Exactly. All the employers seem to have the attitude "well you love this stuff, so you would do it for free - so you must love working like a slave. If you don't like working like a slave then you can't be very enthusiastic or motivated".

I've long been coming to the conclusion that IT is now fucked however I've also found that the places with mature business practices and decent project management were the ones that offer the least stress. That's because those ancillary to IT were skilled enough to manage the stakeholders, so the only stress you were under was to perform.

Generally if I see an organization filled with a lot of young people and a disregard for experienced people, I run. You can tell what sort of organization it is going to be before even working there. The narcissistic boss, the lead tech bully, the general oppression of people with good ideas, the female office administrator who is just nasty, the 'it's just a job' people and the emotionally intelligent people who are generally liked but just passing through because they realized they made a big mistake taking this job.

Becoming in-demand and a indispensable problem problem solver helps until you can fire them, usually with a smug polite smile, helps you maintain yourself from a mental health perspective. This is because most of them are bound to fail and spend big trying to get good, so if you give them sincere advice that they ignore which costs them money, they will never ignore you again. If find if I maintain a 'I'm here to take your money from you' attitude I can maintain some separation from the assholes and still get some enjoyment from IT work.

Of course, at the core of this argument is *why* IT is so stressful, and it is because it has been invaded by a lot of clueless assholes. You also have to acknowledge your own propensity to assholiness, I know I can be an asshole, so try hard not to be. Get rid of the assholes from IT work and you can get good work done. If you are working with assholes, you'll spend most of your time stressing and dealing with them and their mistakes.

Asshole management is *the* most stressful part of IT work.

God bless America.*

*Even though I firmly believe the separation of church and state is vital and I would in no way impose religion on anyone.

I believe this is where I say, whatever.

No, they got that way by appealing to the naivety of people such as yourself with simplistic nationalism. Wrapped yourself in a flag lately? Do you think you're a patriot?

In other words, you've never read a single line of a proposed bill, even for your own country, you don't understand how laws are made and enacted and you have never written a single letter to a politician about anything. Your not interested in human rights and justice issues and the world revolves around you.

You get your news from mainstream media and anything outside of the scope of your expertise you are too mentally lazy to learn about.

Life, politics, what a fool thing to say, I wish I could share the irony. You have no idea what I have experienced. Don't get personal pal, I maybe excoriating you aggressively, but I'm not being nasty.

No, your a coward. It's that simple. There is no hope for you.

It interesting because it describes how unappealing your spineless position is. I suppose you need an explanation why you like being fist fucked, now that you're a grown up. Is the analogy 'adult' enough for you? Is AFF better for you? Daddy what does AFF mean?

Sure, why don't you tell me how I stand to benefit from these laws? As I am already bound by and, have read them. I want you to demonstrate to me how your point of view is somehow more enlightened considering that I analysed every line of the many hundreds of pages it contained and wrote to > 50 politicians about them, including specific part where I made direct written modifications to the act which were successfully included because even the politicians conceded the strip and body cavity search of minors, i.e under 15 were too unreasonable but not unreasonable for you, Daddy.

Does AFF makes sense now that I've explained it to you? Daddy.

I want you to explain to me how jailing witnesses of the arrest for 5 years for telling anyone they witnessed an arrest where someone was taken away under these laws, the suspension of due process, the inclusion of strict liability (which only applied to parking fines) for jail terms, the reversal of the presumption of innocence to the presumption of guilt, the reversal of the onus of proof onto the accused who has to produce evidence that they are mandated to give up to the state on arrest and the reversal of the presumption of innocence to the presumption of guilt is reasonable considering that with all these powers terrorism acts are still being commissioned?

Did you expect to be speaking to someone who has actually read the English version of the Act, kid? Let's say it was you being arrested under these laws, would you look forward to the AFF of a full body cavity search while you were in custody, boy. Which of these clause would you find the least appealing as you heard the *snap* of the latex glove going on the officers hand, would you be considering the rammifications of politics at hand or just the ramming hand? Since you approve of the act, I can only presume you approve of a AFF, lest you be a hypocritical pseudonym. Do unto others...

So, what do you suggest we change the record to? Please don't prattle on about muslim's, I'm well aware of their many human rights violations. Or fundamental terrorism for which I'm statistically unconcerned about and enough powers already exist to deal with it. Convince me, show me why stopping the opportunity for state based terrorism to be conducted is wrong. Explain to me why your way is better, that you are right and why you are not another useful idiot humming your favourite tune of silence.

