His action was a form of passive-aggressive behavior. Give him a taste of his own medicine.
It certainly looks that way, but in all honesty, I don't think he was being passive-aggressive. First, he's not passive anything, lol. He speaks his mind, and if you don't like it, tough. Passive-aggressive is definitely not his style. Second, he's a pretty good guy and a pretty decent boss; I've certainly worked for far worse. Third, there's only two of us network admins in the office, him and me, and we're under the gun from our parent company due to a number of external factors, so any pressure to work this outage came from his higher ups. If I have a beef with anyone, it's management in the parent company; my boss is just as burned out as I'm getting (if not more so). Fourth, he was on the conference bridge working the outage with me, so it's not like he was like, "Hey, I don't feel like doing this, so even though you're off today, here ya go!"
Don't go. If it's a scheduled outage, it's not an emergency. You're at a party and someone kept filling your glass when you weren't looking and now they've taken your keys away because friends don't let friends drive drunk.
I probably should have been a little more clear. He, and the admins from the parent company who are a client on the network that was having the problem, scheduled an emergency outage for later in the night. It was scheduled in that they put it off until later that night because they planned to do intrusive troubleshooting (rebooting network cards, etc.) and didn't want to impact other customers on the network in the middle of the business day, but it was an emergency in that this particular customer's traffic on the network was severely degraded.
I worked that shift for three years from 2000-2002. Swing shift was, by far, my most hated shift. Unfortunately, in that particular job, swing shift was the busiest (therefore, least boring) shift, so that's what I worked. As far as hours, though, that shift sucked big time because it meant I didn't get to spend a lot of time with my family, except on weekends.
I'm reaching that point, myself. My boss gave me today off because of extra time I've been working a lot of O.T. lately. He called me at seven this evening to work a scheduled outage tonight.
Sigh...even when I get a day off, I can't get a day off.
Well, yes and no. I worked nights for a couple of years about five years ago. I *was* more tired on the night shift that I was when I was on a day shift, but I'd say it had more to do with the fact that I was getting five or six hours sleep than the fact that I was working nights. I'm pretty tired when I get only five or six hours sleep now that I'm back on a day shift, too.
FWIW, I kinda liked working nights -- nights were quiet, the phone didn't ring (much) at work, I'd get a couple of hours to myself in the morning (since my wife worked days), but I still had time with my family in the evening before going back to work. And I got an extra 12% shift differential on my paycheck (w00t!).
I haven't had problems with cops while using telescopes, but when I was about ten or twelve, I had a lady freak out a bit because she though I was setting up some kind of mortar or rocket launcher. To be fair, she looked -- and sounded -- like she may well have been Vietnamese or Korean, so there's a good chance that she might have lived through some pretty horrific things, and I can understand how a reflector telescope at night might resemble a mortar to someone who doesn't use either one on a regular basis (but they aren't usually painted bright white...).
I initially had the exact same objection. However, this guy summed up the principle pretty well.
Executive Summary: There is still a boundary layer, but it's very, very thin -- much thinner than the boundary layer on the skin of an airplane. Because it is so thin, but has a very large surface area (think "sheet of paper") it still conducts a rather large quantity of heat away from the heat source, allowing much more efficient cooling than a conventional heatsink/fan combo.
Why does slashdot seem to attract so many completely...stupid morons who like to pretend they know something when in fact is obvious they known absolutely nothing anything anything... you are really...stupid.
Probably for the same reason that/. attracts so many exceedingly foul-mouthed, holier-than-thou*, arrogant whiners who like to smugly comment about how idiotic everyone else is while completing failing to proofread their own comments for spelling, grammatical and syntactical errors, thus looking like completely stupid morons themselves, perhaps? Is civility really that obsolete?
*Yes, I realize that by submitting this post, I'm coming dangerously close to being one myself.
Javascript arrays have push(), pop(), shift(), and unshift() methods. If they fail to teach FIFO and LIFO, they can't blame it on Javascript.
They shouldn't be able to blame it on JavaScript, anyway. I went to a college that had nowhere near the prestige of Stanford, but in my CS101 and CS201 courses, we were programming push() and pop() functions ourselves.
