It is a big deal because this is YOUR money these people are getting paid with, and they are not doing the job they are being paid for, and entrusted with.
"Private-time" sexual behavior is one thing - surfing porn, cheating, "wide stances", and even (arguably) paying for escort services on your own time, and on your own dime, is one thing. Doing it when you're being paid to do a job is unacceptable, no matter who you work for, and who sits in the oval office.
I'm sorry, but if you're not outraged about this sort of behavior on the taxpayers' dime, you're an idiot. It's not a "blame Obama" or "blame Bush" response - it's a fire the sons of bitches and make sure this doesn't happen again response, coupled with a make sure the SEC is doing its fucking job response.
I don't blame Bush, I don't blame Obama - neither of them were showing up in these guys' offices with a tube of Intensive Care lotion saying, "Here, let me help you with that so you don't get chafed." The people surfing porn on government time & government computers (both paid for at the expense of taxpayers) are responsible, and they should be turfed out immediately.
There is nothing that makes this okay, regardless of who's in the Oval Office. The only thing that's "not news" about this is that one side or the other is attempting to use it for political gain. That was a shocker I didn't see coming.
Can you tell me what the important differences are between mitochondrial DNA and nuclear DNA? Can you tell me what standard chemotherapy protocol is for stage 2 adenocarcinoma of the lung?
Can you tell me how maintenance of a Continuosly Variable Transmission would differ from maintenance of a standard manual transmission?
Can you give me a quick summary of the current laws regarding possession of a firearm in Boston, Massachusetts?
The key to having a successful professional career is not in walking around with a set of facts glued into your skull. The key to having a successful professional career is in being able to learn, adapt, and understand new technologies and research, and apply those things to your work. This is not unique to software engineering.
I'm sorry you think learning the syntax and nuances of a new programming language is inordinately more difficult than staying current with case law relevant to your field of law, or medical research & treatment best practices relevant to your medical specialty, or the functional details of new automotive technologies like gas-electric hybrid engines and electronic control systems.
Perhaps software engineering just isn't a profession you're cut out for. Since medicine, law, and auto repair all seem to be much easier in your estimation, perhaps you'd find more satisfaction in those fields.
Sure, nobody wants root exploits in their software, and that's what's required to jailbreak an iPhone. If you're concerned about having the ability to update your firmware, I'd submit that the iPhone and jailbreaking it so you can run Android probably aren't the best means for accomplishing your goal of having a completely open phone that you can do whatever you want with.
1) "Is apple going to let me use it:" Sure, you can use it. You'll void your warranty, but once you've bought the hardware, if you want to smash it with a hammer or load something else on it, they're not going to waste time and effort chasing you down.
2) "Will there be any installed user base?" I predict this will be wildly popular among the couple thousand android enthusiasts who would bother to purchase an iphone. In short, "not really".
No, Apple has made it so you can't load some stupid "iJiggle" boob app on your iphone through their official channels.
The web still works just fine; video still works just fine. Rip Porn DVDs, or visit any of the multitude of mobile porn sites, and you can quite easily view X-rated content with your iphone.
While I agree that the restriction on "adult" apps is silly (implement a parental control system and ratings on the apps), did you REALLY need a pair of cartoon tits in an application on your phone when there's plenty of audio, video, and photographic porn that's available right in your browser? I guess I don't miss it because I wouldn't have bothered to buy any of those apps in the first place, I can get my porn by browsing if I really want it.
see, obviously you are just a manager who thinks he knows programming.
You are wrong. But I can play this game too: You are obviously just a code drone who thinks he knows programming, and so he thinks it must be the "hardest thing in the world" to learn new languages, new systems, new architectures, and new external packages and interfaces. It's also clear that you think that you should be treated like a rock star because you have a couple years of Java programming experience. Whoop-de-fucking-doo, get some perspective.
Your vapid and senseless assertions about programmers being the equivalent of slave labor because they need to learn new things constantly to stay current with the state of the art are just that: vapid, and senseless. It's a common phenomenon - people like to assume that they have it worse than anybody else. It's generally not the case.
