The real question is: Are the companies that are moving jobs overseas profiting? Are their share prices rising? Are they paying better dividends? Or are they merely reducing technical costs so that the executives can receive higher salaries and bonuses?
A lot of us tech workers are also stockholders as well. In theory, our job cuts should lead to gains in our investments.
Having a couple teens, and remembering what it was like to be a teen, I'm not so sure. Would my daughter really buy a Turtles CD instead of Good Charlotte because the former was cheaper?
But you do have a good point. My guess is that the record companies would make even more money because old baby-boomers like me would probably buy those old CD's if their price were more reasonable.
One thing I've noticed over the years: Women want a man to BE successful, but they often don't want to be married to a man who's doing the necessary work to become successful.
(There's a similar thing with cars: If you're single, having a cool sports-car will help you attract women. Once you've married, she'll want you to trade it in for something more 'practical'.)
That reminds me: I worked for a company in the early 90's where I wrote quite a bit of the code in one of their software products. I left in 1997, came back around 2001, and was amused to see there was still "#ifdef PHARLAP286" code that the maintainers were afraid to remove.
You're making the assumption that the people who run companies are completely knowledgeable and competent. Often, though, they are not.
A month of refactoring/cleanup can often pay for itself in increased productivity within a few months. There's nothing like spending a couple weeks to find and fix an old bug, then spending another week to find the same bug again because someone cut-and-pasted code all over the place.
I've also worked for a large number of companies over the years, and have also worked on open-source. I'd venture that one of the main reasons closed-source doesn't improve is that many (actually most) employers do not want to pay for 'code cleanup'. An employee will see little gain from trying to improve the code, and will certainly get penalized if his work causes even a single bug.
I've been working on an open-source project for about three years. The users are as nice today as they ever were, with many offering praise (and even apologies) before submitting bugs.
1. Apple is the BMW/Mercedes of computers. Very high quality, a pleasure to use, fast, but expensive. 2. A Windows PC is like a Chevy SUV. Has many capabilities, but is somewhat bloated. It costs less than an Apple, but still is beyond what many people can afford. 3. The Linux PC is akin to a Honda Civic, VW Beatle, or small Toyota. It's very affordable, and yet, is also highly reliable.
Now, which types of cars are most common on the roads?
This is a good thing, as it will help correct the situation. A week dollar means that overseas workers and products become more expensive, while domestic become more affordable.
...but they might get one.
on
Ageism in IT?
·
· Score: 1
In most places I've worked, most of the software engineers are married. A 21-year-old has a good chance of having small children in the next few years. And an employee with one or two babies/toddlers in the house is going to be WAY less able to work long hours than a 45-year old with teenagers (who are rarely even around).
Are you sure? In the US, copyrights stay in force until something like 50 years after the death of the author. But religious people believe that god wrote the bible, and they certainly don't believe that god is dead.
Who knows? Maybe that is god's plan. How can we mortals presume to think otherwise, when it's obvious that humanity was destined to evolve to this point. Why else were we provided with silicon, and the ability to use it?
Maybe I should start a religion base on this notion. Killing time on slasdot has got to be better than killing people on a battlefield. Besides, didn't Heinlein suggest that founding a religion was a good way to get rich?
True. But suppose the Big Bang theory is correct. Then even if there are millions of planets capable of supporting life, there's going to be one where it first appears. Maybe that just happens to be ours.
Maybe it's because Sony has a long-standing reputation for making quality products that are sold in a highly-competitive market, while Microsoft's reputation is that of a monopolist selling shoddy products.
I just keep replaying the 'classics', like, currently, Ultima Underworld. Those that I don't already own can usually be bought for next to nothing from the bargain shelves. It's rather amusing how today's $60 hit will be $20 a year from now, and less than $10 after a couple years. The game industry has a rather wierd pricing strategy, but it works fine for me.
That's a really good point. I'm sure the same 'geek' personalities existed 100,000 years ago. Not having computers to play with, they spent their time doing other anti-social activities. So while the 'normal' people were gathering berries or trying to hunt with rocks, the geeks were messing around with flint or clay.
Of course, capitalism works great when there's a free market. But that means there is a variety of suppliers. If, say, Kelloggs raises its cereal prices, I can buy similar products from several other companies. Or I can eat toast for breakfast.
If the company that owns the road leading to my house decides to raise the price by 4X, what am I supposed to do?
One can also learn things from gaming. For example, one particularly large chip company encourages a form of interaction called 'constructive confrontation'. The Monkey Island games' "insult dueling" could be excellent practice for this.
I agree that it sounds fairly goofy that people are claiming to follow the Jedi 'religion'. But I've thought that it's possible that other, mainstream, religions may have started in similar ways.
Look at the Greek 'myths'; they're really good stories. Maybe they started purely as stories, and that it was only over several generations that people started to accept them as real.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I guess they'll make lots of money by working with MS, just like WordPerfect, Stac, and Borland did.
The real question is: Are the companies that are moving jobs overseas profiting? Are their share prices rising? Are they paying better dividends? Or are they merely reducing technical costs so that the executives can receive higher salaries and bonuses?
