If I had a quarter for every time some guy unnecessarily kissed Ron (and now Rand) Paul's fiscally-self-satisfied ass on Slashdot, we wouldn't need fiscally conservative politicians because I could just pay for everything the country needs out of my quarter-for-every-time-someone-kissed-Ron-Paul's-ass-fund. I could be the nanny state you've always dreamed of. And all because of your figurative leg humping of the Paul family. Vote for Paul!
They don't try to improve on an idea or at least reinterpret it. They merely recreate it.
When the inhibiting factor in the use of certain types of software is cost, then the goal isn't really improving, but rather recreating, but for free. Improvements are a bonus; people will even accept deficiencies as long as the price is right. Of course, Facebook is already free, at least from a monetary perspective, so you're right.
Pretty much any time I read the word "only" in contexts such as these, it ends up being what amounts to a quickly-reached and myopic false dichotomy, as if the onlypossible options are legal/regulatory or private/technological. But perhaps, like anything else in life, the best overall solution is a combination of the best lower-level solutions, especially as the globe gets more global and things like jurisdictions and corporate partnerships get more and more nebulous.
And for what it's worth, I think you meant to write that sometimes the regulation is NOT worse than the alternative, right? Maybe I missed something.
India will always have a place (as will the Philippines, especially for support desk stuff) because of the language issues. This isn't to say that someone won't come up with an "interesting" business model serving as a communicative go-between for relatively dirt cheap Asian (read: Chinese) programmers and English-speaking business groups, but given the number of reqs. I see that stress "Excellent communicator", I think having some background in English is always going to be valuable.
I would be fine with H1Bs if they actually filled needs that weren't being met, but if you go to a site like Corp-To-Corp (or whatever you prefer), you'll see the number of companies that are willing to sponsor H1Bs for jobs like "PHP Developer, Perl Programmer, Midlevel Java Developer" and the like. If it was Bio-Genetic-Something-Or-Other, that would be one thing; there are not a lot of bio-genetic-something-or-otherists out there. But that's simply not the case with computer programmers, developers and the like.
My (now former) company simply opened multiple large IT ffices in places like Gurgaon, Mumbai and Noida, so they don't have to get H1B workers. (They were first opened as BPO offices.) American workers are slowly laid off (always in small numbers every few months) or lost by attrition, new workers are hired in those Indian offices and work for the Indian subsidiary of that company. Those offices have grown by leaps and bounds since they were first opened in 2002-3ish. So that company doesn't "outsource" anything or get any H1Bs. Whether or not that's a dirty trick is another discussion. Everyone will have their opinions.
I would say that any H1B in this economy is pretty frustrating if just based on perception (and perception tends to be reality...); I guess I just don't believe there aren't enough American workers to do those jobs.
...and the "bad guys" get away the more we enforce the constitution...
I mod you -1 for disagree.
The "problem" is that the "bad guys" really do get away with more the more we enforce the constitution. No matter your political ilk or even if you claim not to have one (riiiiiiiight...), it's easier to get away with more crap the more freedom you have. And the Constitution takes its freedom VERY seriously, something I am very happy about.
As such, the issue is really about whether or not it's better to live in a place where we live with this sort of potential for crime because it goes hand-in-hand with freedom, or whether it's worth it to forsake certain freedoms to obtain greater control over certain bad (and really bad) behaviors.
It's easy to swing ridiculously to one side, but there are good arguments on both sides, and even amongst some of the crazier fringes. Unfortunately debates about stuff like this usually devolve into (choose your favorite or select all 6!):
1 - A bunch of tools having what amounts to a libertarian pissing contest
2 - An argument about legalizing marijuana
3 - Something where someone mentions the military industrial complex (this happens regardless of the issue actually...)
4 - Some guy talking about yelling out "Fire!" in a crowded theater
5 - A bunch of thoughts that all begin with "Well, I'm an independent, but..."
