(1) Every time your boss hands you some new responsibility ask him "which of my current responsibilities should I push to the bottom of my prioritized list so that I can take on this new responsibility?" Be persistent... he needs to provide an answer. Explain that you can only make a small number of tasks (1-3) your "top priority" and everything else will either get worked on sporadically or fall by the wayside entirely. Force him to prioritize... that's his job. Be sure to get this in writing (email).
(2) Learn to tactfully say "no". I do this ALL THE TIME at my job. I explain that my primary duty is too important to the company for me to get distracted by some additional work. I simply refuse to be assigned the work. This only works if you are really good at your core duties and are not easily replaceable. It also help if you generate revenue. (Suck on that, developers).
(3) Start looking RIGHT NOW for the job you really want. When you find it, drop this one like the stinking bag of shit it is. Life is too short to hate your job... you could get brain cancer next year and die within 18 months... why spend your time between now and then being miserable?
Nobody has mentioned DimDim, which is another good option. They have both free and paid options. I don't work for DimDim, but I've used it a few times.
> that would require appointed judges rather than elected dribbling nutcases
Please, please tell me you where high when you wrote this.
There is a state supreme court judge who lives down the street from me. At the time he was appointed by the governor (to fill a vacancy) he had quite literally never seen the inside of a courtroom. He had passed the bar several years earlier and then served as a political advisor to George "Oops I broke the world" Bush. This fool's appointment to the highest court in the state was a way for the governor to kiss up to the president. This was good for the governor and bad for 24 million people who live in his state.
I would much rather be judged by someone selected by a majority of other citizens instead of being the result of a highly political process. But, maybe you live in Illinois and you have a lot of money to spend on judges.
I once was the VP of Sales for a software company. At one point I took it upon myself to completely rewrite the EULA in plain language and then I had an attorney "lawyerize" it before making it our new license.
This is not difficult, in fact it's much easier than actually writing software. Here's the license.
Easy to read and not objectionable... eh? We put the bulleted summary at the top so that the key points would be visible in the UI.
Other companies don't do this because they choose not to.
> Apparently the EULA stated this cost and here in Germany she is > required to pay up. So I thought I would ask Slashdot, should she
> pay?
Yes, if she agreed to the EULA then she should pay. This will be considered controversial (or just plain stupid) to most Slashdot readers, so let me phrase the question in a different light:
"My friend agreed to pay someone for something. Should she pay?"
Your friend needs to learn to actually read the EULA and to not agree if she is unwilling to meet the terms of the agreement.
Um... when someone takes your $1700 and then never sends you the item you purchased that is is not "poor customer service." It is, in fact, a violation of the law.
Find some relevant section of the law and quote it via email to every contact you have at Dell. Tell them that you are reporting the situation to the Texas AG IMMEDIATELY and that you expect them to get your computer into your hands within X days or face the full penalty of the law.
I used a similar tactic recently on a cellphone provider and received a prompt and personal resolution.
First of all, what ever price you think is reasonable for your efforts, you should at least double it. I find that developers, while very proud, frequently underestimate the monetary value of their work.
Second, you should realize that in most states (I assume you are in the US) merely agreeing not to compete isn't actually legal. But if they write the contract correctly and they pay you specifically not to compete, then it can be binding. The term of the non-compete should not be "forever"... between one and three years after you stop working for them is reasonable and "reasonable" is one of the expectation for a valid agreement. Spin this a benefit "to them"... after all don't they want a legally valid agreement? See a lawyer for details here.
If they really want an evergreen (ie, perpetual) non-compete, then pick an annual fee for your non-competition and give them the offer of paying you annually, forever, to not work on this project. (You lucky sob).
If you really are torn over this, then imagine a ridiculous, potentially life-changing price for the work in question plus the non-compete and propose this price to the company. If they agree, then go for it. Sometimes in life your priorities change... that's not selling out.
BTW... it might not be so easy to see now, but there will be lots of interesting oss projects to work on during your lifetime.
No, I don't think you will see any last minute, bi-partisan efforts to fix this. Here's why:
(1) The Texas Legislature is not in session. The governor can call a special session, which would require the legislators to return to Austin from their homes, but...