The difference between a master of some art and a mere practitioner of the same art is that, if the master doesn't have the tool he needs to accomplish a specific task, he'll build it, whereas the practitioner will grouse that he doesn't have the tools he needs to do the job properly and either quit or do a substandard job.
You are legally able to destroy your own property for any, or even no, reason at all.
In general, yes, you are correct. However, that is not always the case. For example, if you receive a subpoena to save and/or provide all e-mails, documents, etc. relating to $Random_Investigation then there can be legal repercussions for destroying that property. While I don't have the legal credentials to offer any kind of legal advice (IOW, I don't know what I'm talking about, so take this with NaCl as required), I rather suspect that providing an encryption key that triggers a self-destruct action on your encrypted hard drive would fall into the same kind of legal troubles.
And if they make a bit-by-bit copy of the hard drive before asking you to decrypt it? You provide the password that wipes the drive. They reinstall the image onto the drive, say "very funny, wise guy. Now try it again with the real one."
Other than (possibly) landing yourself some new charges for perjury, obstruction of justice, contempt of court and only-a-lawyer-not-just-some-geek-like-me-can-tell-you-what-else, what exactly have you accomplished?
Not to mention that such a stunt would probably land you additional charges for destruction of evidence and contempt of court.
No, a much, much better solution is to provide a key that unlocks a believable - but fake - partition that contains no incriminating evidence. But wouldn't it just be simpler to not do anything that is going to get you investigated in the first place?
jarich may very well be equating TSA with LEO (which they most certainly are not), but his underlying point remains valid: TSA has been a spearhead for eroding civil liberties in this country, and this is potentially yet another example of that trend.
In general, companies like that end up with one of two things: passive-agressive schmucks who simply take it until they go postal (with all that entails) or inexperienced n00bs who work like madmen until they burn out and becomes useless. In either case, if the company replaces me with someone who doesn't take vacations, then they get what they deserve.
FWIW, this is exactly what happened to me in the late '90s. In my case, I got a better job at a better company with an immediate $1.50 an hour raise which became double my old salary within 18 months, and with better working conditions, to boot.
Why would you welcome a call from work to a boat you are vacationing on?
I've spent roughly one extra day this last week alone on the phone from home trying to fix technical problems at a couple of remote sites. If, as GPP stated, it was going to cost the company $5-$10 per minute to have me work those particular issues, that would be (($5|$10)/minute) x (60 minutes / hour) x 8 hours = $2400 - $4800, not including overtime (if GPP gets overtime; I'm salaried, so it wouldn't apply in my case), to fix the problem. That's somewhere between two weeks and one month's salary for another entry-level to somewhat-experienced IT person.
When it starts costing the company more to call me for help when I'm out of the office than it does to hire more help to take up the slack, they'll finally get the picture, and my life will get better.
I wasn't talking about infidelity, crime, or divorce cases. Look at the question I was answering.
Ok...
If a relationship is to the point of a person needing to track their significant other's movements with a GPS device, why do people even bother continuing the relationship?
Because proof of guilt is important.
If not divorce or infidelity in a marriage, then exactly what relationship were you talking about severing? And for what cause? It looks like I'm not the only one missing your point, so perhaps some clarification is in order? <shrug>
I didn't say "can't"; I said "too lazy". Why? Because it's trivially easy (so you can find it if you want) and I really didn't feel like searching for terms like "voyeur" or "peeping tom" while at work, connecting to the net through a proxy server that captures URLs. Sue me.
Slashdot Mirror
Check out DailyRoads Voyager in the Android Market. It's a bit of a resource hog, but I think it will do what you are talking about.
Avalanches travel at Mach 5+?
Q. What are the odds that 50 yrs of technological progress would slash the stellar travel time, so that a 100-yr trip would likely be pointless?
A. Not good.
The regular brown dwarfs are just jealous.
His action was a form of passive-aggressive behavior. Give him a taste of his own medicine.
