On 08/06/2012 7:16 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 18:36:13 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> "Godwin's law" person was a bad human being.
>> You just piss people off with your wild assertions as Jim said.
>
> I don't think Michael Godwin was a bad human being.  Or do you mean
> Hitler? ;)
>

And points mean?... :-)


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 20:13:40 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 08/06/2012 7:16 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 18:36:13 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> "Godwin's law" person was a bad human being.
>>> You just piss people off with your wild assertions as Jim said.
>>
>> I don't think Michael Godwin was a bad human being.  Or do you mean
>> Hitler? ;)
>>
>>
> And points mean?... :-)

Prizes! :)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

> You're doing it again, I am sorry to say. You are not a bad human being.
> You don't even come close. "Godwin's law" person was a bad human being.
> You just piss people off with your wild assertions as Jim said.

In that case, I rephrase: A human in need of serious readjustment.

>> I'll admit, sometimes it feels like you're doing it intentionally (though
>> I think I know better and know you're not) just to wind people up.
>
> You are right, it is almost troll-ish.

If people aren't sure *if* you're a troll, you're doing it wrong.

Oh, unless you're *trying* to be a troll. In which case, you're winning...

> BTW Andrew, have you ever tried to play Grieg's In the hall of the
> mountain king? ;-)

Actually, yes... I *think* I succeeded.

Post a reply to this message

On 08/06/2012 8:24 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 20:13:40 +0100, Stephen wrote:

>>>
>>>
>> And points mean?... :-)
>
> Prizes! :)

Well, they do say that time flies when you're having fun, and to prove 
it I notice my sundial has stopped...


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

arn't we allOn 08/06/2012 9:38 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>> You're doing it again, I am sorry to say. You are not a bad human being.
>> You don't even come close. "Godwin's law" person was a bad human being.
>> You just piss people off with your wild assertions as Jim said.
>
> In that case, I rephrase: A human in need of serious readjustment.
>

Aren't we all?

>>
>> You are right, it is almost troll-ish.
>
> If people aren't sure *if* you're a troll, you're doing it wrong.
>
> Oh, unless you're *trying* to be a troll. In which case, you're winning...

Get back under your bridge :-P

>
>> BTW Andrew, have you ever tried to play Grieg's In the hall of the
>> mountain king? ;-)
>
> Actually, yes... I *think* I succeeded.

Well done, that man.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 21:44:01 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 08/06/2012 8:24 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 20:13:40 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> 
> 
>>>>
>>> And points mean?... :-)
>>
>> Prizes! :)
> 
> Well, they do say that time flies when you're having fun, and to prove
> it I notice my sundial has stopped...

That sounds like fun after dark. ;)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>>> "It didn't change while I was using it, so it won't have changed since
>>> I stopped using it" - that's a bad assumption to make.
>>
>> What, expecting future events to resemble past ones?
>>
>> Isn't that ultimately the basis of all scientific inquiry? ;-)
>
> Certainly in the space of the physical world.  I don't think decisions by
> people really qualify as a 'reproducible experiment'.

Damn. We should go tell the psychology experts... ;-)

>> Depends on whether you want to split hairs between "actually impossible"
>> and "so insanely difficult that it is _effectively_ impossible".
>
> For the average person, it most certainly is possible.  There are tools
> in the basic/cheap versions of Photoshop to do this sort of thing IIRC.

There is no magical "tool" which can correctly guess what is hidden 
behind a solid object.

I'm aware that there *are* people who possess the skill to do utterly 
amazing things with photo editors. But that doesn't mean that everybody 
can do this. It's not a question of having a magic "tool"; it's about 
being sufficiently skilful to find ways to trick the eye. From what I've 
seen, few people have such skills.

>>>> It's perfectly possible for incorrect information to lead you to a
>>>> conclusion that happens to be true
>>>
>>> Only by pure chance.
>>
>> That's my point.
>>
>> If you do not have all of the information (the usual case), then whether
>> your conclusions are correct or not is largely chance.
>
> I don't think this is the "usual case".

Usually what you know about a thing is utterly dwarfed by what you don't 
know. The question is whether you know the important facts - which is 
usually a matter of chance.

>> I've noticed, on multiple forums, that I seem to piss people off. I
>> guess I'm just a bad human being. In the past, people used to just
>> ignore me. Now people talk to me, but only to tell me that I'm an idiot.
>> I'm not sure that's an improvement...
>
> Well, no, it's not my intention to say "Andy, you're an idiot" - I hope
> you know that.  What you do tend to do, though, is start from a very bad
> premise and then make wild assertions that are not accurate and very
> easily verifiable.