(2) The Democrats, Libertarians and Independents in the house will refuse to return for the special session because they all benefit from this. Without the non-Republicans the legislature would not have a quorum and will not be able to hold a special session. They did this a few years ago when the Republicans tried to re-district the state and it worked well enough for several weeks.
Texas is a "sure win" state for McCain, who would pick up all of the states' 34 electoral votes. If Texas is removed from play, McCain would have to win every single "toss-up" state to win with 271 votes.
In other words, if Bob Barr's suit works, McCain is screwed and Obama should start packing up his house because he's moving in January.
P.S. I live in Austin and I follow these matters closely.
I test everyone during job interviews, but it's not always obvious.
At one point we were looking to hire a new bookkeeper. This person would know every employee's salary, how much stock each person held, etc. So I decided to test candidates by trying to gently the coerce the person into revealing something told to them in confidence. If a candidate told me a secret they were eliminated.
I often test sales people by asking them technology questions. As soon as the candidate starts bs-ing their way through the discussion, they are eliminated. (The correct answer is "I don't know.")
I test candidates for junior positions by requiring them to submit their resume in PDF format. Anyone who sends in a Word files get eliminated because they have not demonstrated an ability to follow instructions.
So, please quit whining about being asked to take a test... at least you know you are being tested.
Note that none of these sources make mention of cannon fodder returning from battle with tactical information, as you suggest.
"Cannon fodder" is almost always used to describe a massive force of soldiers with no individual identities (ie, the stormtroopers in Star Wars.)
The phrase "cannon fodder" has never been used (correctly) in reference to one, high value fighter (aka, the "big gun")whose commanders expect will prevail in battle.
Hence, I stand by original statement that "cannon fodder" has been misused.
For the record, I can debate this point all weekend, if that's what it takes.
it is highly unlikely the judge will allow himself to be misled again, no matter who the RIAA brings in as cannon fodder on Monday.
Hey, I know the author is just a simple ol' country lawyer, but this sentence makes no sense. If the RIAA is bringing in "the big gun" then they are not bringing in "cannon fodder."
The phrase cannon fodder is defined as "soldiers regarded merely as material to be expended in war." The term is usually used to describe a large force of poorly trained and poorly armed soldiers whose tactical value is that their slaughter consumes enemy resources. A good example of this is Zapp Brannigan's troops vesus the Killbots in Futurama.
As I constantly telling 12 year olds on Xbox Live, please don't use words if you are not sure what they mean.
I live in Texas and was really upset when I read the Slashdot headline and the PC Magazine article.
Then I read the actually law. It probably applies to forensic data recovery techs, but if the screen on my MacBook Air goes out I am not concerned about having to find a licensed private investigator to repair it for me.
I don't see a problem because I don't see a problem.
While "losing data" is a figure of speech that I also use, but it's not accurate and doesn't apply here. The bits don't fall out of the hard drive, requiring the service of a bloodhound to find where they are hiding.
In other words: "Extracting data from a damaged hard drive" does not count as "finding lost data."
I am not a lawyer, this is just my opinion.
For the record, I live in the Texas and I am not losing any sleep over this.
Folks, calm down. The fault here seems to lie with the person who wrote the newspaper article. I read the Texas law in question and I don't see a problem.
Here's the important passage:
---- INVESTIGATIONS COMPANY. (a) A person acts as an investigations company for the purposes of this chapter if the person:
(1) engages in the business of obtaining or furnishing, or accepts employment to obtain or furnish, information
related to:
(A) crime or wrongs done or threatened against a state or the United States;
(B) the identity, habits, business, occupation,knowledge, efficiency, loyalty, movement, location, affiliations, associations, transactions, acts, reputation, or character of a person;
(C) the location, disposition, or recovery of lost or stolen property; or
(D) the cause or responsibility for a fire, libel, loss, accident, damage, or injury to a person or to property;
(2) engages in the business of securing, or accepts employment to secure, evidence for use before a court, board, officer, or investigating committee;
(3) engages in the business of securing, or accepts employment to secure, the electronic tracking of the location of an individual or motor vehicle other than for criminal justice purposes by or on behalf of a governmental entity; or
(4) engages in the business of protecting, or accepts employment to protect, an individual from bodily harm through the use of a personal protection officer.
