Well....I started out as a Help Desk Monkey myself and am now In global Infrastructure - it's taken a whil eto get there but I can give you a few keys to the kingdom...
First off, never complain about the position you are currently in. When talking to anyone whether inside or outside the company - complaints about your role - devalues your own role therefore it devaules you. To improve your role and to improve the opinions of those around you - only stress the good points of the role and thework you are doing. Also, toot your own horn - if your dealing with difficult probles and you find solutions let it be known YOU did it. Email off the manager and cc: his boss (depending on the type of organization). this will increase your visbility.
Second, look for ways to expand upon your own set of responsibilities. I hate to say it but the people who jump in and start working (not volunteer) are the ones who tendto get lookeda t first in the promotion department. Its shows you have initiative and your willingness to expand upon current sets of responsibilities. You do however, have to make sure you do not neglect your first set of responsibilities and ensure they remain top notch.
Third, Education is always important, however, it really depends on the company and the value they place oneducation beyond the initial hire. An example of this, the current company I work for values your contribution beyond the intial hire and education is only secondary to ability to perform. Performance, experience, and value add are what employers value the most. Any way you can find to stream line or reduce cost to save money (especially to the bottom line)gets you noticed alot faster. I have people who have their masters who I still have to tell how to do their job. But again, Education can never be taken away from you so there is always a value.
Fourth, get diversified. The more diversified your skill set the more valuable you are. If you are getting a masters - get your masters in something other than IT but is complimentary (like some engineering discipline). Gain knowledge in as many programming languages (if you want to program) and / or operating systems as possible. Unless you want to specialize but that limits mobility and pigeon holes you to particular roles. In IT the more diversified you are education and knowledge wise the further you will go and the faster.
Lastly, In even the worst economies the job market is open to those who have the skills and track record of accomplishments to prove it. Keeping notes of projects that save money, increase efficiency, reduce total overall cost, etc...that is what you want toinclude on your resume. Do not emblish and be sure it is verifable in some way. Do not be afraid to search out companies and call them to get your foot into the position you want. Its ok to inquire of companies that do not have direct posting's because some companies do not necessarily list them. But again it is the persistance at which you pursue your endevours that is going to make you attractive to employers.
So like other posters have said, clearly define what you are seeking and begin to expand yourself in those ways. Also, be careful what you ask for because you may just get it - and - that is not always what you think. One last piece of advice - remember money is not everything - find something you love to do and do it exceptionally because when you do - the money will follow.
I really just wanted to read the discussion and not get involved - but one comment I have not seen is simply this:
Any "Stimulus" from money being spent is going to have 0 impact on the US or the creation of US jobs.
Let's face facts here people - unless the money is spent on "American produced goods and services" the money will go everywhere other than the US.
For example: John Q. Public runs on down to Walmart and says, "Geez that there TV and blueray player looks good - Im gonna buy that with this here stimulus check" Where did the money go?
China, Korea, Japan, etc...
So let's face it - People don't think. You want a stimulus package that creates jobs and boosts America's economy - Hand out a voucher only redeemable at "X" American companies (not an American Subsidiary of X Global Company or better still - MADE, PRODUCED, DELIVERED, CREATED in the U.S. of A.). Forget handing out the cash, otherwise your stimulating someone else's economy.
This is probably one of the most thought out comments I have read today in this thread - If I had the mod points and it went higher than +5 I would give them to you.
You should also mention though point 5 -
Whether a voiced opinion is meritous or unpopular, all voices have a right to be heard. If one voice screams loudest that voice then bears no weight. As the system stands currently - all voices carry weight.
I am not a conspiracy theorist, however, I do object to material being taught through either a red or blue colored prism. For example, I may not agree totally with people who talk about global warming, but I can not nor would not dismiss it. However, in my own current text (as in my children's classroom text and their teacher POV) it is taught as an undeniable fact with no other oppossing viewpoint or that consensus amongst scientists themselves has not been 100% established. That from a purely scientific perspective without consensus (like evolution has consenus whether I agree or not) it should not be taught as fact. This is what I suggest by critical thinking. Understand that not everyone will agree but a group concensus based on factual reality does help. As far as socialization, if you live in the states talk to any teacher - they will tell you all about socialization. That is something that should be left to parents to deal with. For an example of socialization, when a teacher reads a wonderfully inappropriate re-written pc version of a story tale that includes two gay characters falling in love - I have a right to object. I want my children yes to understand that homosexual relationships exist and that I as a parent should be able explain to them about them and my particular views. Such as, I feel the lifestyle is inappropriate, however, that homosexuals regardless of their sexual orientation / lifestyle still deserve to be treated no different than anyone else who is not homosexual. The difference in the messge is I do not agree or feel it is something my children should be encouraged to pursue for their own lifestyle choice, but also that they should not treat someone differently if that is someone elses (or their) choice in life ultimately. That is what I was referring to and that is what I mean about 'misinformation'. Stick to the basics and the facts don't try to color the message.
Your assumption is on pre-tax earnings - what I focus on and what most other people focus on is POST tax ( NET not GROSS). This is why I said the system is flawed and where your example is actually flawed. Without breaks or incentives to reduce the amount of Pre-tax - the net is reduced as well.
I think I agree more with other Posters spirit he tryed to convey but obviously WHOOSED right over your head. When we talk about Education, I have to agree that the fundementals are lacking SEVERELY! I try to make up my kids time in school with covering the basics (like Grammar, English, and Math) while my wife deals with Fine Arts ( Music, Art, etc..). Together we cover Religion and why we believe what we believe. This is as how it should be.
HOWEVER, my issue is that education today is more about indoctrination and socialization - not about learning. People on both the right and the left have it wrong. I have to unprogram my kids about global warming and other crap the school feels is important, instead of doing what they are supposed to be doing - focusing on the EDUCATION!
So when people talk about fixing education - I think it should be left to the parents. Prior to the "RAW DEAL" Education was left to parents. Those that wanted their children to succeed in life spent the time with them to ensure they were educated. You want to fix it - force states to only have non-politically appointed people with a no single majority and non-union member comprise the State Boards of Education and Federal Department of Education. Focus on teaching the children History (like non-modified history), Science (like real science not politically charged science including dissenting opinion), Math, English, Art, Music, and most importantly - CRITICAL THINKING!