Statements like this make me wonder where this vast endless source of 
"easy" counter-examples is... It's as if the entire world knows 
something that I don't.

>> I'll see if I can figure out what my password is. (If not, I guess I can
>> look it up on some Russian forum...)
>
> LOL
>
> There is a forgotten password link you can use to reset it, of course.

Nah, it's probably the same password I use for everything else...

...oh. ****. >_<

>> Or because - as I already suggested - it's perhaps aimed at somebody
>> other than me.
>
> That's certainly possible, but you are a "job seeker", and that's part of
> the target audience.

As I say, I get the impression (I'm not sure precisely why) that it's 
mainly targeted at high-powered business executives in upper management. 
(These are the people who are usually obsessed with "networking", for 
example.) Since I am not one of those people, perhaps this isn't an 
appropriate tool for me, which is why it looks useless when I look at it.

(Alternatively, perhaps I'm just mistaken...)

> But jobs typically don't fall out of the sky into
> your lap (as you know), you have to work to find them (which you also
> know) and it can be difficult (which you also also know).

Sure. As I say, last time I looked, there didn't seem to be anything to 
"work at". Once you've filled in all the fields, that's about it. Unless 
they really have /radically/ altered the capabilities of the site...

>>> There are millions of people who do use it with some success, so it
>>> seems logical to infer from that that perhaps there are better ways to
>>> use it than the way you're trying to.
>>
>> OOC, do you have any factual basis for saying that "millions of people
>> do use it with some success", beyond the fact that the site still exists
>> and hasn't gone bankrupt yet? Or is /that/ merely an assumption? :-P
>
> Oooh, he's got teeth, this one does. ;)  That's a fair question.

Back atcha. ;-)

> Look at the number of people I'm connected to.  I follow a number of
> companies and see people taking positions at new companies that had jobs
> posted on the site.

So, there's indirect evidence that some of the people on the site lead 
quite successful careers. That's a correlation, but not necessarily a 
causal relationship.

> My network (out to three degrees) consists of nearly 5 million people.

So there's a lot of people /on/ the site.

> Every job search professional I have talked to (recruiters, placement
> agencies, etc.) has said that networking is something that's generally a
> good predictor of success in finding employment.

I don't get the whole "networking" thing. I mean, hypothetically I can 
see why it might work. But I have no idea how you'd go about this in the 
real world, nor do I directly know of any instances where this has been 
a successful approach for somebody. Maybe I haven't seen networking 
succeed because I don't do any networking and I don't know anybody else 
that does, IDK... It just seems a slightly strange concept.

>> (Not that a seriously doubt you. But it sounds like exactly the sort of
>> statement that's easy to casually make and almost impossible to
>> objectively verify.)
>
> See above. :)

For example, how do you know that "millions" have found it useful? Not, 
say, "thousands"? The number of people on the site is not necessarily 
the number who have actually found it beneficial.

In general, I imagine it's quite hard to scientifically quantify this. 
(What counts as "beneficial" or "not beneficial"? How do you put a 
number on that?)

Post a reply to this message

>> In that case, I rephrase: A human in need of serious readjustment.
>
> Aren't we all?

Everything can be improved. This is not the same as saying that 
everything is equally optimal.

>>> BTW Andrew, have you ever tried to play Grieg's In the hall of the
>>> mountain king? ;-)
>>
>> Actually, yes... I *think* I succeeded.
>
> Well done, that man.

I used to love that song, until Altern Towers overused it...

Post a reply to this message

On 08/06/2012 9:53 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 21:44:01 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 08/06/2012 8:24 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 20:13:40 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>> And points mean?... :-)
>>>
>>> Prizes! :)
>>
>> Well, they do say that time flies when you're having fun, and to prove
>> it I notice my sundial has stopped...
>
> That sounds like fun after dark. ;)
>

Talking about “After dark”, there is still eight days until TC-RTC 
finishes. ;-)

...and so, ladies and gentlemen, that's the end of the show, and you 
must agree, it certainly ticked all the boxes - particularly those 
marked 'terrible' and 'rubbish'...