Maybe that wasn't the point, but it's what about 50% of the commentary in this thread amounts to: assholes high-fiving each other over how smart and with it they are because they're not like some poor delusional schizophrenic woman, and making jokes about aliens and "hurr hurr it sounds like it would be fun to have a microchip in my taint."
Another 25% seem to be about how this is "such a waste of time," which absolutely floors me to read here on Slashdot. That a group which seems in many other threads to be mostly comprised of tinfoil-hatted conspiracy theorist nutjobs would think that the GA legislature passing a law which prohibits anybody from forcibly implanting you with a microchip is a "waste of time" or pointless is shocking.
The remainder of the comments seem to be along the lines of "Well of course, GA is full of backwards right-wing jesus freaks who fuck their sisters, so of course they'd do that."
Citation needed for being stoned on weed making you a worse driver, please.
USDOT Study. Their conclusion is that it doesn't make you "as bad" a driver as alcohol or other drugs, but that it does impair driving performance, and as such, does pose some safety concern, though should be considered secondary to the risks of alcohol impairment. From the linked article:
In summary, this program of research has shown that marijuana, when taken alone, produces a moderate degree of driving impairment which is related to the consumed THC dose. The impairment manifests itself mainly in the ability to maintain a steady lateral position on the road, but its magnitude is not exceptional in comparison with changes produced by many medicinal drugs and alcohol. Drivers under the influence of marijuana retain insight in their performance and will compensate where they can, for example, by slowing down or increasing effort. As a consequence, THC's adverse effects on driving performance appear relatively small. Still we can easily imagine situations where the influence of marijuana smoking might have an exceedingly dangerous effect; i.e., emergency situations which put high demands on the driver's information processing capacity, prolonged monotonous driving, and after THC has been taken with other drugs, especially alcohol. We therefore agree with Moskowitz' conclusion that "any situation in which safety both for self and others depends upon alertness and capability of control of man-machine interaction precludes the use of marijuana". However, the magnitude of marijuana's, relative to many other drugs', effects also justify Gieringer's (1988) conclusion that "marijuana impairment presents a real, but secondary, safety risk; and that alcohol is the leading drug-related accident risk factor". Of the many psychotropic drugs, licit and illicit, that are available and used by people who subsequently drive, marijuana may well be among the least harmful. Campaigns to discourage the use of marijuana by drivers are certainly warranted. But concentrating a campaign on marijuana alone may not be in proportion to the safety problem it causes.
Then "drinking two beers and driving home" is not a crime at all, and the GP is just talking out his ass.
You may disagree that 2 beers makes you drunk, but if you have a BAC of 0.08%, you are legally drunk, and you are demonstrably impaired.
And I know plenty of people who would (and some who HAVE) claim "I only had 2 beers!" to police no matter how long they were at the bar and how much they drank.
It would, but since paying a tattoo parlor money to put a tattoo on you is a voluntary activity, they wouldn't run afoul of the law, and so have no need to worry.
I'm not sure I understand your objection - is it that you think implanting people with microchips wouldn't be a problem, or only that it's not a problem yet, because no companies have started requiring it as a condition of employment?
Maim:
1 : to commit the felony of mayhem upon
2 : to mutilate, disfigure, or wound seriously.
Explain how "implanting a microchip" constitutes "maiming"? Does it cause pain? probably. Could it have negative effects? Certainly. Does it result in long term loss of a limb or limbs or other severe disfigurement? Not so much.
Having a limb blown off by a roadside bomb = maiming. Being run down by a drunk driver and losing a limb, or being permanently disfigured as a result = maiming. Having a rice-grain sized microchip embedded under your skin = painful, uncomfortable, but not maiming.
Let's get some perspective. I know everybody loves to protest unfair drug laws, but implanting a microchip is not equivalent to maiming any more than slapping someone is equivalent to first degree murder.