A lot of us tech workers are also stockholders as well. In theory, our job cuts should lead to gains in our investments.
Having a couple teens, and remembering what it was like to be a teen, I'm not so sure. Would my daughter really buy a Turtles CD instead of Good Charlotte because the former was cheaper?
But you do have a good point. My guess is that the record companies would make even more money because old baby-boomers like me would probably buy those old CD's if their price were more reasonable.
One thing I've noticed over the years: Women want a man to BE successful, but they often don't want to be married to a man who's doing the necessary work to become successful.
(There's a similar thing with cars: If you're single, having a cool sports-car will help you attract women. Once you've married, she'll want you to trade it in for something more 'practical'.)
That reminds me: I worked for a company in the early 90's where I wrote quite a bit of the code in one of their software products. I left in 1997, came back around 2001, and was amused to see there was still "#ifdef PHARLAP286" code that the maintainers were afraid to remove.
Shouldn't there be a "MS loves them" in that row somewhere?
You're making the assumption that the people who run companies are completely knowledgeable and competent. Often, though, they are not.
A month of refactoring/cleanup can often pay for itself in increased productivity within a few months. There's nothing like spending a couple weeks to find and fix an old bug, then spending another week to find the same bug again because someone cut-and-pasted code all over the place.
I've also worked for a large number of companies over the years, and have also worked on open-source. I'd venture that one of the main reasons closed-source doesn't improve is that many (actually most) employers do not want to pay for 'code cleanup'. An employee will see little gain from trying to improve the code, and will certainly get penalized if his work causes even a single bug.
I've been working on an open-source project for about three years. The users are as nice today as they ever were, with many offering praise (and even apologies) before submitting bugs.
Comparing computers to cars, I get this analogy:
1. Apple is the BMW/Mercedes of computers. Very high quality, a pleasure to use, fast, but expensive.
2. A Windows PC is like a Chevy SUV. Has many capabilities, but is somewhat bloated. It costs less than an Apple, but still is beyond what many people can afford.
3. The Linux PC is akin to a Honda Civic, VW Beatle, or small Toyota. It's very affordable, and yet, is also highly reliable.
Now, which types of cars are most common on the roads?
Does this mean he's moving to Portland, Oregon?
This is a good thing, as it will help correct the situation. A week dollar means that overseas workers and products become more expensive, while domestic become more affordable.
In most places I've worked, most of the software engineers are married. A 21-year-old has a good chance of having small children in the next few years. And an employee with one or two babies/toddlers in the house is going to be WAY less able to work long hours than a 45-year old with teenagers (who are rarely even around).
Are you sure? In the US, copyrights stay in force until something like 50 years after the death of the author. But religious people believe that god wrote the bible, and they certainly don't believe that god is dead.
There could be a BIG lawsuit coming out of this.
Who knows? Maybe that is god's plan. How can we mortals presume to think otherwise, when it's obvious that humanity was destined to evolve to this point. Why else were we provided with silicon, and the ability to use it?
Maybe I should start a religion base on this notion. Killing time on slasdot has got to be better than killing people on a battlefield. Besides, didn't Heinlein suggest that founding a religion was a good way to get rich?
True. But suppose the Big Bang theory is correct. Then even if there are millions of planets capable of supporting life, there's going to be one where it first appears. Maybe that just happens to be ours.
Maybe it's because Sony has a long-standing reputation for making quality products that are sold in a highly-competitive market, while Microsoft's reputation is that of a monopolist selling shoddy products.
I just keep replaying the 'classics', like, currently, Ultima Underworld. Those that I don't already own can usually be bought for next to nothing from the bargain shelves. It's rather amusing how today's $60 hit will be $20 a year from now, and less than $10 after a couple years. The game industry has a rather wierd pricing strategy, but it works fine for me.
PPP doesn't have to be difficult. Have you tried 'wvdial'? It's quite an amazing little package.
That's a really good point. I'm sure the same 'geek' personalities existed 100,000 years ago. Not having computers to play with, they spent their time doing other anti-social activities. So while the 'normal' people were gathering berries or trying to hunt with rocks, the geeks were messing around with flint or clay.
You're wrong. The 'Jamaican accent' requirement isn't legal, since it depends on your ethnic background.
So the requirements aren't nearly as stringent as you've implied.
Of course, capitalism works great when there's a free market. But that means there is a variety of suppliers. If, say, Kelloggs raises its cereal prices, I can buy similar products from several other companies. Or I can eat toast for breakfast.
If the company that owns the road leading to my house decides to raise the price by 4X, what am I supposed to do?
One can also learn things from gaming. For example, one particularly large chip company encourages a form of interaction called 'constructive confrontation'. The Monkey Island games' "insult dueling" could be excellent practice for this.
I agree that it sounds fairly goofy that people are claiming to follow the Jedi 'religion'. But I've thought that it's possible that other, mainstream, religions may have started in similar ways.
Look at the Greek 'myths'; they're really good stories. Maybe they started purely as stories, and that it was only over several generations that people started to accept them as real.
Put together 4 (a Beowolf cluster!), and you could get surround-sound.