-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 08/06/2012 10:03 PM, Stephen wrote:

> ...and so, ladies and gentlemen, that's the end of the show, and you
> must agree, it certainly ticked all the boxes - particularly those
> marked 'terrible' and 'rubbish'...

http://tinyurl.com/28oz8fu

Post a reply to this message

On 08/06/2012 9:57 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>
> Everything can be improved. This is not the same as saying that
> everything is equally optimal.
>

Too deep for me, I am afraid. o_O

>>>> BTW Andrew, have you ever tried to play Grieg's In the hall of the
>>>> mountain king? ;-)
>>>
>>> Actually, yes... I *think* I succeeded.
>>
>> Well done, that man.
>
> I used to love that song, until Altern Towers overused it...

Woosh! That goes right over my head.

And be true to your shelf-ish.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 08/06/2012 9:56 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> There is no magical "tool" which can correctly guess what is hidden
> behind a solid object.

Even if the object is made of glass? :-P

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 08/06/2012 10:04 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> On 08/06/2012 10:03 PM, Stephen wrote:
>
>> ...and so, ladies and gentlemen, that's the end of the show, and you
>> must agree, it certainly ticked all the boxes - particularly those
>> marked 'terrible' and 'rubbish'...
>
> http://tinyurl.com/28oz8fu
>


That’s the problem, you have all the wrong references.

Unless…

You’re a Geek?

And if you are a geek. Don’t expect to fit in with the muggles. They are 
just as weird but there are more of them.


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 22:03:29 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 08/06/2012 9:53 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 21:44:01 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/06/2012 8:24 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 20:13:40 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> And points mean?... :-)
>>>>
>>>> Prizes! :)
>>>
>>> Well, they do say that time flies when you're having fun, and to prove
>>> it I notice my sundial has stopped...
>>
>> That sounds like fun after dark. ;)
>>
>>
> Talking about “After dark”, there is still eight days until TC-RTC
> finishes. ;-)
> 
> ...and so, ladies and gentlemen, that's the end of the show, and you
> must agree, it certainly ticked all the boxes - particularly those
> marked 'terrible' and 'rubbish'...

:)

Are you perhaps hinting that a new series is imminent?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 21:56:07 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>> For the average person, it most certainly is possible.  There are tools
>> in the basic/cheap versions of Photoshop to do this sort of thing IIRC.
> 
> There is no magical "tool" which can correctly guess what is hidden
> behind a solid object.

No, but if you have a picture that shows what's behind a solid object, 
then you can in fact mask out the object.

Photoshop also now has a plugin that can do a reasonable fill that looks 
good to do things like remove a tree from the foreground and replace it 
with grass, that kind of thing.  That's much easier than, for example, 
removing people from a picture.

But if you take a series of photos with people walking in front of the 
subject, in general, you can paint people out and replace them with 
what's behind them using data from other shots in the series.

That's how it's done, generally.

> I'm aware that there *are* people who possess the skill to do utterly
> amazing things with photo editors. But that doesn't mean that everybody
> can do this. It's not a question of having a magic "tool"; it's about
> being sufficiently skilful to find ways to trick the eye. From what I've
> seen, few people have such skills.

Well, you are working from a very small sample.

>>> That's my point.
>>>
>>> If you do not have all of the information (the usual case), then
>>> whether your conclusions are correct or not is largely chance.
>>
>> I don't think this is the "usual case".
> 
> Usually what you know about a thing is utterly dwarfed by what you don't
> know. The question is whether you know the important facts - which is
> usually a matter of chance.

That's not been my experience.  It is possible to seek out the important 
facts before making a decision.

Business intelligence systems do exactly that, in fact.

>> Well, no, it's not my intention to say "Andy, you're an idiot" - I hope
>> you know that.  What you do tend to do, though, is start from a very
>> bad premise and then make wild assertions that are not accurate and
>> very easily verifiable.
> 
> Statements like this make me wonder where this vast endless source of
> "easy" counter-examples is... It's as if the entire world knows
> something that I don't.

How to properly use google? <scnr>

>>> I'll see if I can figure out what my password is. (If not, I guess I
>>> can look it up on some Russian forum...)
>>
>> LOL
>>
>> There is a forgotten password link you can use to reset it, of course.
> 
> Nah, it's probably the same password I use for everything else...
> 
> ...oh. ****. >_<

I smell a problem....

>>> Or because - as I already suggested - it's perhaps aimed at somebody
>>> other than me.
>>
>> That's certainly possible, but you are a "job seeker", and that's part
>> of the target audience.
> 
> As I say, I get the impression (I'm not sure precisely why) that it's
> mainly targeted at high-powered business executives in upper management.
> (These are the people who are usually obsessed with "networking", for
> example.) Since I am not one of those people, perhaps this isn't an
> appropriate tool for me, which is why it looks useless when I look at
> it.
> 
> (Alternatively, perhaps I'm just mistaken...)