Just be silent, you're good at it.

Well they'll be able to empathize with the situation. It is unlikely that you have ever written to a politician after reading a legislation like this to defend the remaining democracy. I have, so perhaps the best thing you can do is move to north korea or some other military dictatorship to cheer them on, or just STFU and let the rest of us spend our time ensuring the rule of law applies to all in democracies. After all, that is the point of a democracy.

What a mature reaction on your part, GTFU.

Yes, and step by step it incrementally becomes more of a police state until someone steps in, uses those powers and it becomes a dictatorship. Perhaps you are an optimist who trusts leaders to implicitly do the right thing. We've seen you before, you pick on the weak and oppressed while defending the powerful and corrupt, who think of you as a rather useful idiot.

I'd love to but people like you keep pressing repeat. I know the soundtrack. We've seen the movie so many times, the film is flapping on the side of the projector, the reel is over, the end is always the same, and at the beginning are people like you who allow power structures like this to evolve and dictators to exist. You are the domestic enemy we are warned about.

The song is always the same because you just aren't comfortable with any other tunes.

To put it another way you enjoy being anally fist fucked, so to make you feel normal, you want everyone to experience it if only they would just stop fighting and give in. After that, you don't know because you don't think that far ahead.

Because by the very doctrine rammed down our throats it's our freedom that terrorists hate. So if we were fighting terrorism we would be *increasing* freedom, not destroying it. Giving away our freedom increases terrorism because now society cannot discover what provoked the acts of terrorism in the first place.

Society in a free country will never be a safe place from anything, however it will be free.

You should be asking So how does giving away our freedom prevent people from committing acts of terrorism? The obvious answer is, it doesn't.

In my context I was thinking of my grandfather who fought in both world wars against the very thing that is happening in our western societies today.

Nazism is exactly what I was considering when I posted. How these establishment of police states leads to state sponsored terrorism, which is scarier than fundamentalism in a different way.

Oh, I see. Your one of these people that cheer on the erosion of peoples right to privacy because companies do illegal things. This is best compared to anal fist fucking, you may be a willing participant, but most people would not.

All things considered, that's an oxymoronic statement.

Thinking about all those people that fought in the world wars for our freedom. I wonder if they would have fought if they knew their children would piss every freedom they fought for away in a generation.

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." - John F. Kennedy

Under the recently passed data retention laws passed in Australia, law enforcement only needs to ask your carrier for the data and they are obliged to provide it.

Any company that works that way is bound to fail anyway. Working people that hard doesn't make them productive, it makes them exhausted and prone to mistakes. Those mistakes compound into needing more time to fix - so it's generally an advanced sign of failure.

That's how they should advertise the job so that more experienced people don't waste their time. It's the same old story once you get there and it takes a lot of social skills and energy to walk away amicably. Most of the time it isn't a happy ending for anyone.

Well, she was the former yeoman to Captain James. T. Kirk, so that's gotta look pretty good on her resume.

I did an analysis of the Australian 2014 National Security Amendments Legislation back in October 2014 and wrote to the politicians to try to stop it. I think that it is relevant here because, well frankly, Australian seems unfortunately blessed with apathetic right wing morons that it makes the construction and passing of such legislation possible and that sometimes they become a template for countries less blessed with these morons.

This legislation contains specific amendments directed at intelligence officers leaking information in light of wikileaks. Any legal opportunity for officers to leak corruption or criminal acts is now a criminal act in Australia and I would imagine that the compartmentalisation of information would allow leakers to be identified.

I am uncertain if such amendments would be constitutional in the US/UK or Canada, but they are law here now. Clearly the doctrine of fighting domestic enemies that corrupt governments, like cancer, from within will no longer be tolerated and the wheels are in motion to close that legality. My interpretation of the legislation is that the ability for these agents to do the right thing to expose criminal acts and corruption will be met with the destruction of their careers and gaol (jail) time.

I'm certain that the portions of the law that can be made legal in other Echelon (5 I's) countries, will be as soon as the constitutional implications are understood. I hope that the mechanisms that wikileaks has created is enough to protect them. I hope there is an opportunity for UK/US and Canadian citizens to stop similar legislation from passing into law in those countries.

If there was any doubt that we were on a slippery slope before the legislations I've read passed into law, then right now Australia's ass is wet and is sliding uncontrollably to being a full blown police state.

You are still the same generation you were born into.

ba dum *tish*!