Depends on the alcohol content of the beer, how fast it was consumed, the person doing the consuming, and a host of other factors - you cannot correctly make this claim without a host of additional stipulations. What's more, the OP stated that "driving home after two beers is a worse crime" - it's only a crime if you're legally drunk. So we can reasonably assume that the OP was talking about a situation where two beers is enough to get you drunk, which is to say - at least here in the US - that you have a blood alcohol content of 0.08%. If two beers is not enough to put you to that limit, then you have committed no crime, and your case is not covered by his claim that "driving home after two beers" is a crime.
Unless you'd care to argue that alertness, coordination, concentration and depth perception are not required to operate a vehicle safely, it makes plenty of sense to tell people that they may not operate a vehicle when they're impaired, and to set up harsh consequences to dissuade them from doing so. Operating a vehicle with those faculties impaired makes you "more likely" to kill or severely injure yourself and others, and also increases the risk that you will do significant property damage as well.
Foolish is to compare any other profession in sense of the keep-up effort with the programming domain.
I'm sorry - why is that foolish? Because you have a preconceived notion that "programming r harder"? Your assertion that programming is the only profession which requires constant study & "keeping up" doesn't make it a fact.
just give me a single example where the domain change is so heterogeneous and fast paced as the IT/programming is and would suffice.
I cited 3 examples of professions which require significant amounts of learning, retraining, and continuous self-development. I'll repeat them: Law. Medicine. Auto mechanic. Any other sort of biotech / biomedical field. Anybody entering into any of these professions is going to need to continuously study and learn the new "state of the art" to stay current. Programming is not unique in this regard.
exactly because of this crazy fast paced change rate the cheapest solution for the employers is to switch the onus on the employee.
Given that learning is an active process which requires effort on the part of the employee, I don't see why this is cause for alarm or why you'd expect this to be any different. If you need to learn to stay current, it *is* your responsibility to do so, the company can encourage you to do so, but ultimately it's your responsibility to do the learning. They can't "make you" learn new technologies, methods, and practices.
Yes, because emailing the very well known CEO of a company (who is known to both read & respond to customer emails) about what is one of the biggest breach of product secrecy they've ever had, and expect him to perhaps have somebody look at that claim...
That's totally far-fetched. You're right. It never would've worked. The only reasonable thing to do is to sell it Gizmodo for $5k.
Will a link directly to the relevant California Civil Code sections suffice as a citation? Specifically, Section 2080.1, which reads:
2080.1. (a) If the owner is unknown or has not claimed the property, the person saving or finding the property shall, if the
property is of the value of one hundred dollars ($100) or more, within a reasonable time turn the property over to the police department of the city or city and county, if found therein, or to
the sheriff's department of the county if found outside of city limits, and shall make an affidavit, stating when and where he or she
found or saved the property, particularly describing it.
I know what Gizmodo "says" happened, I read their article. I also know that the California law is very clear on this issue, and that "selling the found property to Gizmodo" is not a reasonable second step under that law.
One who finds lost property under circumstances which give him knowledge of or means of inquiry as to the true owner, and who appropriates such property to his own use, or to the use of another person not entitled thereto, without first making reasonable and just efforts to find the owner and to restore the property to him, is guilty of theft.
So there's a pretty strong argument that the finder is also guilty of theft.
And if you're unable to contact or find the owner, CA law also indicates that you are then to turn it in to the local police, who will make an attempt to contact the owner for a certain amount of time. IF, after that time, no owner has claimed the property, possession may be given to the person who found it and turned it in.
It looks to me like the guy who "found" it (note that Gizmodo says, "We didn't know it was stolen when we bought it!") made a half-hearted attempt to contact apple, despite having the engineer's facebook page & name, and then decided, "Well fuck it, I might as well make some cash for myself."
At BEST (assuming they really didn't believe it was stolen), It's scummy journnalistic practice by Gizmodo and unethical behavior on the part of the person who found it. At worst, Gizmodo & the finder have both broken several laws relating to finding "lost" property, and let's also not forget that this would probably fall under the protection offered by the Uniform Trade Secrets Act in California, which also would seem to have some relevance in this case.