Thats correct that the Senate levels the playing field, however, when it comes to the other branch (cough...house) there is inequity. So to say the senate levels thefield for al statesby itself is not true. The executive branch is decided by all (with small states not getting as many votes as larger states), however, those 3 votes from Wyoming could be the deal breaker in the executves choosing and that is what the other poster was saying. The electoral college if there is a flaw is when a set of electors do not vote the way the majority in the state says it should vote when casting their electoral ballots. You want to fix the electoral college fix that clause.
I think that statement is a bit-misguided. It has nothing to do with drinking the 'kool-aid' it has to do with participating in a system that gives that opinion a voice. Granted you are really voting for electors but those votes do count (See GORE-BUSH 2000). What voting comes down to (to those who do go) is actually sounding your voice. Our country has always had a basis where the people have the power. I know it seems like a far cry but the constitution does still exist and is still relevant. If enough people actually voted, the government as a whole could be reformed, but it is the laisse-faire (? spelled right ?) attitude of a populace spoiled by hand-outs. If everyone who could actually went and voiced an opinion things would work the way they were designed, but because people refuse to exercise that right you get rule by the opinionated few (for the good or bad).
That is where the problem lies, not with people abstaining and "working on other ways to change the system" but by not participating within the system. You want to "fix it" then go vote. One opinion means nothing, many millions of opinions spoken in unison have no choice but to be heard.
Isn't the whole point to make the world more fair? What would be the point of a government trying to make the world less fair...
There is no point obviously to making the world less fair, however, the government is not there to make the world fair either. The government is supposed to take care of the things that I should not be concerned with like, International Treaties, Conscription of Army in the Case of War, Settling disputes between states on territory, etc... The government is also in place to enforce laws such as, we do give up the right to kill someone in exchange that we are not killed ( I could make a case about civility here..but I digress). My point though is that if I chose to donate money to an organization I deem is worthy of my contribution that is my choice, not the government mandating economic fairness.
I think you and your fellow voters did
Not yet they have not. I have my say next Tuesday like the rest of em and I will definitely be voting my displeasure. Hopefully enough fellow voters will agree with me ( if not then at least by voting I will have earned the right to Beyotch about it).
In Europe most countries decided to just take over and nationalised the banks that failed. I don't really get why you in the US decided to give them free money with no accountability.
The thing is though, if you don't save the banks then the entire economy comes crashing down.
Not that it has helped Europe any. After just being there (within the last month) the same bailout crap is going on and the same inflation pressures are being felt (so socialism and nationalization hasn't helped them much either!) Add that to the taxes already being paid for the socialized medicine and the rest of the taxes Europeans pay 3,35E (4.39usd)for a 20oz diet soda I pay 1.49Usd. In other words, don't try and sell me how much better a system it is when I have seen first hand.
I will agree we probably did not have much choice in saving the banks (or Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac), but Lehmann's? Bear Sterns? AIG? Wall Street? Gimme a break.... I also said in an earlier post someone needs to go to Jail!
Okay, given how we've tried trickle down economics for a while now, how have things turned out? I'd say we tried it, and it failed. Maybe time for something new, eh?
What would you suggest then to motivate people to want to succeed? I would agree that the wealthy get to many tax breaks for the wrong reasons. My suggestion is give them tax breaks on incentive to invest in jobs (full-time only, not part-time!), capital revinvestment, community reinvestment, education for employees, etc...
Again, what is the incentive from trying to climb from the Bottom Up when you know your going to get screwed at the top? Again, I wouldn't call it a complete failure in the aspect that as another poster pointed out, capital expenditures for the year 2000 drove a boom, there is nothing currenlty to drive another. Changing something and tinkering without understanding the ramifications of the actions long term are useless. I don't propose doing nothing, but clearly when Carter tried the bottom up approach it did not work either and worsened the country. Kennedy funneled everything at the space race, FDR focused on the infrastructure, and Clinton lucked out. So gimmee something that logically makes sense the nation can drive for other than some pie in the sky idea of socialism.
You'd be exempt from paying tax on capital gains from small business investments. Such an exemption would encourage investors to buy equity to help finance start ups rather then buying equity in big corporations. In a way, it would dampen the need for small businesses to get loans for capital improvements.
Obama's philosophy is things work better from the bottom up rather then trickling down from the top. Make life easy for those with the least and they'll have a better time making a go of things and moving up the ladder.
Let me ask this (using a little logic here) -
If things work so well from the bottom up - Where is the incentive for the guy working from the bottom to climb up the ladder knowing full well he is going to get screwed as he gets closer to the top? C'Mon fire those neurons up and think beyond the blatant not very well though out statements.
There should be breaks in place at the top to be used as incentive to climb that is the trickle down theory. Otherwise if your at the top the race is to come down the ladder by diversification of your assets to protect as much of what you have as you can.
How is taxing rich people any more socialist than taxing the middle class?
It is not the taxing of the rich that is at issue when we talk about socialism. The definition implies that each person has something taken from them and everyone gets their "Fair Share". NEWSFLASH! - The world is not fair!
I personally believe that each person earns what they earn and that THEY should choose how that wealth is used. I am by no means Rich, hell, I am not even well-off but it distrubs me at a fundemental level that anyone should decide for me, How much is enough? That goes beyond income to everything in this short life of mine that I have. I feel it is arrogant to "spread the wealth" and ignorant at best to believe "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs - Karl Marx". I work, I save, I spend, I give/donate - who the hell died and appointed Obama, the democrats, the government, or anyone else for that matter to tell me what I should do or not do with the regards to the fruits of my labor or if I have enough. This is why Obama is not on my list of candidates to vote for. It is not about taxes or fiscal responsibility (which both candidates lack - but Obama seems to lack more) - It's about what I have earned and trying to keep as much of it as possible.
What we lack in this country is personal responsibility (to take care of one's own self and the actions that govern themselves), a drive to succeed (some have it but I would dare say most just want to be taken care of), education (not just school, but parents taking responsibility for their own children's education), and foresight (being able to rationally and logically think more than 1 step ahead).