(b) For purposes of Subsection (a)(1), obtaining or furnishing information includes information obtained or furnished through the review and analysis of, and the investigation into the content of, computer-based data not available to the public. ----
I don't see how the applies to computer repair shops.
I searched the entire text and found only two instances of the word "repair", both in reference to the repair of "security devices" and the word "computer" is only used once in the entire document (in the last sentence of the passage above.)
The "PC Magazine" story cites as it's source a "Dallas-Ft. Worth CW Affiliate." That affiliate published a story penned by: "Pelpina Trip, KDAF33 News at Nine Intern"
It looks like you have all been riled up into a foamy froth by AN INTERN AT A LOCAL TV NEWS OUTFIT.
This article lost all credibility for me when I read the phrase "MS Outlook with Exchange is a fine product."
Exchange and Outlook are hideous products with terrible usability and bizarre/unexpected behavior.
I say this as a relatively new user of both products, having recently joined a company where they are the standard, coming from a company where they were not used.
Outlook, in particular, is a crime against humanity.
I see a lot of cracks on slashdot belittling marketing people in the software business, but if this guy had a decent marketing person he never would have made these stupid mistakes.
Just to clarify, what Mono supports is VB.NET. According to the article, a VB.NET application can be moved to any platform that Mono supports and it will just run. That is very cool.
What Mono does not support is the migration of Windows applications written using Visual Basic 6 or earlier. The solution for that problem is REALbasic, a cross-platform RAD tool that is similar to VB6 and runs on Linux, Windows and Mac OS X. REALbasic compiles native executables for each platform from a single code base.
Here's what the Mono guys say about it: "REALbasic is a great tool for Linux," stated Miguel de Icaza, vice president of developer platforms for Novell. "Where Mono focuses on bringing.NET applications to Linux, REALbasic migrates Basic applications to Linux." http://opensource.sys-con.com/read/244039.htm
Your friend should ask a lawyer at his company how to handle this situation. If there is a possibility that the "sensitive company data " includes personal data from customers, employees, etc. then the company may be legally required to inform all of the people potentially affected of the situation. The law here has been changing quickly at the state and national level, and I am not a lawyer, so the best advice is to ask a lawyer.
In other words, this is not merely an IT problem, it is a PR problem and probably a legal problem. The company that lost the data probably pays a lot of people to be experts those fields, so your friend should consult with them, not us.
Lesson #1: >> Don't correct people, unless you know what the hell you are talking about. > > It appears that you also missed a comma in the above quote, I took the liberty of adding it.
You took the liberty of adding a comma incorrectly. Here's the comma lesson of the day for you. "Information that is unnecessary to the meaning of the sentence must be set off and enclosed by commas. If the information is necessary, no commas should be used." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma_(punctuation)
The phrase "unless you know what the hell you are talking about" is necessary to the meaning of the sentence so the comma you added is incorrect.
Lesson #2: >> And, by the way, I think "slashdot" is spelled with an "sl", not an "sh". > > Actually, I believe it would be: > > And, by the way, I think "slashdot" is spelled with a "sl", not a "sh".
I really like the part where Gates says "I would appreciate letters from any one who wants to pay up," but doesn't actually tell the reader what the price is for the stolen software.
Slashdot Mirror
(1)
Every time your boss hands you some new responsibility ask him "which of my current responsibilities should I push to the bottom of my prioritized list so that I can take on this new responsibility?" Be persistent... he needs to provide an answer. Explain that you can only make a small number of tasks (1-3) your "top priority" and everything else will either get worked on sporadically or fall by the wayside entirely. Force him to prioritize... that's his job. Be sure to get this in writing (email).
(2)
Learn to tactfully say "no". I do this ALL THE TIME at my job. I explain that my primary duty is too important to the company for me to get distracted by some additional work. I simply refuse to be assigned the work. This only works if you are really good at your core duties and are not easily replaceable. It also help if you generate revenue. (Suck on that, developers).
(3)
Start looking RIGHT NOW for the job you really want. When you find it, drop this one like the stinking bag of shit it is. Life is too short to hate your job... you could get brain cancer next year and die within 18 months... why spend your time between now and then being miserable?