Yes, and you work on that phone for a couple years, and pretty much can write your ticket to any other mobile device company you want to work at.
Given that he was out getting pissed on good German beer, I think it's likely that he hasn't "thrown away his entire social life" to work on a mobile phone. The hours are long, but if - as an engineer - the work is something you enjoy, then why not work your ass off when you're young and don't have the responsibilities of a home, family, etc. to keep up with as well?
Good luck building your resume... I, for one, would like to look back on my life when I'm on my deathbed thinking I had the time of my life, met awesome people, did awesome things and had a lot of fun.
And that can't be done while working on one of the hottest tech products around? Some people actually enjoy the work they do, work with awesome people, and would call "being a major contributor to a device that tens of millions of people around the world use for hours every day," "pretty awesome."
You seem to view work as something which must be dull, boring, and soul-crushing. I feel sorry for you, if that's the type of work you do.
So if he's fired, it's evidence that Apple are a bunch of heartless pricks. If he's not fired, it's evidence that the conspiracy theorists are correct.
Sir, I like your ideas and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Slashdot Mirror
It is a big deal because this is YOUR money these people are getting paid with, and they are not doing the job they are being paid for, and entrusted with.
"Private-time" sexual behavior is one thing - surfing porn, cheating, "wide stances", and even (arguably) paying for escort services on your own time, and on your own dime, is one thing. Doing it when you're being paid to do a job is unacceptable, no matter who you work for, and who sits in the oval office.
I'm sorry, but if you're not outraged about this sort of behavior on the taxpayers' dime, you're an idiot. It's not a "blame Obama" or "blame Bush" response - it's a fire the sons of bitches and make sure this doesn't happen again response, coupled with a make sure the SEC is doing its fucking job response.
I don't blame Bush, I don't blame Obama - neither of them were showing up in these guys' offices with a tube of Intensive Care lotion saying, "Here, let me help you with that so you don't get chafed." The people surfing porn on government time & government computers (both paid for at the expense of taxpayers) are responsible, and they should be turfed out immediately.
There is nothing that makes this okay, regardless of who's in the Oval Office. The only thing that's "not news" about this is that one side or the other is attempting to use it for political gain. That was a shocker I didn't see coming.
Something tells me the government version of "The Girls of the SEC" would make a lot less money than Playboy's.
Quick, without looking at wikipedia:
Can you tell me what the important differences are between mitochondrial DNA and nuclear DNA? Can you tell me what standard chemotherapy protocol is for stage 2 adenocarcinoma of the lung?
Can you tell me how maintenance of a Continuosly Variable Transmission would differ from maintenance of a standard manual transmission?
Can you give me a quick summary of the current laws regarding possession of a firearm in Boston, Massachusetts?
The key to having a successful professional career is not in walking around with a set of facts glued into your skull. The key to having a successful professional career is in being able to learn, adapt, and understand new technologies and research, and apply those things to your work. This is not unique to software engineering.
I'm sorry you think learning the syntax and nuances of a new programming language is inordinately more difficult than staying current with case law relevant to your field of law, or medical research & treatment best practices relevant to your medical specialty, or the functional details of new automotive technologies like gas-electric hybrid engines and electronic control systems.
Perhaps software engineering just isn't a profession you're cut out for. Since medicine, law, and auto repair all seem to be much easier in your estimation, perhaps you'd find more satisfaction in those fields.
Sure, nobody wants root exploits in their software, and that's what's required to jailbreak an iPhone. If you're concerned about having the ability to update your firmware, I'd submit that the iPhone and jailbreaking it so you can run Android probably aren't the best means for accomplishing your goal of having a completely open phone that you can do whatever you want with.
+1, correct use of "jerkin the gherkin".
Or - and this is just blue-sky brainstorming here, but indulge me for a second - you could buy a fucking Android phone in the first place.
My speculation:
1) "Is apple going to let me use it:" Sure, you can use it. You'll void your warranty, but once you've bought the hardware, if you want to smash it with a hammer or load something else on it, they're not going to waste time and effort chasing you down.