Now before I get jumped I will also point out, every last person on this planet is given choices in life. We make billions and billions of them during our lifetime and to try and blame someone else for our won failure to exercise those previous 4 lacking points is no one's fault but their own. It is not my responsibility to take care of anyone except, myself and my family. Now if you believe that spreading the wealth or that great bullshit statement (I am my brother's keeper or it takes a village to raise a child), we are going to have to fundementally disagree.
Also can anyone actually explain why we should be bailing out these banks in the first place?
BTW - to answer this I wrote to each of my democrat representatives / senators (since Michigan is overflowing with these people) basically pointing out it is not Government's to bail out a damn thing and in fact should be using the mother of all anal probes to find out who is at fault for this calamatity and HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE. Fines, seizure of assets, whatever within the law to make them pay - HOWEVER - to not give any bailout spending my tax dollars on people who criminally and fraudently bilked the American public. I also sent a letter to committee chairman(s) and the president.
What did you do?
All the letters I got back basically said, "sorry, I didnt mean to leave those handprints on your shoulders after the huge anal implement I had to ram into your behind." They didn't care but, come next Tuesday they will, as I vote to throw them out of their offices.
*** SIDE NOTE **** (D)Senator Carl Levin will be getting my vote because he was the only one who voted against the free money handouts.
You don't even know what Socialism is. *Barak Obama* is to the right of most right-wing parties in the rest of the world. Only in the US would a center-right candidate get called 'Socialist'.
Center right Candidate?!?!?! You have obviously been drinking / smoking crack / or [insert drug of choice] today! When I read that I didn't know if that should be tagged as funny or crackhead. Anyone who believes in wealth re-distribution as a vehicle to fix social issues clearly hasn't read Marx's view on social science or Saul Alinsky. Also calling for a second bill of rights and viewing the current bill of rights as flawed? Dude I am just floored and dont know what else to say...
Normally , I usually only chime in on Technical type articles, but your response really touched a nerve within me.
He lied in his question to Obama about being in a position to buy his boss' company. His boss' company also doesn't make the level of income that would trigger a new tax under Obama's plan. Joe himself would get a tax cut under Obama's plan. Joe owes back taxes as it is. He's against Social Security. He's not a licensed plumber. Oh, and did I mention his first name isn't even Joe?
I think you truly missed the fundemental points represented by "Joe's question". Fundemental point #1 - Is it not the American Dream most of us pursue is to better their station in life? I mean you may work for philanthropic purposes but I suspect, like most of us you probably work to sustain yourself and those you support. So, if you can agree that most people seek to better their station in life, don't you find it a bit disingenous to criticize anyone who achieves a high level of success that affords them an income in excess of 250K a year should be penalized for that success?
I mean after all Obama answered Joe's question stating,"
My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. If you've got a plumbing business, you're gonna be better off if you're gonna be better off if you've got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and right now everybody's so pinched that business is bad for everybody and I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody.
"
That is the true point of contention in this whole thing. Obama's comment in bold is socialism pure and simple. Meriam-Webster's Dictionary defines socialism as the following, "a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done."
Trying to bury the plumber or rail about the "lie" he represents is like pissing on the American Dream to better one's station in life, which I personally belive in. I don't think anyone has th right to penalize someone's elses success by taking something from them to give to someone else who hasn't earned it themselves. Spreading the wealth is the lie in this scenario. Spreading the wealth hasn't worked well and realistically, those who do have the money or cn afford it wil ljust find more ways of hiding it or just shipping it offshore. In the end, just like these assinine bailouts we the poor and middle class will end up paying for it no matter who the hell wins the white house. Ask the numerous economic professors who talk about Obama's grand socialist ideas and how it will impact the country. Try this from the wall street journal
I dont diagree with you in the least, however, the way it generally works here in the good ol US of A is for the person caught doing something illegal (bad) is for them to blame the person who enabled it. Personal Responsibility is a foreign unknown concept these days and when it comes to criminals it is genrally not in their vocabulary.
The MPAA is likely to argue that (1) selling anything that makes copies of movies if you have reason to know that the customer is going to use it to infringe is, itself, an act of contributory infringement and (2) while the "archiving" may not violate the DMCA's [Digital Millennium Copyright Act] prohibition on unauthorized decryption, any device that includes any unlicensed "decrypter" or "player" is a circumvention device prohibited by the DMCA.
I think the gist of the story is broken down into those two questions and based on the response from von Lohmann, I would say is the profit worth the risk. I wont argue anything that allows you to backup the legally purchased DVD's you own (or is it lease...might have to re-read the license)is and should be 100% legal, however, if I am just an installer putting these devices in play, I would think long and hard when the customer who begins his "dvd-reselling" business points the finger back at you..
Obviously your not new to the field to understand the difference between an Enterprise Level Admin \ Tech Support person. I cant disagree with what you say but I will trump your statement with a simple truism: GREED KNOWS NO BOUNDS! If you can get someone to do the majority of the work for $12 and only have to occasionally pony up the dough fora $75 and hours person, Greed dictates you do what is cheapest and take the interest on your savings to pay for it later. Otherwise, why would polluters continue on polluting if it wasnt already economically in their best interest to do so and pay the small fines on the large profits they reap from their misdeeds?
Your first comment I agree with, however your second comment,um...no. You must not understand networks and components very well to make that kind of statement. Why you may ask? I hate to be the bearer of bad news but Wireless devices generally still need to "plugged" in somewhere (power and data wire), so regardless of that, I would think at a bare minimum someone whould get off their lazy ass and start tracing wire. If he was using a Broadband OvertheAir card, a little digging into his or the cities account can uncover the needed information to 1. get the wireless broadband provider to locate a MAC and 2. Triangulate the location of said device.
Sorry for whatever reason the just kidding with geekgirlandrea was left off my post - so apologies to her..I was just joking with her in that first line..
I am wondering if your new here or maybe new to IT in general?