Yep, you are.  I'm certainly not a 'high powered business executive in 
upper management", but I do happen to have worked with a lot of people in 
several different fields.

>> But jobs typically don't fall out of the sky into your lap (as you
>> know), you have to work to find them (which you also know) and it can
>> be difficult (which you also also know).
> 
> Sure. As I say, last time I looked, there didn't seem to be anything to
> "work at". Once you've filled in all the fields, that's about it. Unless
> they really have /radically/ altered the capabilities of the site...

Well, there's also the question of your unwillingness to go where the 
work is, or your unwillingness to believe that anyone on the planet who 
works a "normal" job makes enough to live on.

Even with plenty of real-life examples demonstrating the opposite.

Heck, I was laid off last May.  I didn't work again until October, and 
it's been contract work ever since.  A couple of really tight months 
financially, but we haven't lost the house and are still paying all the 
bills.

>>> OOC, do you have any factual basis for saying that "millions of people
>>> do use it with some success", beyond the fact that the site still
>>> exists and hasn't gone bankrupt yet? Or is /that/ merely an
>>> assumption? :-P
>>
>> Oooh, he's got teeth, this one does. ;)  That's a fair question.
> 
> Back atcha. ;-)

It always makes me smile when you take a stand on something.  Even when 
the stand isn't necessarily logical in my view.  You have changed in that 
regard, and it's a good change.  :)

>> Look at the number of people I'm connected to.  I follow a number of
>> companies and see people taking positions at new companies that had
>> jobs posted on the site.
> 
> So, there's indirect evidence that some of the people on the site lead
> quite successful careers. That's a correlation, but not necessarily a
> causal relationship.

Sure, it's not a causal relationship - but even if you consider the 
possibility that 0.01% of the people on LinkedIn have successfully used 
it to find work (and that's an extremely conservative estimate), that's 
still 500 people who have found jobs using it just in my network alone.

>> My network (out to three degrees) consists of nearly 5 million people.
> 
> So there's a lot of people /on/ the site.

And it stands to reason if it were a waste of time, people wouldn't spend 
time on the site, would they?  (The point of LinkedIn isn't to waste 
time, it's to build a professional network.  Facebook, OTOH, is 
essentially there for people to waste time on so they can be the 
'product' sold to advertisers - the two aren't really equivalent).

>> Every job search professional I have talked to (recruiters, placement
>> agencies, etc.) has said that networking is something that's generally
>> a good predictor of success in finding employment.
> 
> I don't get the whole "networking" thing. I mean, hypothetically I can
> see why it might work. But I have no idea how you'd go about this in the
> real world, nor do I directly know of any instances where this has been
> a successful approach for somebody. Maybe I haven't seen networking
> succeed because I don't do any networking and I don't know anybody else
> that does, IDK... It just seems a slightly strange concept.

Well, I've had it work for me in the past.  In fact, the contract work 
I'm doing right now is due to networking - I applied for a position with 
a local company, and while I wasn't hired by that company, someone 
external to the company involved in the selection process saw my CV and 
gave me a call for another project she was working on.

I've been working "for" her (as an independent contractor) ever since.

The job before the one I was laid off from (or rather, the company), I 
met a recruiter at a user group meeting who introduced me to the hiring 
manager at the company - and I was originally going to contract to them, 
but they bought the contract out and hired me directly.

So there's two examples.

>>> (Not that a seriously doubt you. But it sounds like exactly the sort
>>> of statement that's easy to casually make and almost impossible to
>>> objectively verify.)
>>
>> See above. :)
> 
> For example, how do you know that "millions" have found it useful? Not,
> say, "thousands"? The number of people on the site is not necessarily
> the number who have actually found it beneficial.

It stands to reason that if it weren't beneficial, people would stop 
using it.  After all, you didn't find it beneficial, and you stopped 
using it.  That's actually a perfectly natural reaction.

So are you assuming you're the only one who stopped using it because you 
didn't find it beneficial?

> In general, I imagine it's quite hard to scientifically quantify this.
> (What counts as "beneficial" or "not beneficial"? How do you put a
> number on that?)

Found something they were looking for using the service.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> http://tinyurl.com/28oz8fu
>
> That’s the problem, you have all the wrong references.
>
> Unless…
>
> You’re a Geek?
>
> And if you are a geek. Don’t expect to fit in with the muggles. They are
> just as weird but there are more of them.

http://tinyurl.com/cjscp68

Post a reply to this message

>> There is no magical "tool" which can correctly guess what is hidden
>> behind a solid object.
>
> No, but if you have a picture that shows what's behind a solid object,
> then you can in fact mask out the object.

