Companies have a human resources department for a reason.
Well, then you criminalize the actual CRIME - driving while impaired. You can't criminalize behavior that's not criminal. It's like saying you can't buy a car because it *might* be used in the commission of a crime. There are thousands of things that are already illegal that pretty much cover the bases - everything from reckless driving to child safety...these laws are perfectly capable of punishing real criminals instead of filling our prisons with responsible users.
Using the same logic, driving while impaired is only considered a crime because you may end up killing someone - hence we should decriminalize driving while impaired and only arrest people when they run over and kill someone - which is the real crime.
Prevention is the key word. The reason why drug usage (just as driving when intoxicated) is considered a crime is prevention.
If you are a Mac user, as a drinker of the Kool-Aid you have no choice.
I have been using Mac computers since 1989 and to this date I have found the OS to consistently improve over time. The only exception being OS 9, which kinda sucked. I'm speaking about my perception of their software of course, and implying others should share my opinion.
It makes no sense for me to believe it's better to switch to Linux out of fear of being let down in the future. I really have no reason to believe it will happen. Even if it did, moving my files to some other PC would not really be an issue for me.
My experiences with Linux weren't very happy ones either. I'm not trying to generalize but I've more than once found myself in a situation in which I've been told to fix something myself - which really is not something I'm interested in doing at all. I've got my dev projects and work, and I don't really care about improving the OS I use at home. Some of those issues were things that I know I can get working much easier in windows or mac (maybe due to experience on the OSes, that's not really important to me). My personal opinion on the subject is that Linux is not for me.
Going back to your idea about Mac users drinking Kool-Aid, I think you're failing to put yourself in other people's shoes. Maybe your principles regarding open source/free software vs commercial software are not as important to others as they are to you?
Well he effectively is when people don't know about it and it isn't readily reported. You actually have to dig to find it. That isn't to say that you have to dig much. You're right in that the veil is... thin. However, generally people don't even attempt to dig these days. And if/when it is discovered, people generally go into a daze with rolling their eyes and just saying something along the lines of, "Politicians, eh." That without remembering it at all.
It's kind of ironic that the Liberals got ousted by a handful of nonsense, yet the Cons get more and more powerful even though the corruption points they have far exceeds the Liberals in less than half the time.
Nope, they pull *far* more than any one else; others don't even come close. Just check out the number of votes of no confidence that they pulled when Martin had a minority; they didn't even try to make it work. At that point the Cons pushed for a coalition government, then when the Cons get a minority and the other parties go for a coalition Harper cries about it not be democratic, etc taking advantage of the electorates ignorance of how our system of government works. Not to mention during that minority they attached a no confidence rider to bills so they'd pass. He promised he wouldn't do it during the following election, but then that next time he gets in, what's one of the first things he does? That's right, the same bloody no confidence rider BS.
I could say the same thing about their Economic "action plan." According to the PBO it was their policies that got Canada into the situation it's in (made it worse that is) and their plan to get out of it was to do more of the same type of policies!?!?!?
And now with their majority, what do they do? They don't listen to every study done with regards to mandatory minimum sentences (they don't work), nor anything even approaching Science (hey, why use logic when yah got ideology). Thus, C-10 passes. Similarly, for C-11 with regards to digital locks and no doubt once the fire dies down with C-30 (the spying bill). As in, after C-30 passes, they'll, by regulation (add/delete by reg is already in the bill), add in information that'll be available without a warrant.
I could go on. (It's funny what a memory can do when used, eh.)
Harper is a two faced asshole that does nothing but dirty political gamesmanship. He's a disgrace. Same goes for Vic Toews and Dean Del Mastro and...
Now, I'm not saying that the other parties are squeaky clean. But, in comparison, Harper et al look as though they have been rolling in the mud while the other parties might have scuffs on their shoes (Liberals likely worse than the NDP).
Seriously, this election fraud shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. But, what would be nice is if the Cons would see at least some repercussions for their actions.