2) "Will there be any installed user base?" I predict this will be wildly popular among the couple thousand android enthusiasts who would bother to purchase an iphone. In short, "not really".
No, Apple has made it so you can't load some stupid "iJiggle" boob app on your iphone through their official channels.
The web still works just fine; video still works just fine. Rip Porn DVDs, or visit any of the multitude of mobile porn sites, and you can quite easily view X-rated content with your iphone.
While I agree that the restriction on "adult" apps is silly (implement a parental control system and ratings on the apps), did you REALLY need a pair of cartoon tits in an application on your phone when there's plenty of audio, video, and photographic porn that's available right in your browser? I guess I don't miss it because I wouldn't have bothered to buy any of those apps in the first place, I can get my porn by browsing if I really want it.
Gotta be honest man, they seem to be doing a pretty bang-up job of "matching up to Android" even with all those restrictions you cite.
You are wrong. But I can play this game too: You are obviously just a code drone who thinks he knows programming, and so he thinks it must be the "hardest thing in the world" to learn new languages, new systems, new architectures, and new external packages and interfaces. It's also clear that you think that you should be treated like a rock star because you have a couple years of Java programming experience. Whoop-de-fucking-doo, get some perspective.
Your vapid and senseless assertions about programmers being the equivalent of slave labor because they need to learn new things constantly to stay current with the state of the art are just that: vapid, and senseless. It's a common phenomenon - people like to assume that they have it worse than anybody else. It's generally not the case.
Maybe that wasn't the point, but it's what about 50% of the commentary in this thread amounts to: assholes high-fiving each other over how smart and with it they are because they're not like some poor delusional schizophrenic woman, and making jokes about aliens and "hurr hurr it sounds like it would be fun to have a microchip in my taint."
Another 25% seem to be about how this is "such a waste of time," which absolutely floors me to read here on Slashdot. That a group which seems in many other threads to be mostly comprised of tinfoil-hatted conspiracy theorist nutjobs would think that the GA legislature passing a law which prohibits anybody from forcibly implanting you with a microchip is a "waste of time" or pointless is shocking.
The remainder of the comments seem to be along the lines of "Well of course, GA is full of backwards right-wing jesus freaks who fuck their sisters, so of course they'd do that."
USDOT Study. Their conclusion is that it doesn't make you "as bad" a driver as alcohol or other drugs, but that it does impair driving performance, and as such, does pose some safety concern, though should be considered secondary to the risks of alcohol impairment. From the linked article:
Then "drinking two beers and driving home" is not a crime at all, and the GP is just talking out his ass.
You may disagree that 2 beers makes you drunk, but if you have a BAC of 0.08%, you are legally drunk, and you are demonstrably impaired.
And I know plenty of people who would (and some who HAVE) claim "I only had 2 beers!" to police no matter how long they were at the bar and how much they drank.
It would, but since paying a tattoo parlor money to put a tattoo on you is a voluntary activity, they wouldn't run afoul of the law, and so have no need to worry.
I'm not sure I understand your objection - is it that you think implanting people with microchips wouldn't be a problem, or only that it's not a problem yet, because no companies have started requiring it as a condition of employment?
Somebody needs a rudimentary vocabulary course.
Maim:
1 : to commit the felony of mayhem upon
2 : to mutilate, disfigure, or wound seriously.
Explain how "implanting a microchip" constitutes "maiming"? Does it cause pain? probably. Could it have negative effects? Certainly. Does it result in long term loss of a limb or limbs or other severe disfigurement? Not so much.
Having a limb blown off by a roadside bomb = maiming. Being run down by a drunk driver and losing a limb, or being permanently disfigured as a result = maiming. Having a rice-grain sized microchip embedded under your skin = painful, uncomfortable, but not maiming.
Let's get some perspective. I know everybody loves to protest unfair drug laws, but implanting a microchip is not equivalent to maiming any more than slapping someone is equivalent to first degree murder.