6 - Someone talking about "pigs" and how evil they are, usually in relation to something someone experienced regarding #2 above
Anyhow, when you talk about "unelected, abusive, thugs" you lose credibility and hurt your own arguments (while helping the bad cops that you dislike) via your imbalance. Not every cop is an abusive thug, nor would having to elect every cop be a good idea -- mostly because you'd have a hybrid cop/politician which is a terrifying concept. Even for someone that generally supports the police like me.
imagine. one video goes viral and you are on top of the world in just a few hours. keep quality content up, and youll get subscribers in no time.
Yeah - because "viral" videos are "quality content". Whatever.
All that would do is encourage local news outlets to air the stupid or sensational kind of content that exemplifies "viral", something they already do and tell viewers "you can see this again on our website".
If it's a bridge collapse, I suppose that's one thing. If it's a dog that scares itself with its own farts, I'd say this decreases quality. The way to keep consistent viewers at the local level -- something local advertisers with real, local money desperately want and are willing to pay for, in general -- is to have pertinent, quality content given by professional broadcasters with as little bias as possible. Online "news" outlets (mini agenda mills), the alphabet affiliates (5 minutes of actual news per 30 minute broadcast) and the cable outlets (even bigger agenda mills) provide the exact opposite of these things.
Fine (although your first post was worthy of a Partially Off-Topic mod), but the internet, world wide web, or whatever you want to call it is an effectively infinite place. You really CAN go somewhere else, and it's not like going to Antarctica or the middle of a desert; it's just the same as the next place on the internet. You have options. Start your own colony and restrict who can join it, if you like. Or stop using it altogether (that's why that localhost comment, while probably meant to be a joke, was actually quite insightful, especially when coupled with your comments about "home"). Or change how you use it. Or use ad-blocking software. All this overpopulation talk is just selfishness masked as social concern. You aren't interested in the world, whether terra firma or a figurative place like the internet, to be a better place; you want it to be like it used to be. There, now I've posted my own Partially Off-Topic comment.
Will probably get modded down for suggesting such an anti-tech idea as using cash, but oh well. Karma is overrated anyway.
If Karma is overrated, why did you try to preempt getting modded down by making this statement? I hate when people do this. Please stop doing this. You made a fairly insightful post. Don't wreck it by using the "I'll probably get modded down..." thing.
So if it was unnecessarily extreme, why write it? Anyways, it doesn't matter because the VAST majority of the people that care about these issues 1) do not vote, or 2) if they do, would probably approve or be ignorant of such Draconian technological measures. I'm not an ageist, just speaking the truth. The biggest voting bloc in America (oldsters) may be less monolithic and more diverse than they get credit for, but I also think it's safe to say that as a whole they care more about how candidates deal with the AArp than the riAA.
Side note: Even if you could write-in candidates or change the voting system used in the US, millions of people every election -- perhaps including you, perhaps not -- would still be complaining. So your beef is noteworthy and well-principled, but still might be classified as whining because it would make no change in who actually gets elected, especially at the federal level. That's just my opinion, but it's not completely crazy.
Reliability. I don't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going *poof* when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT can't afford to do.
Yeah - because in that case it is great to have a bunch of notes about something that doesn't matter because it can't be restored. I jest, of course, I jest, so you don't need to respond and explain the systems and why I am wrong and you are right. Just trying to inject a small morsel of something to think about and a large morsel of levity.
See, if you would have just ended the sentence at "unemployment" instead of adding the ", mkay?" your message would have been much more effective, even with the sarcastic and pejorative "might be handy" and "zomg deficit spending is teh baaad". But providing simple information is insufficient, apparently; info must always be provided in a manner where it is clear that anyone who disagrees is unarguably a dimwit, fool, personal enemy or some variety of blind partisan.
Slashdot Mirror
If I had a quarter for every time some guy unnecessarily kissed Ron (and now Rand) Paul's fiscally-self-satisfied ass on Slashdot, we wouldn't need fiscally conservative politicians because I could just pay for everything the country needs out of my quarter-for-every-time-someone-kissed-Ron-Paul's-ass-fund. I could be the nanny state you've always dreamed of. And all because of your figurative leg humping of the Paul family. Vote for Paul!
They don't try to improve on an idea or at least reinterpret it. They merely recreate it.