In all seriousness, users when not prodded not only dont change their password but generally stick to the default of [ or vice versa] or worst yet pick something pretty easy to guess like pa55w0rd or some such idiocracy. So reading about people's accounts being compromised is not so laughable but more a comment on how we are churning out unlearned retards who know nothing of security, privacy, or rights...
Here in Sweden, employers have to choose between paying you hourly with overtime for all hours over 37.5 in a given week or salary without overtime but giving you an extra week's paid holiday (that's 30 days a year rather than 25).
Even though I typically work a 50-hour week (slightly illegal here, but I'm not actually *forced* to do so, and I generally like my work), I'm happy with the salary plus the extra paid days off, especially since I also have fairly flexible scheduling plus I often can choose for myself between the office and home. If I actually had to work all hours in the office (or if my salary were lower or I had to work a strict 9-6/Monday-Friday schedule), I might feel differently.
(4-digit/. ID here but posting anonymously since I don't wish to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs by possibly getting my employer into hot water.)
See here is a huge difference between American and European Law. There you are entitled to those 25 days a a year, however, here in the US you are entitled to NADA, nothing, squirt, bumpkiss, didly squat, crap , 0 days. Generally most employers will give two weeks of vacation (10 days) after a minimum of one year (well sometimes two years) of service. To get to 25 days (of holiday / vacation time) most employers want to have you working there for more than 30 years. Also Hourly workers must be given a 15 minute break for every 4 hours they work (aka the 30 minute lunch). So although I agree with you, I also understand the botterness of some of the American Workforce. Equity in Labor is a non-starter where laws are concerned and favor the corporation over the person.
We also have "right to work" laws but they are so rare its ridiculous, the majority of us in the US live in a "Employee at will" state, which while it allows you to be able to tell your employer to GTH whenever you wish for whatever reason you wish, it also gives the employer the same right making your ability to labor always seem a little more tenous....
Yes but the codified definition is in your own referenced material as to what constitutes an 'Executive Exemption - Management' - "Generally, "management" includes, but is not limited to, activities such as interviewing, selecting, and training of employees; setting and adjusting their rates of pay and hours of work; directing the work of employees; maintaining production or sales records for use in supervision or control; appraising employees' productivity and efficiency for the purpose of recommending promotions or other changes in status; handling employee complaints and grievances; disciplining employees; planning the work; determining the techniques to be used; apportioning the work among the employees; determining the type of materials, supplies, machinery, equipment or tools to be used or merchandise to be bought, stocked and sold; controlling the flow and distribution of materials or merchandise and supplies; providing for the safety and security of the employees or the property; planning and controlling the budget; and monitoring or implementing legal compliance measures."
However, the original article stems from the apple employees lawsuit ((taken directly FTA (http://www.cio.com/article/print/443113)- "are networking professionals - network engineers, network administrators and network support staff -covered by the FLSA? The plaintiffs contend that Apple misclassified them as exempt from the FLSA so that the company would not have to pay them for overtime. Apple will have to prove that these workers are in fact exempt by demonstrating that their jobs require independent judgment and discretion, and that they're not simply carrying out repeatable tasks")).
In which my post speaks directly to that claim, in which, those individuals (read networking professionals) are generally bent over by the amendments to the FLSA in 2004.
So I wasnt ignoring, the OP, I was just moving the discussion back towards the real issue that was presented in the first place and stating very plainly, that if your classified a "professional" under the "professional exemptions" -
Grab your ankles and prepare to be violated. Dont expect a kiss afterward, unless of course you have a politician in your pocket.
Actually, according to the FLSA (http://www.resource4flsalaw.com/fairlaborstandardsactemployeeclassifications.html )
"The Fair Labor Standards Act provides for a âoeprofessional exemptionâ for such jobs as:
One that requires advanced education or knowledge Work in an original and creative artistic field Teaching Computer systems analyst, programmer, engineer, or similar field Those who perform work which is intellectual and varied in character, the accomplishment of which cannot be standardized as to time Those who regularly exercise discretion and judgment These classifications have frustrated many workers, such as computer and information system workers, who have a great deal of specialized knowledge but no professional training. These changes to the law allow many companies to reclassify these workers as âoeprofessionalsâ and thus not pay them overtime.
Your employer must establish precisely why your position qualifies for a professional exemption through a number of wage and duty tests. Salaried positions are generally immediately exempt from overtime, but other positions must meet specific requirements in order to be exempt. If you believe you were not properly compensated for your work, you may be entitled to take legal action. Contact an experienced labor law attorney today."
As far as the litmus tests an employer needs to go through it does not take a rocket scientist to manipulate that system. So I would say based on this "amendent to clarify the FLSA in 2004" a large number of people were bent over and forced to take it.
Of course posting this tidbit as well as a reference doesnt mean those on/. will read it;)
I have to agree with you in that OpenSource (while it may be superior for a computing platform) really is not ready for avergae Joe / Jane Doe. I couldnt even imagine the amount of support within my own family that would be required if I replaced the "Microsoft Solution". Before anyone starts telling me about all the benefits etc, I am agreeing with the original poster in that, unless you are semi proficient or really inquisitive OSS is not ready for primetime. Forget the marketing it must be 100% user friendly and reliable(i.e. as idiot proof as possible or even - "Hey this is great, joe I just put in the Cd and my program/game works - no configuration required). Just my two cents...
Oh yeah - to all the rabid oss people - you need to really work with a general business sometime where the average user is a 60 year old grandma who comes in twice a week to help out with the secretarial work and caouldnt tell you the difference between a hard drive and hard toast...
I have to say I disagree with the stance you posted. I will agree that the society in general is overly litigious and that parents generally are not tuned into school / children maybe the way that they should be. I can even agree with your viewpoint on having minimum standards are a good thing.
However, throwing money at the education problem has done nothing to correct it despite the best efforts of NCLB. In fact, it could be argued that it a huge waste of tax payer money that could go to other efforts. Wouldn't it be more valuable to say use the money to build more schools and reduce class size, along with reduce the size of the administration, and introduce a voucher based system forcing schools to compete for their education dollars?
By allowing money to be thrown at the problem and holding schools to minimum standards instead of forcing competition between them we are lowering the expectation and not getting a great return on our investment (aka the childs education). Just my 2 cents.
