Clearly you have never been to the UCLA campus because, if you had, you would have known this isn't true in the least. You can walk all over that place.

The problem in LA is the culture. People believe they are to be seen in their automobiles and they buy or lease expensive cars and drive them ridiculously short distances for that sole reason (if there is another reason, please do share but nothing really makes sense).

I worked for a company based out of LA for 2.5 years and we were there often. One guy lived a 10 minute walk from the office but chose to drive each and every day. He didn't buy an M3 to have it sit in his garage, after all. Nope, it sat in the company's garage instead.

SMH.

I work in marketing analytics and, specifically, in measuring the effectiveness of online marketing campaigns at a customer level. Straight up click tracking is dead and this will do nothing which is purports as organizations begin moving away from siloed measurement of IMP -> CLK within single channels at an aggregate level and instead go down to the very granular cross-channel customer-level attribution.

If you really want to avoid detection and behavior tracking, I highly suggest you entirely disable cookies entirely (yes, I realize this is not worth it at all), otherwise you will not have accomplished what you had hoped.

For the first time since I started w/the iPhone (the 3G was my first one), I see absolutely nothing of value with this major release version which makes me want to upgrade to it.

I'll be paying $99 for the 5S and be happy w/it. Sorry but unnecessarily bigger sizes and a better camera is not worth $200+contract renewal.

I totally understand what they're doing and that's fine if they want to operate in that way. Its people just need to realize this and use the name and prestige its name on their resume brings when they hop to a smaller but potentially more enjoyable organization.

The IT world is certainly competitive; however, ALL companies should see the internal benefits to training employees and working to ensure they do not leave. Companies with the mindset you laid out above are doing themselves a double disservice by not training their employees and leveraging the benefits and immediate returns provided by investments in their human capital. In some fields and with some resources, professional development is seen as a bigger happiness motivator and retention tool than more salary.

What you have outlined above is a company which is not interested in its people and only its immediate bottom line and one where it's clear its people should move on regardless of payscale and internal short-term opportunity provided.

As someone who has repeatedly attended and presented at conferences in my field, I make it a point during negotiations for any new job to ensure these are funded fully but only if I am presenting; otherwise, I opt to share in the costs associated in attending with my employer.

Each and every company I have worked at in the past (and current) has a budget for training and professional development of its employees, some more than others; however, by making a case that I am giving back to a community of like-minded professionals and putting our name and brand out there during presentations, I have found this is an easy sell for companies for which I want to work.

I work extensively w/SAS and utilize a lot of the conference (SAS Global Forum/SUGI prior) materials in my day to day both for myself and our entire organization. By making it clear to my employers that I want to give back by presenting, I have opened organization's view on how the sharing of information benefits the business while benefiting the entire industry.

Make your determination and desires known when you sign on and, if that is not an option, make it clear to your management that you want to do the same thing. While I have received a variety of different types of pushback over the years for this view, they have all relented and ended up changing their world view when the benefits are presented as they are.

Conferences are not inexpensive (SAS Global Forum is usually around $3000 - $3500 for a single person encompassing travel, conference registration, lodging, meals, etc) but the ROI can be HUGE beyond that depending on the knowledge transfers that occur, the networking opportunities, and the new business development which I have seen from these conferences.

While I did not attend SASGF 2014 this year, it was solely due to my available time to develop a presentation topic, not because my company would not send me (this was my first missed attendance since I became involved in the SAS world) and I look forward to contributing to and learning from others in the future.

Best of luck.

It's not the same as re-telling a secret. You have an intellectual property interest in your own likeness. Whether you agree or disagree with whether that "should" be the case, unless the pictures were taken in public, or she waived her rights for the distribution of those images, she has a cause of action against the person who distributed them without her permission.

Look at it this way. In the most straightforward case, if you sneak into someone's house and take a picture of them when they're naked, clearly the fact that you own the camera doesn't mean you own the right to distribute such a picture. The person whose picture is being taken didn't consent. Now, let's take a case where the person consents to the picture. Does that consent to have a picture being taken implicitly grant the right to distribute those pictures? At a minimum, it would depend on the facts. A picture taken of someone posing for a picture in front of a fancy restaurant with a bunch of friends, you could argue the right to redistribute was implied in that consent, and certainly it's not really practical to get a signed consent form of all the people in the picture. Nude photos taken in a private bedroom? You can be damned sure that consent to have the picture taken did not carry with it the right to redistribute unless that was explicit (and as the person doing the redistribution you would probably need it to be in writing to cover your ass).