This happens with disturbing regularity. What is going on in Medicine cannot be equated to Science as a whole. Hell, Medicine isn't even a Science. If it were, there'd be a overlying theory to explain how the body works, etc. But, Medicine can't even predict with
A real Science has a theory to explain the data, puts out new predictions, and those predictions get tested to prove/disprove the prediction. Also, those tests need to be verified by several people/groups (e.g. peer review). Rise, repeat. It'd be nice if people would just accept this as it is by definition.
Now, Medicine is what it is. It obviously has utility as can be seen from various metrics including our increased life expectancy, quality of life, etc. It is a good thing. However, just because it's a good thing, and those that work in the field try to apply the Scientific Method, that does *not* make it a Science.
When an mp3 is sold, it is not being transferred from the provider's server to the buyer's computer...it is being copied.
It goes both way... it isn't stealing either then, as the media corps would like to make us believe.
If you repeat the question to yourself again, you'll see that the question is about why you are applying to that *particular* company, not why you need a job. Are you truly interested in what the company does and what practice area it is involved in, or as you say, are you applying only because "you need the fucking job". This helps the company determine if you are just going to be a pencil pusher clocking your time and going to be a sourpuss about it, or if you are going to kick some ass in your job.
You're relating not caring about a particular company with being a bad worker, which is a fallacy. Some people simply don't care about the company, as long as the job and the career are good. It doesn't mean they won't do their best, and it doesn't mean they will be pencil pushers clocking their time.
I would imagine that just about *any* company would be interested in you want to do with your career and how the position will fit not just your current needs (bring food on the table as per your statement) but also your future needs as a person AND as a professional. Are you seriously tell me that you are an automaton - you just want to clock in your 8 hrs at work so you get your paycheck and aspire absolutely nothing else from your career?? Why would you react so strongly to an interviewer who is trying to understand your career aspirations? Its not like they are asking you how you lead your life or how you floss your teeth, the question is only about your career goals. Sooner or later, you will end up discussing this with your manager anyway.
You are still assuming he's an automaton just because he doesn't care for that particular company. Respect and responsability are what the employment relationship needs, not some unfounded love and loyalty. It is a two way road, which takes time to build.
Each and every time I've worked at a company, I have done my best. But still I totally disagree with your reasoning that this is related directly with how much I care about the company having a particular name.
...I would rather that someone have the strength of conviction to make and stick with the choice that they believe is right, rather than flip back and forth to fit the prevailing opinion...
In this particular case, I do agree that GoDaddy has no merit in their change of mind - because they are acting consistently bad with their customers, and don't really seem to have changed their mind at all.
But it seems to me as if in our society we preferred that people stick to their decisions, rather than change their mind if there's overwhelming evidence that they've been wrong. Does it make sense?
Recognizing mistakes and dealing properly with them is IMHO a very rare and positive trait, which should always be encouraged. Think of how much better things would be if this was more widely encouraged.
Not in the job description kind of deflates you argument.
Doing some extra work, good. Doing a lot however, is just asking to be exploited either in this job or his next.
Brief your management on the situation. Explain what condition things are in and what is needed to get them into a manageable state. Give them a list of projects / tasks that you have to deal with and get them to prioritize.
Its sort of unrelated. But my brother was doing some independent audio work for some VIP wedding in Italy, when he realized the electrical hardware & connections were a mess (meaning they were actually dangerous to use). He first talked with the management for the event and let them know about the situation. They ignored him. He quit the job, and was highly criticized for it.
As he was disconnecting all of his hardware with his team, a short circuit caused a fire, which fortunately was controlled easily.
The event's management immediately contacted him to offer him a formal apology and pay for the damages to his hardware. They also offered to hire him back, double the salary. The last part was kind of luck, but had the fire not been controlled as easily as it was, my brother would have shared the responsibility.
Long story short: sometimes you have to know when to step down.
There is no likelihood man can ever tap the power of the atom. -- Robert Millikan, Nobel Prize in Physics, 1923