No, it's why do local government's loathe their citizens? After all, they're the ones who are, almost always, signing exclusive contracts with these companies to provide a local monopoly of services while forcing unnecessary additional costs (local government access via cable TV) and franchise fees to fund them.
In Minnesota, the public sector is mandated by statute to release information to the public and be setup in a way which facilitates this action:
13.03 ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT DATA.
Subdivision 1.Public data. All government data collected, created, received, maintained or disseminated by a government entity shall be public unless classified by statute, or temporary classification pursuant to section 13.06, or federal law, as nonpublic or protected nonpublic, or with respect to data on individuals, as private or confidential. The responsible authority in every government entity shall keep records containing government data in such an arrangement and condition as to make them easily accessible for convenient use. Photographic, photostatic, microphotographic, or microfilmed records shall be considered as accessible for convenient use regardless of the size of such records.
I have used this exact quoted statute many-a-time to force local government agencies in Minnesota to not only provide me information, which they were usually willing to do, but for free or very low cost.
I made a request once to a public transit agency who told me it would be several hundred dollars to do. I told them if they had followed the statute to make the data readily accessible by the public, it wouldn't require the work they were trying to charge me to do. Their legal counsel informed them I was indeed correct and I got it for the cost of the media.
Maybe there is a similar statute in this case which drove the decision?
It really depends on the individual role, the team as a whole, and the individual being hired. I shouldn't have used numbers as people are entirely too hung up on it.
Really? Do you know how many talented developers who are completely and utterly 'dysfunctional' themselves and cause irrevocable damage to the team and its work output? It's not something I enjoy dealing with as much as helping people continue to grow and learn.
Depending on what need I'm trying to fill, I hire 90% for culture fit and 10% for technical ability. Most often, people can learn to improve their technical ability, especially b/c there is very rarely any single individual who can fill an open req 100%. That said, what I have found cannot be learned as well, is how to fit into an organization's culture.
Broad experience is great and I wholly support companies which are looking to add resources who possess such knowledge; however, broad experience can come with the price of not having enough targeted knowledge to bring deep-dive specifics to the mix.
The real question you should be asking is whether they can figure it out on their own if tasked with finding a solution to the problem. I guarantee you that most of those you have cast aside due to their lack of public-key cryptography knowledge would be able to do so while bringing you the specific knowledge you need straight out of their heads.
Honestly, if you interviewed me and I didn't know the answer to some mostly irrelevant question and told me that's why I didn't get the job, I would thank you for not hiring me to work with someone who doesn't know enough about being a hiring manager to do his job effectively.
I'm preaching to the 4-digit choir here, I know. Let me issue the disclaimer that I am not a teacher but a bunch of my friends are, and my job does depend on staying up to date.
I am not sure what my ability to remember the login information for an account I created in 1997 has anything to do w/the discussion; however, EVERYONE's job depends on them staying up-to-date, it's just that most people choose not to and fall behind.
Technology funding in school districts (in my area these are tax levies) is already insanely high; mostly because we're pushing for tablet devices in schools driven, behind the scenes, by extremely lucrative vendor deals.
Without adequate training, the related curricula are severely limited and thus the added benefits when compared to related cost are low, if at all positive.
Now, this research, as well as the districts, are rightly saying the teachers need more training in order to leverage the technology effectively; however, what really needs to be understood is just how much training is really necessary and whether the tech gap between teachers and their students can really be mitigated.
It is my unfounded opinion that it will never be mitigated enough as teachers are not usually well enough equipped at their own subject matter, let alone keeping up with the taxing knowledge demands of technology.
What we need to do is take a step back and ensure that these additional tax investments in technology are actually doing anything to further student development and because they aren't, think about what we can do to actually concentrate on doing that instead of buying the new and shiny and letting it, effectively, collect dust in the corner while levy after levy is passed to support it.
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.
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.
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.