Slashdot Mirror
Well....I started out as a Help Desk Monkey myself and am now In global Infrastructure - it's taken a whil eto get there but I can give you a few keys to the kingdom...
First off, never complain about the position you are currently in. When talking to anyone whether inside or outside the company - complaints about your role - devalues your own role therefore it devaules you. To improve your role and to improve the opinions of those around you - only stress the good points of the role and thework you are doing. Also, toot your own horn - if your dealing with difficult probles and you find solutions let it be known YOU did it. Email off the manager and cc: his boss (depending on the type of organization). this will increase your visbility.
Second, look for ways to expand upon your own set of responsibilities. I hate to say it but the people who jump in and start working (not volunteer) are the ones who tendto get lookeda t first in the promotion department. Its shows you have initiative and your willingness to expand upon current sets of responsibilities. You do however, have to make sure you do not neglect your first set of responsibilities and ensure they remain top notch.
Third, Education is always important, however, it really depends on the company and the value they place oneducation beyond the initial hire. An example of this, the current company I work for values your contribution beyond the intial hire and education is only secondary to ability to perform. Performance, experience, and value add are what employers value the most. Any way you can find to stream line or reduce cost to save money (especially to the bottom line)gets you noticed alot faster. I have people who have their masters who I still have to tell how to do their job. But again, Education can never be taken away from you so there is always a value.
Fourth, get diversified. The more diversified your skill set the more valuable you are. If you are getting a masters - get your masters in something other than IT but is complimentary (like some engineering discipline). Gain knowledge in as many programming languages (if you want to program) and / or operating systems as possible. Unless you want to specialize but that limits mobility and pigeon holes you to particular roles. In IT the more diversified you are education and knowledge wise the further you will go and the faster.
Lastly, In even the worst economies the job market is open to those who have the skills and track record of accomplishments to prove it. Keeping notes of projects that save money, increase efficiency, reduce total overall cost, etc...that is what you want toinclude on your resume. Do not emblish and be sure it is verifable in some way. Do not be afraid to search out companies and call them to get your foot into the position you want. Its ok to inquire of companies that do not have direct posting's because some companies do not necessarily list them. But again it is the persistance at which you pursue your endevours that is going to make you attractive to employers.
So like other posters have said, clearly define what you are seeking and begin to expand yourself in those ways. Also, be careful what you ask for because you may just get it - and - that is not always what you think. One last piece of advice - remember money is not everything - find something you love to do and do it exceptionally because when you do - the money will follow.
Good Luck
I really just wanted to read the discussion and not get involved - but one comment I have not seen is simply this:
Any "Stimulus" from money being spent is going to have 0 impact on the US or the creation of US jobs.
Let's face facts here people - unless the money is spent on "American produced goods and services" the money will go everywhere other than the US.
For example: John Q. Public runs on down to Walmart and says, "Geez that there TV and blueray player looks good - Im gonna buy that with this here stimulus check" Where did the money go?
China, Korea, Japan, etc...
So let's face it - People don't think. You want a stimulus package that creates jobs and boosts America's economy - Hand out a voucher only redeemable at "X" American companies (not an American Subsidiary of X Global Company or better still - MADE, PRODUCED, DELIVERED, CREATED in the U.S. of A.). Forget handing out the cash, otherwise your stimulating someone else's economy.
This is probably one of the most thought out comments I have read today in this thread - If I had the mod points and it went higher than +5 I would give them to you.
You should also mention though point 5 -
Whether a voiced opinion is meritous or unpopular, all voices have a right to be heard. If one voice screams loudest that voice then bears no weight. As the system stands currently - all voices carry weight.
I am not a conspiracy theorist, however, I do object to material being taught through either a red or blue colored prism. For example, I may not agree totally with people who talk about global warming, but I can not nor would not dismiss it. However, in my own current text (as in my children's classroom text and their teacher POV) it is taught as an undeniable fact with no other oppossing viewpoint or that consensus amongst scientists themselves has not been 100% established. That from a purely scientific perspective without consensus (like evolution has consenus whether I agree or not) it should not be taught as fact. This is what I suggest by critical thinking. Understand that not everyone will agree but a group concensus based on factual reality does help. As far as socialization, if you live in the states talk to any teacher - they will tell you all about socialization. That is something that should be left to parents to deal with. For an example of socialization, when a teacher reads a wonderfully inappropriate re-written pc version of a story tale that includes two gay characters falling in love - I have a right to object. I want my children yes to understand that homosexual relationships exist and that I as a parent should be able explain to them about them and my particular views. Such as, I feel the lifestyle is inappropriate, however, that homosexuals regardless of their sexual orientation / lifestyle still deserve to be treated no different than anyone else who is not homosexual. The difference in the messge is I do not agree or feel it is something my children should be encouraged to pursue for their own lifestyle choice, but also that they should not treat someone differently if that is someone elses (or their) choice in life ultimately. That is what I was referring to and that is what I mean about 'misinformation'. Stick to the basics and the facts don't try to color the message.
Your assumption is on pre-tax earnings - what I focus on and what most other people focus on is POST tax ( NET not GROSS). This is why I said the system is flawed and where your example is actually flawed. Without breaks or incentives to reduce the amount of Pre-tax - the net is reduced as well.
I think I agree more with other Posters spirit he tryed to convey but obviously WHOOSED right over your head. When we talk about Education, I have to agree that the fundementals are lacking SEVERELY! I try to make up my kids time in school with covering the basics (like Grammar, English, and Math) while my wife deals with Fine Arts ( Music, Art, etc..). Together we cover Religion and why we believe what we believe. This is as how it should be.
HOWEVER, my issue is that education today is more about indoctrination and socialization - not about learning. People on both the right and the left have it wrong. I have to unprogram my kids about global warming and other crap the school feels is important, instead of doing what they are supposed to be doing - focusing on the EDUCATION!
So when people talk about fixing education - I think it should be left to the parents. Prior to the "RAW DEAL" Education was left to parents. Those that wanted their children to succeed in life spent the time with them to ensure they were educated. You want to fix it - force states to only have non-politically appointed people with a no single majority and non-union member comprise the State Boards of Education and Federal Department of Education. Focus on teaching the children History (like non-modified history), Science (like real science not politically charged science including dissenting opinion), Math, English, Art, Music, and most importantly - CRITICAL THINKING!