Depends on the alcohol content of the beer, how fast it was consumed, the person doing the consuming, and a host of other factors - you cannot correctly make this claim without a host of additional stipulations. What's more, the OP stated that "driving home after two beers is a worse crime" - it's only a crime if you're legally drunk. So we can reasonably assume that the OP was talking about a situation where two beers is enough to get you drunk, which is to say - at least here in the US - that you have a blood alcohol content of 0.08%. If two beers is not enough to put you to that limit, then you have committed no crime, and your case is not covered by his claim that "driving home after two beers" is a crime.
Unless you'd care to argue that alertness, coordination, concentration and depth perception are not required to operate a vehicle safely, it makes plenty of sense to tell people that they may not operate a vehicle when they're impaired, and to set up harsh consequences to dissuade them from doing so. Operating a vehicle with those faculties impaired makes you "more likely" to kill or severely injure yourself and others, and also increases the risk that you will do significant property damage as well.
The truth of that statement also depends on the size & physiology of the person drinking them, and how quickly the beer was consumed.
I'm sorry - why is that foolish? Because you have a preconceived notion that "programming r harder"? Your assertion that programming is the only profession which requires constant study & "keeping up" doesn't make it a fact.
I cited 3 examples of professions which require significant amounts of learning, retraining, and continuous self-development. I'll repeat them: Law. Medicine. Auto mechanic. Any other sort of biotech / biomedical field. Anybody entering into any of these professions is going to need to continuously study and learn the new "state of the art" to stay current. Programming is not unique in this regard.
Given that learning is an active process which requires effort on the part of the employee, I don't see why this is cause for alarm or why you'd expect this to be any different. If you need to learn to stay current, it *is* your responsibility to do so, the company can encourage you to do so, but ultimately it's your responsibility to do the learning. They can't "make you" learn new technologies, methods, and practices.
Yes, because emailing the very well known CEO of a company (who is known to both read & respond to customer emails) about what is one of the biggest breach of product secrecy they've ever had, and expect him to perhaps have somebody look at that claim...
That's totally far-fetched. You're right. It never would've worked. The only reasonable thing to do is to sell it Gizmodo for $5k.
I know what Gizmodo "says" happened, I read their article. I also know that the California law is very clear on this issue, and that "selling the found property to Gizmodo" is not a reasonable second step under that law.
Furthermore, California Penal Code, section 485 also defines theft as such:
So there's a pretty strong argument that the finder is also guilty of theft.
And if you're unable to contact or find the owner, CA law also indicates that you are then to turn it in to the local police, who will make an attempt to contact the owner for a certain amount of time. IF, after that time, no owner has claimed the property, possession may be given to the person who found it and turned it in.
It looks to me like the guy who "found" it (note that Gizmodo says, "We didn't know it was stolen when we bought it!") made a half-hearted attempt to contact apple, despite having the engineer's facebook page & name, and then decided, "Well fuck it, I might as well make some cash for myself."
At BEST (assuming they really didn't believe it was stolen), It's scummy journnalistic practice by Gizmodo and unethical behavior on the part of the person who found it. At worst, Gizmodo & the finder have both broken several laws relating to finding "lost" property, and let's also not forget that this would probably fall under the protection offered by the Uniform Trade Secrets Act in California, which also would seem to have some relevance in this case.
Given that he was out getting pissed on good German beer, I think it's likely that he hasn't "thrown away his entire social life" to work on a mobile phone. The hours are long, but if - as an engineer - the work is something you enjoy, then why not work your ass off when you're young and don't have the responsibilities of a home, family, etc. to keep up with as well?
And that can't be done while working on one of the hottest tech products around? Some people actually enjoy the work they do, work with awesome people, and would call "being a major contributor to a device that tens of millions of people around the world use for hours every day," "pretty awesome."
You seem to view work as something which must be dull, boring, and soul-crushing. I feel sorry for you, if that's the type of work you do.
So if he's fired, it's evidence that Apple are a bunch of heartless pricks. If he's not fired, it's evidence that the conspiracy theorists are correct.
Sir, I like your ideas and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.