> Or rather, both sides are correct even though they are in direct disagreement.

Ah, the usual AC handwringing recipe -- "it all hopeless... no one's right" -- along with a dash of zesty "job creator" myth thrown in.

> People with an employee mindset naturally want job security, and consider the provision of such to be a moral obligation of employers. The reasons are obvious.

No, its not, Capn. obvious! Most employees actually want to work hard AND realise that there are limits to their employment.

> Employers, [...] morally obligatory that they hire the best and get rid of people who are becoming dead weight.

There. Now you've defined your own morality. Perhaps you think of yourself as an employer with such a 'moral obligation'. All the best not disgusting your 'good' employees who know how you treat 'deadwood' and wonder when their time will come.

From the article:

Folks - remember the snippets above in your dealings with any company. This is the nature of the employer-employee contract these days.

A spectacular severance supposedly balances out any disquiet at 'pump-and-dump' treatment of employees. Of course, "spectacular" may mean they pay $4,000 instead of $2,330.02 legally due - i.e. 200% of something which probably won't get you very far in the first place. And 'extra' documents they have you sign as a quid pro quo, also sign away review rights regarding unfair dismissal, etc.

Everyone working for someone - and I mean everyone - needs a backup plan to create wealth. Not an MLM - something where you get paid to create actual value. This could be selling cupcakes off your Facebook page, freelancing on guru.com, selling artwork on odesk.com, tutoring math classes, mowing lawns... Even if you make only $10/month, its a skill kept sharp for when you really need to depend on that next arrow in your quiver.

Before doing this, check your work contract - and speak with your attorney. Many jobs - specially IT roles - have a catchall 'all your efforts/patents/ideas/code belong to us' clause. Even for what you do on your own time and dime. Such clauses may or may not be lawful.

Also, while we are still in 'appeal to authority' mode, the coauthor of the paper is Adi Shamir, the 'S' in RSA.

I don't knock their work ... :)

All that needs doing is adding a helium ballon with additional battery payload. As long as the entire system is neutrally bouyant, this could hover for hours, streaming video. Even follow its owner around... Kinda like the "kino" orb in the Stargate Universe TV series, but with wings :)

Grasshoppers can be swept up in updrafts, you know.

Trees and children aren't.

> I'd rather have a competent driver in a bare-bones sports car on the road with me than a clueless housewife ...

"Roger Rodas was a highly skilled driver who would not have taken a risk with his friend and client Paul Walker’s life, an engineer for Rodas’ race team said Tuesday."

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/12/03/paul-walker-roger-rodas-porsche/

...offering employment contracts which don't bind employees in intellectual slavery. Some employers - especially tech employers - lay claim to every thought, word and deed of value that the employee creates during his term of employment - even if done in his own time and on his own dime.

Do 'em a good turn... you will.

Whether its real call for violence or not, its indicates an attitude problem with the owner. And attitude is everything in hospitality - it informs everything: the staff you hire, the ingredients you procure, how kind you are to customers that make a mistake, or disagree with you ... This guys attitude is Not that of a hospitable restauranteur.

I see the problem with GG in restaurants. I support the ban. After all, its for the benefit of the OTHER patrons in the place. But I still prefer not to eat at venues where attitudes like this flow from the top down.

Feel free to disagree - just remember its your ass kicking he may call for tomorrow because of a bad tip or Yelp review.

What about wearing your GG in the restaurant bathroom, urinating in the stalls? Is that a freedom you cherish too? I don't.

Then try it on day 3 of the disaster, when your battery is nearly flat and it gives out after the first ring. :}

Or more likely -- try it when just misplaced your mobile phone (you know, because you've been carrying it around everywhere).

> Plans went from 600$ a month to 900$ a month for gold.

Wow - that seems a lot. I live in Australia. Here private health insurance plans go for much cheaper - even when you factor out a rebate the Government provides for taking private insurance (i.e. a rebate for not using the public health system.)

E.g.: http://www.frankhealthinsurance.com.au/quote
--
(Select zip code 2000)
You're a family living in NSW with adults aged 35 and 32. Your Private Health Insurance Rebate tier is 'don't apply rebate'.
    -- Better Hospital and Some Extras with 50% Back = AU $244.40/month
    -- Best Hospital and Lots Extras with 50% Back = AU 359.20/month

> Have some personal accountability.

And he can say "Have some corporate accountability" - its a small amount and a company representative made a committment (..."simply honored their CSRs original promise")

Its not a study.

Only dogs do that!