That will fix it.
Thats correct that the Senate levels the playing field, however, when it comes to the other branch (cough...house) there is inequity. So to say the senate levels thefield for al statesby itself is not true. The executive branch is decided by all (with small states not getting as many votes as larger states), however, those 3 votes from Wyoming could be the deal breaker in the executves choosing and that is what the other poster was saying. The electoral college if there is a flaw is when a set of electors do not vote the way the majority in the state says it should vote when casting their electoral ballots. You want to fix the electoral college fix that clause.
I think that statement is a bit-misguided. It has nothing to do with drinking the 'kool-aid' it has to do with participating in a system that gives that opinion a voice. Granted you are really voting for electors but those votes do count (See GORE-BUSH 2000). What voting comes down to (to those who do go) is actually sounding your voice. Our country has always had a basis where the people have the power. I know it seems like a far cry but the constitution does still exist and is still relevant. If enough people actually voted, the government as a whole could be reformed, but it is the laisse-faire (? spelled right ?) attitude of a populace spoiled by hand-outs. If everyone who could actually went and voiced an opinion things would work the way they were designed, but because people refuse to exercise that right you get rule by the opinionated few (for the good or bad).
That is where the problem lies, not with people abstaining and "working on other ways to change the system" but by not participating within the system. You want to "fix it" then go vote. One opinion means nothing, many millions of opinions spoken in unison have no choice but to be heard.
My two cents
Isn't the whole point to make the world more fair? What would be the point of a government trying to make the world less fair...
There is no point obviously to making the world less fair, however, the government is not there to make the world fair either. The government is supposed to take care of the things that I should not be concerned with like, International Treaties, Conscription of Army in the Case of War, Settling disputes between states on territory, etc... The government is also in place to enforce laws such as, we do give up the right to kill someone in exchange that we are not killed ( I could make a case about civility here..but I digress). My point though is that if I chose to donate money to an organization I deem is worthy of my contribution that is my choice, not the government mandating economic fairness.
I think you and your fellow voters did
Not yet they have not. I have my say next Tuesday like the rest of em and I will definitely be voting my displeasure. Hopefully enough fellow voters will agree with me ( if not then at least by voting I will have earned the right to Beyotch about it).
In Europe most countries decided to just take over and nationalised the banks that failed. I don't really get why you in the US decided to give them free money with no accountability.
The thing is though, if you don't save the banks then the entire economy comes crashing down.
Not that it has helped Europe any. After just being there (within the last month) the same bailout crap is going on and the same inflation pressures are being felt (so socialism and nationalization hasn't helped them much either!) Add that to the taxes already being paid for the socialized medicine and the rest of the taxes Europeans pay 3,35E (4.39usd)for a 20oz diet soda I pay 1.49Usd. In other words, don't try and sell me how much better a system it is when I have seen first hand.
I will agree we probably did not have much choice in saving the banks (or Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac), but Lehmann's? Bear Sterns? AIG? Wall Street? Gimme a break.... I also said in an earlier post someone needs to go to Jail!
Okay, given how we've tried trickle down economics for a while now, how have things turned out? I'd say we tried it, and it failed. Maybe time for something new, eh?
What would you suggest then to motivate people to want to succeed? I would agree that the wealthy get to many tax breaks for the wrong reasons. My suggestion is give them tax breaks on incentive to invest in jobs (full-time only, not part-time!), capital revinvestment, community reinvestment, education for employees, etc...
Again, what is the incentive from trying to climb from the Bottom Up when you know your going to get screwed at the top? Again, I wouldn't call it a complete failure in the aspect that as another poster pointed out, capital expenditures for the year 2000 drove a boom, there is nothing currenlty to drive another. Changing something and tinkering without understanding the ramifications of the actions long term are useless. I don't propose doing nothing, but clearly when Carter tried the bottom up approach it did not work either and worsened the country. Kennedy funneled everything at the space race, FDR focused on the infrastructure, and Clinton lucked out. So gimmee something that logically makes sense the nation can drive for other than some pie in the sky idea of socialism.
You'd be exempt from paying tax on capital gains from small business investments. Such an exemption would encourage investors to buy equity to help finance start ups rather then buying equity in big corporations. In a way, it would dampen the need for small businesses to get loans for capital improvements.
Obama's philosophy is things work better from the bottom up rather then trickling down from the top. Make life easy for those with the least and they'll have a better time making a go of things and moving up the ladder.
Let me ask this (using a little logic here) -
If things work so well from the bottom up - Where is the incentive for the guy working from the bottom to climb up the ladder knowing full well he is going to get screwed as he gets closer to the top? C'Mon fire those neurons up and think beyond the blatant not very well though out statements.
There should be breaks in place at the top to be used as incentive to climb that is the trickle down theory. Otherwise if your at the top the race is to come down the ladder by diversification of your assets to protect as much of what you have as you can.
How is taxing rich people any more socialist than taxing the middle class?
It is not the taxing of the rich that is at issue when we talk about socialism. The definition implies that each person has something taken from them and everyone gets their "Fair Share". NEWSFLASH! - The world is not fair!
I personally believe that each person earns what they earn and that THEY should choose how that wealth is used. I am by no means Rich, hell, I am not even well-off but it distrubs me at a fundemental level that anyone should decide for me, How much is enough? That goes beyond income to everything in this short life of mine that I have. I feel it is arrogant to "spread the wealth" and ignorant at best to believe "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs - Karl Marx". I work, I save, I spend, I give/donate - who the hell died and appointed Obama, the democrats, the government, or anyone else for that matter to tell me what I should do or not do with the regards to the fruits of my labor or if I have enough. This is why Obama is not on my list of candidates to vote for. It is not about taxes or fiscal responsibility (which both candidates lack - but Obama seems to lack more) - It's about what I have earned and trying to keep as much of it as possible.