It certainly looks that way, but in all honesty, I don't think he was being passive-aggressive. First, he's not passive anything, lol. He speaks his mind, and if you don't like it, tough. Passive-aggressive is definitely not his style. Second, he's a pretty good guy and a pretty decent boss; I've certainly worked for far worse. Third, there's only two of us network admins in the office, him and me, and we're under the gun from our parent company due to a number of external factors, so any pressure to work this outage came from his higher ups. If I have a beef with anyone, it's management in the parent company; my boss is just as burned out as I'm getting (if not more so). Fourth, he was on the conference bridge working the outage with me, so it's not like he was like, "Hey, I don't feel like doing this, so even though you're off today, here ya go!"
Don't go. If it's a scheduled outage, it's not an emergency. You're at a party and someone kept filling your glass when you weren't looking and now they've taken your keys away because friends don't let friends drive drunk.
I probably should have been a little more clear. He, and the admins from the parent company who are a client on the network that was having the problem, scheduled an emergency outage for later in the night. It was scheduled in that they put it off until later that night because they planned to do intrusive troubleshooting (rebooting network cards, etc.) and didn't want to impact other customers on the network in the middle of the business day, but it was an emergency in that this particular customer's traffic on the network was severely degraded.
I worked that shift for three years from 2000-2002. Swing shift was, by far, my most hated shift. Unfortunately, in that particular job, swing shift was the busiest (therefore, least boring) shift, so that's what I worked. As far as hours, though, that shift sucked big time because it meant I didn't get to spend a lot of time with my family, except on weekends.
I'm reaching that point, myself. My boss gave me today off because of extra time I've been working a lot of O.T. lately. He called me at seven this evening to work a scheduled outage tonight.
Sigh...even when I get a day off, I can't get a day off.
Well, yes and no. I worked nights for a couple of years about five years ago. I *was* more tired on the night shift that I was when I was on a day shift, but I'd say it had more to do with the fact that I was getting five or six hours sleep than the fact that I was working nights. I'm pretty tired when I get only five or six hours sleep now that I'm back on a day shift, too.
FWIW, I kinda liked working nights -- nights were quiet, the phone didn't ring (much) at work, I'd get a couple of hours to myself in the morning (since my wife worked days), but I still had time with my family in the evening before going back to work. And I got an extra 12% shift differential on my paycheck (w00t!).
That's not "perspective", it's "fallacy"
Just because "X" sucks more than "Y", that does not imply that "Y" doesn't suck, too.
My dogs are far more excited to chase the laser pointer than my cat.
I haven't had problems with cops while using telescopes, but when I was about ten or twelve, I had a lady freak out a bit because she though I was setting up some kind of mortar or rocket launcher. To be fair, she looked -- and sounded -- like she may well have been Vietnamese or Korean, so there's a good chance that she might have lived through some pretty horrific things, and I can understand how a reflector telescope at night might resemble a mortar to someone who doesn't use either one on a regular basis (but they aren't usually painted bright white...).
I initially had the exact same objection. However, this guy summed up the principle pretty well.
Executive Summary: There is still a boundary layer, but it's very, very thin -- much thinner than the boundary layer on the skin of an airplane. Because it is so thin, but has a very large surface area (think "sheet of paper") it still conducts a rather large quantity of heat away from the heat source, allowing much more efficient cooling than a conventional heatsink/fan combo.
Why does slashdot seem to attract so many completely...stupid morons who like to pretend they know something when in fact is obvious they known absolutely nothing anything anything... you are really...stupid.
Probably for the same reason that /. attracts so many exceedingly foul-mouthed, holier-than-thou*, arrogant whiners who like to smugly comment about how idiotic everyone else is while completing failing to proofread their own comments for spelling, grammatical and syntactical errors, thus looking like completely stupid morons themselves, perhaps? Is civility really that obsolete?
*Yes, I realize that by submitting this post, I'm coming dangerously close to being one myself.
Javascript arrays have push(), pop(), shift(), and unshift() methods. If they fail to teach FIFO and LIFO, they can't blame it on Javascript.