Nobody has mentioned DimDim, which is another good option. They have both free and paid options. I don't work for DimDim, but I've used it a few times.
It works well and it's free.
> that would require appointed judges rather than elected dribbling nutcases
Please, please tell me you where high when you wrote this.
There is a state supreme court judge who lives down the street from me. At the time he was appointed by the governor (to fill a vacancy) he had quite literally never seen the inside of a courtroom. He had passed the bar several years earlier and then served as a political advisor to George "Oops I broke the world" Bush. This fool's appointment to the highest court in the state was a way for the governor to kiss up to the president. This was good for the governor and bad for 24 million people who live in his state.
I would much rather be judged by someone selected by a majority of other citizens instead of being the result of a highly political process. But, maybe you live in Illinois and you have a lot of money to spend on judges.
You were not laid off, you numbnuts. You were fired.
This is not difficult, in fact it's much easier than actually writing software. Here's the license.
Easy to read and not objectionable... eh? We put the bulleted summary at the top so that the key points would be visible in the UI.
Other companies don't do this because they choose not to.
> required to pay up. So I thought I would ask Slashdot, should she
> pay?
Yes, if she agreed to the EULA then she should pay. This will be considered controversial (or just plain stupid) to most Slashdot readers, so let me phrase the question in a different light:
"My friend agreed to pay someone for something. Should she pay?"
Your friend needs to learn to actually read the EULA and to not agree if she is unwilling to meet the terms of the agreement.
Um... when someone takes your $1700 and then never sends you the item you purchased that is is not "poor customer service." It is, in fact, a violation of the law.
Here's two important links for you:
Texas Attorney General Consumer Complaints
http://www.oag.state.tx.us/consumer/complain.shtml
Texas State Statutes:
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/
Look under "statutes" for 'Business and Commerce Code".
Find some relevant section of the law and quote it via email to every contact you have at Dell. Tell them that you are reporting the situation to the Texas AG IMMEDIATELY and that you expect them to get your computer into your hands within X days or face the full penalty of the law.
I used a similar tactic recently on a cellphone provider and received a prompt and personal resolution.
Good luck.
First of all, what ever price you think is reasonable for your efforts, you should at least double it. I find that developers, while very proud, frequently underestimate the monetary value of their work.
Second, you should realize that in most states (I assume you are in the US) merely agreeing not to compete isn't actually legal. But if they write the contract correctly and they pay you specifically not to compete, then it can be binding. The term of the non-compete should not be "forever"... between one and three years after you stop working for them is reasonable and "reasonable" is one of the expectation for a valid agreement. Spin this a benefit "to them"... after all don't they want a legally valid agreement? See a lawyer for details here.
If they really want an evergreen (ie, perpetual) non-compete, then pick an annual fee for your non-competition and give them the offer of paying you annually, forever, to not work on this project. (You lucky sob).
If you really are torn over this, then imagine a ridiculous, potentially life-changing price for the work in question plus the non-compete and propose this price to the company. If they agree, then go for it. Sometimes in life your priorities change... that's not selling out.
BTW... it might not be so easy to see now, but there will be lots of interesting oss projects to work on during your lifetime.
No, I don't think you will see any last minute, bi-partisan efforts to fix this. Here's why:
(1) The Texas Legislature is not in session. The governor can call a special session, which would require the legislators to return to Austin from their homes, but...
(2) The Democrats, Libertarians and Independents in the house will refuse to return for the special session because they all benefit from this. Without the non-Republicans the legislature would not have a quorum and will not be able to hold a special session. They did this a few years ago when the Republicans tried to re-district the state and it worked well enough for several weeks.
Texas is a "sure win" state for McCain, who would pick up all of the states' 34 electoral votes. If Texas is removed from play, McCain would have to win every single "toss-up" state to win with 271 votes.
In other words, if Bob Barr's suit works, McCain is screwed and Obama should start packing up his house because he's moving in January.
P.S. I live in Austin and I follow these matters closely.
I test everyone during job interviews, but it's not always obvious.
At one point we were looking to hire a new bookkeeper. This person would know every employee's salary, how much stock each person held, etc. So I decided to test candidates by trying to gently the coerce the person into revealing something told to them in confidence. If a candidate told me a secret they were eliminated.