What we lack in this country is personal responsibility (to take care of one's own self and the actions that govern themselves), a drive to succeed (some have it but I would dare say most just want to be taken care of), education (not just school, but parents taking responsibility for their own children's education), and foresight (being able to rationally and logically think more than 1 step ahead).
Now before I get jumped I will also point out, every last person on this planet is given choices in life. We make billions and billions of them during our lifetime and to try and blame someone else for our won failure to exercise those previous 4 lacking points is no one's fault but their own. It is not my responsibility to take care of anyone except, myself and my family. Now if you believe that spreading the wealth or that great bullshit statement (I am my brother's keeper or it takes a village to raise a child), we are going to have to fundementally disagree.
Also can anyone actually explain why we should be bailing out these banks in the first place?
BTW - to answer this I wrote to each of my democrat representatives / senators (since Michigan is overflowing with these people) basically pointing out it is not Government's to bail out a damn thing and in fact should be using the mother of all anal probes to find out who is at fault for this calamatity and HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE. Fines, seizure of assets, whatever within the law to make them pay - HOWEVER - to not give any bailout spending my tax dollars on people who criminally and fraudently bilked the American public. I also sent a letter to committee chairman(s) and the president.
What did you do?
All the letters I got back basically said, "sorry, I didnt mean to leave those handprints on your shoulders after the huge anal implement I had to ram into your behind." They didn't care but, come next Tuesday they will, as I vote to throw them out of their offices.
*** SIDE NOTE **** (D)Senator Carl Levin will be getting my vote because he was the only one who voted against the free money handouts.
Center right Candidate?!?!?! You have obviously been drinking / smoking crack / or [insert drug of choice] today! When I read that I didn't know if that should be tagged as funny or crackhead. Anyone who believes in wealth re-distribution as a vehicle to fix social issues clearly hasn't read Marx's view on social science or Saul Alinsky. Also calling for a second bill of rights and viewing the current bill of rights as flawed? Dude I am just floored and dont know what else to say...
except drink one for me man!
He lied in his question to Obama about being in a position to buy his boss' company. His boss' company also doesn't make the level of income that would trigger a new tax under Obama's plan. Joe himself would get a tax cut under Obama's plan. Joe owes back taxes as it is. He's against Social Security. He's not a licensed plumber. Oh, and did I mention his first name isn't even Joe?
I think you truly missed the fundemental points represented by "Joe's question". Fundemental point #1 - Is it not the American Dream most of us pursue is to better their station in life? I mean you may work for philanthropic purposes but I suspect, like most of us you probably work to sustain yourself and those you support. So, if you can agree that most people seek to better their station in life, don't you find it a bit disingenous to criticize anyone who achieves a high level of success that affords them an income in excess of 250K a year should be penalized for that success? I mean after all Obama answered Joe's question stating,"
My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. If you've got a plumbing business, you're gonna be better off if you're gonna be better off if you've got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and right now everybody's so pinched that business is bad for everybody and I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody.
" That is the true point of contention in this whole thing. Obama's comment in bold is socialism pure and simple. Meriam-Webster's Dictionary defines socialism as the following, "a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done." Trying to bury the plumber or rail about the "lie" he represents is like pissing on the American Dream to better one's station in life, which I personally belive in. I don't think anyone has th right to penalize someone's elses success by taking something from them to give to someone else who hasn't earned it themselves. Spreading the wealth is the lie in this scenario. Spreading the wealth hasn't worked well and realistically, those who do have the money or cn afford it wil ljust find more ways of hiding it or just shipping it offshore. In the end, just like these assinine bailouts we the poor and middle class will end up paying for it no matter who the hell wins the white house. Ask the numerous economic professors who talk about Obama's grand socialist ideas and how it will impact the country. Try this from the wall street journal
I dont diagree with you in the least, however, the way it generally works here in the good ol US of A is for the person caught doing something illegal (bad) is for them to blame the person who enabled it. Personal Responsibility is a foreign unknown concept these days and when it comes to criminals it is genrally not in their vocabulary.
Selling products that archive DVDs
The MPAA is likely to argue that (1) selling anything that makes copies of movies if you have reason to know that the customer is going to use it to infringe is, itself, an act of contributory infringement and (2) while the "archiving" may not violate the DMCA's [Digital Millennium Copyright Act] prohibition on unauthorized decryption, any device that includes any unlicensed "decrypter" or "player" is a circumvention device prohibited by the DMCA.
I think the gist of the story is broken down into those two questions and based on the response from von Lohmann, I would say is the profit worth the risk. I wont argue anything that allows you to backup the legally purchased DVD's you own (or is it lease...might have to re-read the license)is and should be 100% legal, however, if I am just an installer putting these devices in play, I would think long and hard when the customer who begins his "dvd-reselling" business points the finger back at you..
Obviously your not new to the field to understand the difference between an Enterprise Level Admin \ Tech Support person. I cant disagree with what you say but I will trump your statement with a simple truism: GREED KNOWS NO BOUNDS! If you can get someone to do the majority of the work for $12 and only have to occasionally pony up the dough fora $75 and hours person, Greed dictates you do what is cheapest and take the interest on your savings to pay for it later. Otherwise, why would polluters continue on polluting if it wasnt already economically in their best interest to do so and pay the small fines on the large profits they reap from their misdeeds?
Your first comment I agree with, however your second comment,um...no. You must not understand networks and components very well to make that kind of statement. Why you may ask? I hate to be the bearer of bad news but Wireless devices generally still need to "plugged" in somewhere (power and data wire), so regardless of that, I would think at a bare minimum someone whould get off their lazy ass and start tracing wire. If he was using a Broadband OvertheAir card, a little digging into his or the cities account can uncover the needed information to 1. get the wireless broadband provider to locate a MAC and 2. Triangulate the location of said device.
Just my 2 cents
Sorry for whatever reason the just kidding with geekgirlandrea was left off my post - so apologies to her..I was just joking with her in that first line..
I am wondering if your new here or maybe new to IT in general?
In all seriousness, users when not prodded not only dont change their password but generally stick to the default of [ or vice versa] or worst yet pick something pretty easy to guess like pa55w0rd or some such idiocracy. So reading about people's accounts being compromised is not so laughable but more a comment on how we are churning out unlearned retards who know nothing of security, privacy, or rights...