When the inhibiting factor in the use of certain types of software is cost, then the goal isn't really improving, but rather recreating, but for free. Improvements are a bonus; people will even accept deficiencies as long as the price is right. Of course, Facebook is already free, at least from a monetary perspective, so you're right.
and Dunkin' Donuts regulars don't often consider actually dunking their doughnuts
Obviously. The question is whether or not they consider dunkin' their donuts.
Scientists discover new extremophiles every year
More like every day...and just by reading Slashdot.
The only solution is legal
Pretty much any time I read the word "only" in contexts such as these, it ends up being what amounts to a quickly-reached and myopic false dichotomy, as if the onlypossible options are legal/regulatory or private/technological. But perhaps, like anything else in life, the best overall solution is a combination of the best lower-level solutions, especially as the globe gets more global and things like jurisdictions and corporate partnerships get more and more nebulous.
And for what it's worth, I think you meant to write that sometimes the regulation is NOT worse than the alternative, right? Maybe I missed something.
India will always have a place (as will the Philippines, especially for support desk stuff) because of the language issues. This isn't to say that someone won't come up with an "interesting" business model serving as a communicative go-between for relatively dirt cheap Asian (read: Chinese) programmers and English-speaking business groups, but given the number of reqs. I see that stress "Excellent communicator", I think having some background in English is always going to be valuable.
I would be fine with H1Bs if they actually filled needs that weren't being met, but if you go to a site like Corp-To-Corp (or whatever you prefer), you'll see the number of companies that are willing to sponsor H1Bs for jobs like "PHP Developer, Perl Programmer, Midlevel Java Developer" and the like. If it was Bio-Genetic-Something-Or-Other, that would be one thing; there are not a lot of bio-genetic-something-or-otherists out there. But that's simply not the case with computer programmers, developers and the like.
My (now former) company simply opened multiple large IT ffices in places like Gurgaon, Mumbai and Noida, so they don't have to get H1B workers. (They were first opened as BPO offices.) American workers are slowly laid off (always in small numbers every few months) or lost by attrition, new workers are hired in those Indian offices and work for the Indian subsidiary of that company. Those offices have grown by leaps and bounds since they were first opened in 2002-3ish. So that company doesn't "outsource" anything or get any H1Bs. Whether or not that's a dirty trick is another discussion. Everyone will have their opinions.
I would say that any H1B in this economy is pretty frustrating if just based on perception (and perception tends to be reality...); I guess I just don't believe there aren't enough American workers to do those jobs.
...and the "bad guys" get away the more we enforce the constitution...
I mod you -1 for disagree.
The "problem" is that the "bad guys" really do get away with more the more we enforce the constitution. No matter your political ilk or even if you claim not to have one (riiiiiiiight...), it's easier to get away with more crap the more freedom you have. And the Constitution takes its freedom VERY seriously, something I am very happy about.
As such, the issue is really about whether or not it's better to live in a place where we live with this sort of potential for crime because it goes hand-in-hand with freedom, or whether it's worth it to forsake certain freedoms to obtain greater control over certain bad (and really bad) behaviors.
It's easy to swing ridiculously to one side, but there are good arguments on both sides, and even amongst some of the crazier fringes. Unfortunately debates about stuff like this usually devolve into (choose your favorite or select all 6!): 1 - A bunch of tools having what amounts to a libertarian pissing contest 2 - An argument about legalizing marijuana 3 - Something where someone mentions the military industrial complex (this happens regardless of the issue actually...) 4 - Some guy talking about yelling out "Fire!" in a crowded theater 5 - A bunch of thoughts that all begin with "Well, I'm an independent, but..." 6 - Someone talking about "pigs" and how evil they are, usually in relation to something someone experienced regarding #2 above
Anyhow, when you talk about "unelected, abusive, thugs" you lose credibility and hurt your own arguments (while helping the bad cops that you dislike) via your imbalance. Not every cop is an abusive thug, nor would having to elect every cop be a good idea -- mostly because you'd have a hybrid cop/politician which is a terrifying concept. Even for someone that generally supports the police like me.
I was - and still am - under the impression that you've missed the point.
imagine. one video goes viral and you are on top of the world in just a few hours. keep quality content up, and youll get subscribers in no time.