For many reasons including:

There aren't many places that do not have Office installed. People are very familiar with it and even if they aren't, they can usually make their way around it in with only a little coaching.

Most companies use Excel for basic analysis, charting, and data delivery to non-technical report recipients.

Deliver a raw dataset and allow the end-user to pivot, chart, etc. It takes the strain off the analytics team for basic tasks and gives the end user the power to do what they want with the data. Tableau seat licenses aren't realistic for most companies and building some sort of analytics platform from scratch in your language of choice isn't always something you can do in the short term and provide more functionality with less training required.

I could go on, but that gives you a general idea.

In the work my team is responsible for, I look for culture fit above anything else. I took a guy with some internship work during his graduate schooling and turned him into what I consider a stellar programmer/analyst.

I'd concentrate on your programming skill and your business knowledge, if any. A lot of organizations are looking for report jockeys and/or true analysts and in that case, highlight your visualization and analysis ability first, programming second. What sort of experience did you have during your schooling that you believe makes you a good fit for an analytics role today?

We have sponsored before, but we/I prefer to hire those who don't require it first.

What I like to see are the following:

1. Statistics knowledge

2. Excel (pivots, charting, VBA, etc.)

3. SAS/R/SPSS (in order).

4. Unix shell scripting.

5. Some sort of data visualization tool usage (e.g. Tableu)

---

We are currently looking for analysts and the market is tough. We take people from all walks: CS, social sciences, Stats/Math/Econ/Finance, etc. The Analytics market is continually growing and in desperate need of people who are competent until higher education catches up and starts putting people out with a good mix of CS, Stats, and Business knowledge.

Get into Analytics IMO, the pay is great and the work is pretty fun.

I had a grievance filed against me for "not doing enough work" because my desk was...wait for it...too clean.

Yes, I had to go through 5 weeks of 3-5 FTEs spending several hours each week discussing the fact that someone claimed I was not busy enough because my desk was neat and tidy.

Want to know it was resolved? They came and looked at my desk and then we went to their office and looked at their desk (a fucking disaster area) and then it was dropped.

FTEs = Me, my union rep, the individual filing the grievance, their union rep, and an arbitrator. For 5 fucking weeks.

Unions are horseshit.

Try applying that 100% to RNs. How are you going to predict patients that get worse, that get better, that crach, etc. Impossible to predict workload of an individual patient. So impossible to get that mythical 100%. You need slack to be there when multiple codes hit a single ICU or unit, or when a big motor vehicle accident hits the ER and surgical staff. The article is written by some idiot efficiency expert who apparently has no idea how you need some sort of reserve to draw upon, both staff-wise and personal-wise. Running flat out for a full shift is enough to wreck even the greatest surgeon or nurse if done too often. Same goes for coders, having been both (RN and Sr SW Engr)

You can demand full access when that person sues you for libel. That's what we are talking about here. Its not a random grab by a critic, but a request (subpoena) for information in a suit BROUGHT BY MANN. So save your anger and your wild imagination trips. This is not about opening up your daughter's email, its about the right of a person to subpoena information from a public employee who is suing him.

It wasn't the "critics" or the political commentator who brought this to court. It was Mann who sued them, opening the way for discovery subpoenas against him, not FOIA requests. This blocks the defendant from getting to a public employee's communications that may possibly be used to defend one's self against a suit by that employee. This could be a very bad precedent. And don't confuse this with the FOIA stuff, nor with critics/skeptics using it to harass Mann: Bottom line is that if Mann had not sued in order to silence a political columnist, none of this would ever have been necessary.

That is what worries me more than anything else - if a public employee sues you in a matter of free speech (to silence you from criticizing him, via use of libel laws), this precedent gives that government employee a huge shield to hide behind and resist your attempts to discover information to defend yourself with against his lawsuit. This is a terrible precedent because it will provide for government coverups and denials of FOIA requests in the long run. Imagine this being used by a public employee you do not like politically, for a libel suit for your criticism of him - whether justifiable or not, it limits your ability to defend yourself. These folks are public employees, and their correspondence should as a general rule be available (excluding classified information, or personal privacy redacted info). A blanket limit on discovery when defending against a lawsuit from a public employee is a bad thing

I transitioned from Software Engineer to RN. Med-Surg, then ER. Licensed. Also US Army veteran, so doubly useful. My wife is a pastry chef (baker) - and an amateur brewer -- as well as an Army veteran too (thats where we met) So if the worst happens, we will be well positioned to help.