I often test sales people by asking them technology questions. As soon as the candidate starts bs-ing their way through the discussion, they are eliminated. (The correct answer is "I don't know.")
I test candidates for junior positions by requiring them to submit their resume in PDF format. Anyone who sends in a Word files get eliminated because they have not demonstrated an ability to follow instructions.
So, please quit whining about being asked to take a test... at least you know you are being tested.
In fact, it is hoped that some will survive in order to return information about enemy capabilities.
Would you mind citing your sources for this statement?
My sources are:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cannon+fodder
http://martiallaw911.info/glossary.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannon_fodder
Note that none of these sources make mention of cannon fodder returning from battle with tactical information, as you suggest.
"Cannon fodder" is almost always used to describe a massive force of soldiers with no individual identities (ie, the stormtroopers in Star Wars.)
The phrase "cannon fodder" has never been used (correctly) in reference to one, high value fighter (aka, the "big gun")whose commanders expect will prevail in battle.
Hence, I stand by original statement that "cannon fodder" has been misused.
For the record, I can debate this point all weekend, if that's what it takes.
The issue here isn't grammar, it is word choice.
And it is not a trivial point... when someone use the completely wrong word (like you just did) it significantly dilutes the power of his message.
In your case, the incorrect usage of the word "grammar" turns your entire message into an ironic piece of unintentional humor.
I appreciate your acknowledging my point, but I still think there is some lack of clarity on the use of the term "cannon fodder."
The phase "cannon fodder" refers to a large mass of people, not one guy. And the phrase "unintentional cannon fodder" makes no sense at all.
Go watch the opening 10 minutes of Saving Private Ryan... much of the Allied force landing at Normandy became "cannon fodder" for the Germans.
otherwise have been had they brought in the original cannon fodder
Nope, it doesn't work that way. Cannon fodder isn't reusable. You can only wipe out a group of people once, not over and over again.
it is highly unlikely the judge will allow himself to be misled again, no matter who the RIAA brings in as cannon fodder on Monday.
Hey, I know the author is just a simple ol' country lawyer, but this sentence makes no sense. If the RIAA is bringing in "the big gun" then they are not bringing in "cannon fodder."
The phrase cannon fodder is defined as "soldiers regarded merely as material to be expended in war." The term is usually used to describe a large force of poorly trained and poorly armed soldiers whose tactical value is that their slaughter consumes enemy resources. A good example of this is Zapp Brannigan's troops vesus the Killbots in Futurama.
As I constantly telling 12 year olds on Xbox Live, please don't use words if you are not sure what they mean.
I live in Texas and was really upset when I read the Slashdot headline and the PC Magazine article.
Then I read the actually law. It probably applies to forensic data recovery techs, but if the screen on my MacBook Air goes out I am not concerned about having to find a licensed private investigator to repair it for me.
I don't see a problem because I don't see a problem.
> Somebody loses data on their hard drive.
While "losing data" is a figure of speech that I also use, but it's not accurate and doesn't apply here. The bits don't fall out of the hard drive, requiring the service of a bloodhound to find where they are hiding.
In other words:
"Extracting data from a damaged hard drive" does not count as "finding lost data."
I am not a lawyer, this is just my opinion.
For the record, I live in the Texas and I am not losing any sleep over this.
Folks, calm down. The fault here seems to lie with the person who wrote the newspaper article. I read the Texas law in question and I don't see a problem.
Here's the important passage:
----
INVESTIGATIONS COMPANY. (a) A person acts
as an investigations company for the purposes of this chapter if the
person:
(1) engages in the business of obtaining or furnishing, or accepts employment to obtain or furnish, information
related to:
(A) crime or wrongs done or threatened against a state or the United States;
(B) the identity, habits, business, occupation,knowledge, efficiency, loyalty, movement, location, affiliations, associations, transactions, acts, reputation, or character of a person;
(C) the location, disposition, or recovery of lost or stolen property; or
(D) the cause or responsibility for a fire, libel, loss, accident, damage, or injury to a person or to property;
(2) engages in the business of securing, or accepts employment to secure, evidence for use before a court, board, officer, or investigating committee;
(3) engages in the business of securing, or accepts employment to secure, the electronic tracking of the location of an
individual or motor vehicle other than for criminal justice purposes by or on behalf of a governmental entity; or
(4) engages in the business of protecting, or accepts employment to protect, an individual from bodily harm through the use of a personal protection officer.