Yeah - because "viral" videos are "quality content". Whatever.
All that would do is encourage local news outlets to air the stupid or sensational kind of content that exemplifies "viral", something they already do and tell viewers "you can see this again on our website".
If it's a bridge collapse, I suppose that's one thing. If it's a dog that scares itself with its own farts, I'd say this decreases quality. The way to keep consistent viewers at the local level -- something local advertisers with real, local money desperately want and are willing to pay for, in general -- is to have pertinent, quality content given by professional broadcasters with as little bias as possible. Online "news" outlets (mini agenda mills), the alphabet affiliates (5 minutes of actual news per 30 minute broadcast) and the cable outlets (even bigger agenda mills) provide the exact opposite of these things.
Your first sentence sounds like you crafted it for a search engine.
You could (or should) also replace "Bean Counter" with "Executive", "Director" or "VP". On a more cynical day, perhaps even "SHAREHOLDER".
I can look at REAL tits, thanks.
liar
Fine (although your first post was worthy of a Partially Off-Topic mod), but the internet, world wide web, or whatever you want to call it is an effectively infinite place. You really CAN go somewhere else, and it's not like going to Antarctica or the middle of a desert; it's just the same as the next place on the internet. You have options. Start your own colony and restrict who can join it, if you like. Or stop using it altogether (that's why that localhost comment, while probably meant to be a joke, was actually quite insightful, especially when coupled with your comments about "home"). Or change how you use it. Or use ad-blocking software. All this overpopulation talk is just selfishness masked as social concern. You aren't interested in the world, whether terra firma or a figurative place like the internet, to be a better place; you want it to be like it used to be. There, now I've posted my own Partially Off-Topic comment.
a new USB enabled stapler
Look, as I've told your people before, that design is mine. I spent many years of research and development on it and I would like it back ASAP.
Will probably get modded down for suggesting such an anti-tech idea as using cash, but oh well. Karma is overrated anyway.
If Karma is overrated, why did you try to preempt getting modded down by making this statement? I hate when people do this. Please stop doing this. You made a fairly insightful post. Don't wreck it by using the "I'll probably get modded down..." thing.
Not really.
So if it was unnecessarily extreme, why write it? Anyways, it doesn't matter because the VAST majority of the people that care about these issues 1) do not vote, or 2) if they do, would probably approve or be ignorant of such Draconian technological measures. I'm not an ageist, just speaking the truth. The biggest voting bloc in America (oldsters) may be less monolithic and more diverse than they get credit for, but I also think it's safe to say that as a whole they care more about how candidates deal with the AArp than the riAA.
Side note: Even if you could write-in candidates or change the voting system used in the US, millions of people every election -- perhaps including you, perhaps not -- would still be complaining. So your beef is noteworthy and well-principled, but still might be classified as whining because it would make no change in who actually gets elected, especially at the federal level. That's just my opinion, but it's not completely crazy.
Reliability. I don't have to worry about the contents of my desk drawers and noteboard going *poof* when a system upgrade goes south and it turns out the restore process requires things IT can't afford to do.
Yeah - because in that case it is great to have a bunch of notes about something that doesn't matter because it can't be restored. I jest, of course, I jest, so you don't need to respond and explain the systems and why I am wrong and you are right. Just trying to inject a small morsel of something to think about and a large morsel of levity.
this thread would be the best place to practice using it. Wow.
After much reflection, I conclude that there is no such thing as competent management.
I'm not sure it takes much reflection to conclude that, but you still have the best post by far. I wish I had a prize to give you.
See, if you would have just ended the sentence at "unemployment" instead of adding the ", mkay?" your message would have been much more effective, even with the sarcastic and pejorative "might be handy" and "zomg deficit spending is teh baaad". But providing simple information is insufficient, apparently; info must always be provided in a manner where it is clear that anyone who disagrees is unarguably a dimwit, fool, personal enemy or some variety of blind partisan.
Either you provide social services for the dead weight, or the dead weight turns to crime, or you euthanize the dead weight.
Holy false trichotomy, Batman!
I will take that as an joke, and not an insult.
Why are all the amateur guys so fricking sensitive? (This is a serious question.)