Indy does seem to be a lousy area for IT work. Seems like applications development/maintenance management positions are very few and far between, and the technologies used are so narrow that my resume doesn't stand a chance of getting past the keyword filter. Arrgggghhhh...
You could make a decent argument that the tax code is overly complicated, but I'd be hard pressed to say that the overall level of US taxation is "too high". The skyrocketing budget deficit is the most obvious argument against that assertion. People also fail to consider what they get for their taxes: civil infrastructure, law & order, short-term unemployment insurance, national defense and a social safety net in the event of poverty/old age. Those things don't come cheap.
While I wouldn't expect ongoing litigation to be much of a distraction to them (that's why you hire lawyers), a negative ruling against them could be catastrophic. A court-ordered redesign of their personnel and software development practices would present a huge risk to keeping the pipeline of products flowing to the market. Even if they cleaned house and brought in new managers, it would take time to get things back up to speed.
In the fast-paced computer gaming world, a year or two lost to restructuring could leave them behind the competition for quite a while...
If you're exempt from overtime pay (as many white-collar workers are) they don't have to pay you for such work. And they can always fire you without specifying a given reason.
I agree, though, unless there are extraneous reasons for staying (absolutely can't miss a paycheck, etc.) I'd say these guys need to make some decisions about what's really important to them.
Like, I'm pretty sure that you should totally let us know what treaty you're talking about, OK? I don't remember an International Don't-Put-Weapons-On-Drones Treaty, but who knows, it's so complicated, ya know?
A more accurate comment would have been, "just goes to show that the editors can still throw any old piece of crap up as a story." Journalism, this ain't.
I remember reading from some third party candidate on/. that voting for them would not lose the election for Kerry. However, I noticed on CNN the number of third party votes, especially in Ohio and Florida. If those third party votes went to Kerry, Kerry would have won Ohio and Florida and be president right now.
One improvement I'd like to see is more states dividing their electoral votes proportionally. Here in Indiana, I don't think either candidate visited because the state's votes were considered a lock for the GOP. If they didn't go as a single block, there would have been more opportunities for either side to try and win electoral votes.
Instead you have a scenario where huge chunks of electoral votes swing in either direction based on as small as a 50-49 margin. That makes "playing the electoral game" more important than appealing to the general voting public...
Just give these latest editions a few years to run through the sales cycle, and we'll see a "Mega-Diamond Director's Special Blend Extra Virgin Original Version" wherein you not only get the original films but also the ability to insert your own face on top of characters in the movie, including the family dog as Chewie.
My "blustering" wasn't in disagreement with the parent post, but rather expounded upon it. The point about soldiers dying is that great sacrifices have been in support of our freedoms.
Apparantly you missed the point of my post, totally.
That's what I was referring to in terms of the popular media. Instead of discussing issues and possible alternatives, usually the conversation devolves into mindless confrontation about the facts.
Reminds me of the Monty Python sketch wherein Eric Idle looks for an argument, but only gets contradiction instead...
It frustrates me greatly when someone says "oh, we shouldn't talk about politics...". For those of us in the US, why the hell shouldn't we talk politics?
Our grandfathers didn't fight and die in the European and Pacific theaters so we could sit around together and avoid controversy by talking about the weather instead of who should be President.
Over 1,000 of our troops have died in the last three years in part to bring free and open elections to Iraq and Afghanistan, and yet we shouldn't talk about politics?
It's amazing to me, especially in light of our recent efforts in the Middle East, that some people look at politics merely as a source of personal conflict that should be avoided at all costs. Of course, the black-and-white conflict-driven political discussions portrayed in the popular media (talking heads yelling over each other on MSNBC, conservative talk radio, etc.) don't help things at all. But as a nation, we've grown relatively fat and happy over the last several decades and are only now starting to pay a price for that.
My hope is that this election brings out a larger share of the vote and people start taking things a little more seriously. A few huge upsets that discredit the predictive power of polling wouldn't hurt, either. I think many people don't bother voting simply because they don't believe their vote matters...
I'm tempted to do that, but Badnarik is such a clown that I can't stomach the prospect of giving him my vote. I actually went to his website and read various position statements, and it's just one absurdity after another, like going back to the gold standard for monetary policy, or immediately closing down overseas military operations and bringing the troops home. Consequences, anyone???
You need to activate your sarcasm detector. I was tossing those four states out there as examples that the heartland doesn't really hold the majority of electoral votes...
Slashdot Mirror
Indy does seem to be a lousy area for IT work. Seems like applications development/maintenance management positions are very few and far between, and the technologies used are so narrow that my resume doesn't stand a chance of getting past the keyword filter. Arrgggghhhh...
You could make a decent argument that the tax code is overly complicated, but I'd be hard pressed to say that the overall level of US taxation is "too high". The skyrocketing budget deficit is the most obvious argument against that assertion. People also fail to consider what they get for their taxes: civil infrastructure, law & order, short-term unemployment insurance, national defense and a social safety net in the event of poverty/old age. Those things don't come cheap.
While I wouldn't expect ongoing litigation to be much of a distraction to them (that's why you hire lawyers), a negative ruling against them could be catastrophic. A court-ordered redesign of their personnel and software development practices would present a huge risk to keeping the pipeline of products flowing to the market. Even if they cleaned house and brought in new managers, it would take time to get things back up to speed.