(b) For purposes of Subsection (a)(1), obtaining or furnishing information includes information obtained or furnished through the review and analysis of, and the investigation into the content of, computer-based data not available to the public.
----
I don't see how the applies to computer repair shops.
I searched the entire text and found only two instances of the word "repair", both in reference to the repair of "security devices" and the word "computer" is only used once in the entire document (in the last sentence of the passage above.)
The "PC Magazine" story cites as it's source a "Dallas-Ft. Worth CW Affiliate." That affiliate published a story penned by:
"Pelpina Trip, KDAF33 News at Nine Intern"
It looks like you have all been riled up into a foamy froth by AN INTERN AT A LOCAL TV NEWS OUTFIT.
Do you feel foolish yet?
By "broken" do you mean "not yet out of beta"? It's a work in progress so please quit your bitching.
Exchange and Outlook are hideous products with terrible usability and bizarre/unexpected behavior.
I say this as a relatively new user of both products, having recently joined a company where they are the standard, coming from a company where they were not used.
Outlook, in particular, is a crime against humanity.
I see a lot of cracks on slashdot belittling marketing people in the software business, but if this guy had a decent marketing person he never would have made these stupid mistakes.
What Mono does not support is the migration of Windows applications written using Visual Basic 6 or earlier. The solution for that problem is REALbasic, a cross-platform RAD tool that is similar to VB6 and runs on Linux, Windows and Mac OS X. REALbasic compiles native executables for each platform from a single code base.
Here's what the Mono guys say about it: .NET applications to Linux, REALbasic migrates Basic applications to Linux."
"REALbasic is a great tool for Linux," stated Miguel de Icaza, vice president of developer platforms for Novell. "Where Mono focuses on bringing
http://opensource.sys-con.com/read/244039.htm
REALbasic Standard Edition for Linux is free as in beer.
Get it here: http://www.realbasic.com/download/
Your friend should ask a lawyer at his company how to handle this situation. If there is a possibility that the "sensitive company data " includes personal data from customers, employees, etc. then the company may be legally required to inform all of the people potentially affected of the situation. The law here has been changing quickly at the state and national level, and I am not a lawyer, so the best advice is to ask a lawyer.
In other words, this is not merely an IT problem, it is a PR problem and probably a legal problem. The company that lost the data probably pays a lot of people to be experts those fields, so your friend should consult with them, not us.
Lesson #1:
>> Don't correct people, unless you know what the hell you are talking about.
>
> It appears that you also missed a comma in the above quote, I took the liberty of adding it.
You took the liberty of adding a comma incorrectly. Here's the comma lesson of the day for you. "Information that is unnecessary to the meaning of the sentence must be set off and enclosed by commas. If the information is necessary, no commas should be used." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma_(punctuation)
The phrase "unless you know what the hell you are talking about" is necessary to the meaning of the sentence so the comma you added is incorrect.
Lesson #2:
>> And, by the way, I think "slashdot" is spelled with an "sl", not an "sh".
>
> Actually, I believe it would be:
>
> And, by the way, I think "slashdot" is spelled with a "sl", not a "sh".
Wrong again.
The rule here is to use "an" before any word that starts with a vowel sound, such as "an hour." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A%2C_an
The word fragment "sl" is pronounced "ess-el," thus the use of "an" is correct.
To recap, don't correct people unless you know what the hell you are talking about. (Note the correct use of the comma.)
I really like the part where Gates says "I would appreciate letters from any one
who wants to pay up," but doesn't actually tell the reader what the price is for
the stolen software.
> In reply to the grand parent post it is actually a spelling mistake not a grammer mistake
I think you meant to say:
"In reply to the grandparent post, it is actually a spelling mistake not a grammar mistake."
Note the proper spelling of "grandparent" and "grammar" and the proper use of the comma.
Don't correct people unless you know what the hell you are talking about.
And, by the way, I think "slashdot" is spelled with an "sl", not an "sh".
--
Quag