Just my 2cents...
Here in Sweden, employers have to choose between paying you hourly with overtime for all hours over 37.5 in a given week or salary without overtime but giving you an extra week's paid holiday (that's 30 days a year rather than 25).
Even though I typically work a 50-hour week (slightly illegal here, but I'm not actually *forced* to do so, and I generally like my work), I'm happy with the salary plus the extra paid days off, especially since I also have fairly flexible scheduling plus I often can choose for myself between the office and home. If I actually had to work all hours in the office (or if my salary were lower or I had to work a strict 9-6/Monday-Friday schedule), I might feel differently.
(4-digit /. ID here but posting anonymously since I don't wish to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs by possibly getting my employer into hot water.)
See here is a huge difference between American and European Law. There you are entitled to those 25 days a a year, however, here in the US you are entitled to NADA, nothing, squirt, bumpkiss, didly squat, crap , 0 days. Generally most employers will give two weeks of vacation (10 days) after a minimum of one year (well sometimes two years) of service. To get to 25 days (of holiday / vacation time) most employers want to have you working there for more than 30 years. Also Hourly workers must be given a 15 minute break for every 4 hours they work (aka the 30 minute lunch). So although I agree with you, I also understand the botterness of some of the American Workforce. Equity in Labor is a non-starter where laws are concerned and favor the corporation over the person.
We also have "right to work" laws but they are so rare its ridiculous, the majority of us in the US live in a "Employee at will" state, which while it allows you to be able to tell your employer to GTH whenever you wish for whatever reason you wish, it also gives the employer the same right making your ability to labor always seem a little more tenous....
done ranting back to work...
Yes but the codified definition is in your own referenced material as to what constitutes an 'Executive Exemption - Management' - "Generally, "management" includes, but is not limited to, activities such as interviewing, selecting, and training of employees; setting and adjusting their rates of pay and hours of work; directing the work of employees; maintaining production or sales records for use in supervision or control; appraising employees' productivity and efficiency for the purpose of recommending promotions or other changes in status; handling employee complaints and grievances; disciplining employees; planning the work; determining the techniques to be used; apportioning the work among the employees; determining the type of materials, supplies, machinery, equipment or tools to be used or merchandise to be bought, stocked and sold; controlling the flow and distribution of materials or merchandise and supplies; providing for the safety and security of the employees or the property; planning and controlling the budget; and monitoring or implementing legal compliance measures."
However, the original article stems from the apple employees lawsuit ((taken directly FTA (http://www.cio.com/article/print/443113)- "are networking professionals - network engineers, network administrators and network support staff -covered by the FLSA? The plaintiffs contend that Apple misclassified them as exempt from the FLSA so that the company would not have to pay them for overtime. Apple will have to prove that these workers are in fact exempt by demonstrating that their jobs require independent judgment and discretion, and that they're not simply carrying out repeatable tasks")).
In which my post speaks directly to that claim, in which, those individuals (read networking professionals) are generally bent over by the amendments to the FLSA in 2004.
So I wasnt ignoring, the OP, I was just moving the discussion back towards the real issue that was presented in the first place and stating very plainly, that if your classified a "professional" under the "professional exemptions" -
Grab your ankles and prepare to be violated. Dont expect a kiss afterward, unless of course you have a politician in your pocket.
Actually, according to the FLSA (http://www.resource4flsalaw.com/fairlaborstandardsactemployeeclassifications.html )
"The Fair Labor Standards Act provides for a âoeprofessional exemptionâ for such jobs as:
One that requires advanced education or knowledge
Work in an original and creative artistic field
Teaching
Computer systems analyst, programmer, engineer, or similar field
Those who perform work which is intellectual and varied in character, the accomplishment of which cannot be standardized as to time
Those who regularly exercise discretion and judgment
These classifications have frustrated many workers, such as computer and information system workers, who have a great deal of specialized knowledge but no professional training. These changes to the law allow many companies to reclassify these workers as âoeprofessionalsâ and thus not pay them overtime.
Your employer must establish precisely why your position qualifies for a professional exemption through a number of wage and duty tests. Salaried positions are generally immediately exempt from overtime, but other positions must meet specific requirements in order to be exempt. If you believe you were not properly compensated for your work, you may be entitled to take legal action. Contact an experienced labor law attorney today."
As far as the litmus tests an employer needs to go through it does not take a rocket scientist to manipulate that system. So I would say based on this "amendent to clarify the FLSA in 2004" a large number of people were bent over and forced to take it.
Of course posting this tidbit as well as a reference doesnt mean those on /. will read it ;)
I have to agree with you in that OpenSource (while it may be superior for a computing platform) really is not ready for avergae Joe / Jane Doe. I couldnt even imagine the amount of support within my own family that would be required if I replaced the "Microsoft Solution". Before anyone starts telling me about all the benefits etc, I am agreeing with the original poster in that, unless you are semi proficient or really inquisitive OSS is not ready for primetime. Forget the marketing it must be 100% user friendly and reliable(i.e. as idiot proof as possible or even - "Hey this is great, joe I just put in the Cd and my program /game works - no configuration required). Just my two cents...
Oh yeah - to all the rabid oss people - you need to really work with a general business sometime where the average user is a 60 year old grandma who comes in twice a week to help out with the secretarial work and caouldnt tell you the difference between a hard drive and hard toast...
I have to say I disagree with the stance you posted. I will agree that the society in general is overly litigious and that parents generally are not tuned into school / children maybe the way that they should be. I can even agree with your viewpoint on having minimum standards are a good thing.
However, throwing money at the education problem has done nothing to correct it despite the best efforts of NCLB. In fact, it could be argued that it a huge waste of tax payer money that could go to other efforts. Wouldn't it be more valuable to say use the money to build more schools and reduce class size, along with reduce the size of the administration, and introduce a voucher based system forcing schools to compete for their education dollars?
By allowing money to be thrown at the problem and holding schools to minimum standards instead of forcing competition between them we are lowering the expectation and not getting a great return on our investment (aka the childs education). Just my 2 cents.