In the fast-paced computer gaming world, a year or two lost to restructuring could leave them behind the competition for quite a while...
I doubt anyone with an 800000+ UID would get that joke...
If you're exempt from overtime pay (as many white-collar workers are) they don't have to pay you for such work. And they can always fire you without specifying a given reason.
I agree, though, unless there are extraneous reasons for staying (absolutely can't miss a paycheck, etc.) I'd say these guys need to make some decisions about what's really important to them.
Like, I'm pretty sure that you should totally let us know what treaty you're talking about, OK? I don't remember an International Don't-Put-Weapons-On-Drones Treaty, but who knows, it's so complicated, ya know?
quoth the article:
"Another set of the rules for the prize require that any contestant reside and do business in the United States."
Hence the name...
A more accurate comment would have been, "just goes to show that the editors can still throw any old piece of crap up as a story." Journalism, this ain't.
Your stanse wreaks of a of prejudice and hatred...
For someone criticizing another poster's writing skills, I'd say your stance reeks .
I remember reading from some third party candidate on /. that voting for them would not lose the election for Kerry. However, I noticed on CNN the number of third party votes, especially in Ohio and Florida. If those third party votes went to Kerry, Kerry would have won Ohio and Florida and be president right now.
Okay, I call bull$hit. From CNN:
Ohio
Bush 2,794,329 51%
Kerry 2,658,108 49%
Badnarik 14,322 0%
Peroutka 11,606 0%
Florida
Bush 3,836,216 52%
Kerry 3,459,293 47%
Nader 32,036 1%
Badnarik 11,746 0%
Peroutka 6,530 0%
Cobb 3,876 0%
Brown 3,495 0%
Harris 2,735 0%
In other words, third party votes didn't even come close to making a difference in these races.
One improvement I'd like to see is more states dividing their electoral votes proportionally. Here in Indiana, I don't think either candidate visited because the state's votes were considered a lock for the GOP. If they didn't go as a single block, there would have been more opportunities for either side to try and win electoral votes.
Instead you have a scenario where huge chunks of electoral votes swing in either direction based on as small as a 50-49 margin. That makes "playing the electoral game" more important than appealing to the general voting public...
Just give these latest editions a few years to run through the sales cycle, and we'll see a "Mega-Diamond Director's Special Blend Extra Virgin Original Version" wherein you not only get the original films but also the ability to insert your own face on top of characters in the movie, including the family dog as Chewie.
It's pretty much in the bag now - Bush has Ohio, and Kerry would have to run the table to cause a tie. Yikes...
Go here and you can see the states getting called by each of the networks as it happens. It's been my favorite site to follow tonight...
It was updated based on the latest polling data, not actual election returns this evening...
Except for that Oklahoma City bombing, of course.
My "blustering" wasn't in disagreement with the parent post, but rather expounded upon it. The point about soldiers dying is that great sacrifices have been in support of our freedoms.
Apparantly you missed the point of my post, totally.
The headline should read, "new study discovers academic rewording for common-sense explanation of phenomenon."
I guess you missed the "in part" within that quote, Mr. Paranoid Conspiracy Theorist. Nobody pretends that was the primary purpose of their mission.
That's what I was referring to in terms of the popular media. Instead of discussing issues and possible alternatives, usually the conversation devolves into mindless confrontation about the facts.
Reminds me of the Monty Python sketch wherein Eric Idle looks for an argument, but only gets contradiction instead...
It frustrates me greatly when someone says "oh, we shouldn't talk about politics...". For those of us in the US, why the hell shouldn't we talk politics?
Our grandfathers didn't fight and die in the European and Pacific theaters so we could sit around together and avoid controversy by talking about the weather instead of who should be President.
Over 1,000 of our troops have died in the last three years in part to bring free and open elections to Iraq and Afghanistan, and yet we shouldn't talk about politics?
It's amazing to me, especially in light of our recent efforts in the Middle East, that some people look at politics merely as a source of personal conflict that should be avoided at all costs. Of course, the black-and-white conflict-driven political discussions portrayed in the popular media (talking heads yelling over each other on MSNBC, conservative talk radio, etc.) don't help things at all. But as a nation, we've grown relatively fat and happy over the last several decades and are only now starting to pay a price for that.
My hope is that this election brings out a larger share of the vote and people start taking things a little more seriously. A few huge upsets that discredit the predictive power of polling wouldn't hurt, either. I think many people don't bother voting simply because they don't believe their vote matters...
I'm tempted to do that, but Badnarik is such a clown that I can't stomach the prospect of giving him my vote. I actually went to his website and read various position statements, and it's just one absurdity after another, like going back to the gold standard for monetary policy, or immediately closing down overseas military operations and bringing the troops home. Consequences, anyone???
Insightful? I don't see any of those mods. Flamebait, Troll, and Funny, but no Insightful...
"Creationist thinking"? We have a new oxymoron of the highest order...
You need to activate your sarcasm detector. I was tossing those four states out there as examples that the heartland doesn't really hold the majority of electoral votes...