They shouldn't be able to blame it on JavaScript, anyway. I went to a college that had nowhere near the prestige of Stanford, but in my CS101 and CS201 courses, we were programming push() and pop() functions ourselves.
The difference between a master of some art and a mere practitioner of the same art is that, if the master doesn't have the tool he needs to accomplish a specific task, he'll build it, whereas the practitioner will grouse that he doesn't have the tools he needs to do the job properly and either quit or do a substandard job.
You are legally able to destroy your own property for any, or even no, reason at all.
In general, yes, you are correct. However, that is not always the case. For example, if you receive a subpoena to save and/or provide all e-mails, documents, etc. relating to $Random_Investigation then there can be legal repercussions for destroying that property. While I don't have the legal credentials to offer any kind of legal advice (IOW, I don't know what I'm talking about, so take this with NaCl as required), I rather suspect that providing an encryption key that triggers a self-destruct action on your encrypted hard drive would fall into the same kind of legal troubles.
And if they make a bit-by-bit copy of the hard drive before asking you to decrypt it? You provide the password that wipes the drive. They reinstall the image onto the drive, say "very funny, wise guy. Now try it again with the real one."
Other than (possibly) landing yourself some new charges for perjury, obstruction of justice, contempt of court and only-a-lawyer-not-just-some-geek-like-me-can-tell-you-what-else, what exactly have you accomplished?
Not to mention that such a stunt would probably land you additional charges for destruction of evidence and contempt of court.
No, a much, much better solution is to provide a key that unlocks a believable - but fake - partition that contains no incriminating evidence. But wouldn't it just be simpler to not do anything that is going to get you investigated in the first place?
If I am not mistaken, so does the TSA, even though they've been hired to flagrantly and deliberately violate those very same Amendments.
I'm not optimistic that our Armed Forces would refuse to uphold unconstitutional orders.
...and yes, once he had a warrant he could compel you to type in your password, in the same way he could compel you to open your safe.
Well...that's still to be determined by the courts.
jarich may very well be equating TSA with LEO (which they most certainly are not), but his underlying point remains valid: TSA has been a spearhead for eroding civil liberties in this country, and this is potentially yet another example of that trend.
In general, companies like that end up with one of two things: passive-agressive schmucks who simply take it until they go postal (with all that entails) or inexperienced n00bs who work like madmen until they burn out and becomes useless. In either case, if the company replaces me with someone who doesn't take vacations, then they get what they deserve.
FWIW, this is exactly what happened to me in the late '90s. In my case, I got a better job at a better company with an immediate $1.50 an hour raise which became double my old salary within 18 months, and with better working conditions, to boot.
Why would you welcome a call from work to a boat you are vacationing on?
I've spent roughly one extra day this last week alone on the phone from home trying to fix technical problems at a couple of remote sites. If, as GPP stated, it was going to cost the company $5-$10 per minute to have me work those particular issues, that would be (($5|$10)/minute) x (60 minutes / hour) x 8 hours = $2400 - $4800, not including overtime (if GPP gets overtime; I'm salaried, so it wouldn't apply in my case), to fix the problem. That's somewhere between two weeks and one month's salary for another entry-level to somewhat-experienced IT person.
When it starts costing the company more to call me for help when I'm out of the office than it does to hire more help to take up the slack, they'll finally get the picture, and my life will get better.
I wonder if Card himself has Hollywood-itis, the tendency to beat a dead horse until money stops falling out.
You mean like a pinata?
I wasn't talking about infidelity, crime, or divorce cases. Look at the question I was answering.
Ok...
If a relationship is to the point of a person needing to track their significant other's movements with a GPS device, why do people even bother continuing the relationship ?
Because proof of guilt is important.
If not divorce or infidelity in a marriage, then exactly what relationship were you talking about severing? And for what cause? It looks like I'm not the only one missing your point, so perhaps some clarification is in order? <shrug>
I didn't say "can't"; I said "too lazy". Why? Because it's trivially easy (so you can find it if you want) and I really didn't feel like searching for terms like "voyeur" or "peeping tom" while at work, connecting to the net through a proxy server that captures URLs. Sue me.