4 months. No exaggeration on that - I saw it happen. Fortunately, it is usually not THAT bad."
Then I say let 'em have what they deserve. To quote a poster in my financial planner's office: "If you think a professional is expensive, wait till you hire an amateur."
That last comment didn't sound right when I re-read it. I just meant that I don't want to sound like I am arguing with you over semantics.
Fair enough...I guess what I don't like about unions is that it's one more layer of invincibility for do-nothings. Plus in my experiences, many (and I say many because I'd be wrong to make a generalization) union folks have a sense of entitlement. Yes, that can occur anywhere but it seems that unions engender that.
Case in point: the automotive unions. They are so unwilling to bend on anything they are partially (and I say partially, you've gotta put equal oarts blame on crappy product, lack of vision, and corrupt leadership) responsible for bankrupting the US automakers. Many union workers, and yes, I have spoken with some recently, are unwilling to bend. Now, I can understand sticking up for yourself, but there has to be some spirit of compromise. At the current rate, the US automakers will be needing another handout in a few more years. Hopefully the economy will be stronger so that it can withstand the loss of jobs. Then Detroit can reap the rewards of gross ineptitude. And the union auto workers will be out on the streets having to earn a buck based on their own merits like everyone else.
"Maybe you're just not working at the right place. Granted, 'rightsize' is a terrible and contrived buzzword, but some people do feel a sense of pride and involvement beyond the means-to-an-end of their paycheck."
I see what you are saying, believe me. I do take pride in and enjoy my work, I like my co-workers, and I like the place I work for (recently made the switch to a nonprofit and loving it), and I can support my family. That said, I also recognize that any company will get rid of you if you ever become too expensive.
I guess it depends on how you define loyalty. It's good to be loyal in a relative sense, but at the same time you can be loyal to your own detriment. Not trying to play semantics with you.
I don't think you are belittling anything. Oh yes, absolutely COBOL programmers are making cash.
That said, I doubt they are doing anything new. I like web dev, because you get to work with emerging technologies and do new stuff. I'd be bored to death working with that old technology like that. Maybe some folks get off on writing business apps that process payroll and so on, but that isn't me.
Sure, I agree. There is plenty of built in functionality in HTML and CSS to take advantage of.
My rule is if a layer has some built in functionality, don't use another layer to simulate it. Don't use Javascript to style things that CSS can do, don't use CSS to make things that HTML already does (like classing divs to look like h1 elements) and the list goes on.
Depending on the audience and purpose of the site, make your site fail gracefully if the user agent doesn't understand javscript. Case in point, a site I did recently, http://ampedia.redbeartrading.com/ works this way. The menu is a folder tree. If you have javascript + cookies turned on then the site will remember which folders you had open and reopen them for you when you return. If no javascript, then everything will be expanded by default. Sure, you lose the convenience but you can get to the content. If you want convenience stop being a luddite and get a user-agent that does javascript. The markup on that site is semantic, so if your user-agent doesn't understand CSS the info will still be relatively well organized. How is this possible? By using default behaviour for each layer to the extent possible.
An experienced web dev knows how the layers fit together, and that's sort of to my original point: there are lot of layers that you have to know well in order to be a good web developer. HTML and CSS is the foundation of web development. But just as there is more to a house than the foundation, there is much much more to web development.
Anyone who thinks web development entails only HTML is probably still writing COBOL or RPG on some big iron. And if you think this way you definitely have penis envy about not understanding that whole "innernet" thing that all the kids are raving about these days.
As a web developer, I know how to and on a daily basis write HTML, CSS, Javascript, XSL, PHP, ASP, JSP, and SQL (several different flavors). I know how to design a database and tweak it so that it performs well. I know how to design a UI. And all that stuff in between? Yep, I know how to do that too. I know how to set up and configure a web server on Windows or *nix. So that makes me something of an sysadmin, though I do not claim to be an expert SA.
What I don't know how to do is write some lame command line program that nobody understands how to use, or some fat client app that requires an install CD and a fat manual to use. (And actually I do know how to do these things, since I cut my teeth on C, I just choose not to.)
Kind of makes your little COBOL skills or whatever you have seem kind of...well, how *do* you stay employed with so little going for you? And if you are employed, don't get too comfortable.
I don't normally reply to troll ACs, but the misconception that web development is somehow a lesser skillset is just plain obtuse and needs to stop.
I hate unions. I would never want to work at a place that has IT people in a union. I would never want to work for a union. In IT, the success of a project depends on everyone involved. If you have a bunch of lazy schlubs who are basically unfireable, then you have some sucky co-workers. That impacts you directly.
I think you are mischaracterizing non-profits. I recently started working for a nonprofit, and the people who work there are very savvy. In fact, I'd say more-so than at any large corporation I have worked for. Why? Because there seems to be more latitude at a nonprofit. Large corporations are scared of OSS and anything new. Nonprofits often have to get things done cheaply, which means exploring OSS and other newer stuff rather that blindly adhering to lame-brained technology standards (this is a .NET shop! We don't tolerate that hippie PHP stuff here!) It's easy for someone incompetent to hide at a large corporation. It's not so easy to do this at a smaller place, and nonprofit are usually much smaller than corporations.
I am in favor of part time work, but that is admittedly a real problem. The answer I have for that: a *good* IT person enjoys what he does. As such, he probably spends *some* time at home learning, hacking, reading, etc. So you don't have the time to do that at work anymore. Learning will still happen if you want it to, just maybe not as much.
I assume (and hope) you were joking. But at a place I used to work (giant telco), there was a guy who worked in IT and did just as you described.
Long story short, it caught up with him eventually. Before too long, everyone was onto him, including his boss. It took a while to fire him because, well, that's how big companies work sometimes. Meanwhile, hundreds of people were aware of what he was doing. The damage he did to his reputation will surely outweigh any benefits he gained from his dishonesty. People move around from job to job. He now has ~200 people at various IT shops who know what kind of moral character he has. Last I heard, he is working at a Home Depot driving a forklift.
And if you *weren't* joking, well...you should be banned from giving advice for the rest of your life.
depends on the worker. I'd rather have a worker who works hard for three or four days a week than the guy who works 60 hours a week and screws off the whole time. Facetime is irrelevant, productivity is king.
Can we please dispense with the euphemisms, seeing as how this is slashdot and all? "Rightsize" is just a word companies came up with to save a little face when they cut jobs.
"Company loyalty" is false, some are just better than others at hiding the fact that the company they work for doesn't define the person. You go to work to pay the bills, provide for your family, and maybe if you are in the right industry, to make the world a better place. Company loyalty only exists to the extent that a company allows you to do these things. And that's not loyalty in the true sense of the word.
I used to work for a large telco corporation (think big!) On my team, there were two women who worked three days a week. They, AFAIK, had benefits and all, but made a lot less salary. It can happen, it's all in how you ask for it.
You have to make a case for it, and you have to have a reasonable boss. Reasonable bosses are usually what happens to people who get their work done and provide value (unless your boss is hopelessly inept and doesn't esteem people who are good employees.) If you are valuable, then they'll want to keep you. If that means keeping you at half time or three days a week or whatever, then that's better than losing you totally.