Sure. That I can believe. Doing it from just one photo isn't so easy.

>>> I don't think this is the "usual case".
>>
>> Usually what you know about a thing is utterly dwarfed by what you don't
>> know. The question is whether you know the important facts - which is
>> usually a matter of chance.
>
> That's not been my experience.  It is possible to seek out the important
> facts before making a decision.
>
> Business intelligence systems do exactly that, in fact.

Doesn't BI involve paying vast sums of money to /collect/ the necessary 
information?

>> Statements like this make me wonder where this vast endless source of
>> "easy" counter-examples is... It's as if the entire world knows
>> something that I don't.
>
> How to properly use google?<scnr>

You laugh, but this is actually non-trivial.

If I had a penny for all the times I've been utterly frustrated in my 
efforts to find information using Google, I'd be very rich by now. 
(Obviously I can't think of a single concrete example right now. That 
would be too useful...)

>> As I say, I get the impression (I'm not sure precisely why) that it's
>> mainly targeted at high-powered business executives in upper management.
>> (These are the people who are usually obsessed with "networking", for
>> example.) Since I am not one of those people, perhaps this isn't an
>> appropriate tool for me, which is why it looks useless when I look at
>> it.
>>
>> (Alternatively, perhaps I'm just mistaken...)
>
> Yep, you are.  I'm certainly not a 'high powered business executive in
> upper management", but I do happen to have worked with a lot of people in
> several different fields.

OK, fair enough.

> Well, there's also the question of your unwillingness to go where the
> work is

I live in a city with a population of 200,000 people, and an 
unemployment rate well below the national average. /Clearly/ there are 
jobs here. I just need to find them.

> or your unwillingness to believe that anyone on the planet who
> works a "normal" job makes enough to live on.

Uh, when did I say that?

> Heck, I was laid off last May.  I didn't work again until October, and
> it's been contract work ever since.  A couple of really tight months
> financially, but we haven't lost the house and are still paying all the
> bills.

Then clearly you are a far better person than I am.

One time my sister got laid off. 5 days later, she was on the phone 
complaining that of the 3 written job offers she had received from the 5 
interviews she attended, she couldn't decide which one sounded the nicest.

She went to more interviews in 5 days than I've been to in my entire 
working life. But then, she has skills that people actually want, and 
she apparently knows how to find those people, so...

>>> Oooh, he's got teeth, this one does. ;)  That's a fair question.
>>
>> Back atcha. ;-)
>
> It always makes me smile when you take a stand on something.  Even when
> the stand isn't necessarily logical in my view.  You have changed in that
> regard, and it's a good change.  :)

It's good to be righteous. It's not so good when you're actually wrong. :-/

>> So there's a lot of people /on/ the site.
>
> And it stands to reason if it were a waste of time, people wouldn't spend
> time on the site, would they?  (The point of LinkedIn isn't to waste
> time, it's to build a professional network.  Facebook, OTOH, is
> essentially there for people to waste time on so they can be the
> 'product' sold to advertisers - the two aren't really equivalent).

Yeah, I'm really not seeing how Facebook is still in business. It must 
cost /millions/ to run all those servers. And yet, their idea of 
"targeted adverts" is about as precise as a blunderbuss. It just seems 
like some day somebody is going to figure out the emperor's magical 
invisible suite is actually non-existent...

>> I don't get the whole "networking" thing. I mean, hypothetically I can
>> see why it might work. But I have no idea how you'd go about this in the
>> real world, nor do I directly know of any instances where this has been
>> a successful approach for somebody. Maybe I haven't seen networking
>> succeed because I don't do any networking and I don't know anybody else
>> that does, IDK... It just seems a slightly strange concept.
>
> Well, I've had it work for me in the past.  In fact, the contract work
> I'm doing right now is due to networking - I applied for a position with
> a local company, and while I wasn't hired by that company, someone
> external to the company involved in the selection process saw my CV and
> gave me a call for another project she was working on.
>
> I've been working "for" her (as an independent contractor) ever since.
>
> The job before the one I was laid off from (or rather, the company), I
> met a recruiter at a user group meeting who introduced me to the hiring
> manager at the company - and I was originally going to contract to them,
> but they bought the contract out and hired me directly.
>
> So there's two examples.

OK.

>> For example, how do you know that "millions" have found it useful? Not,
>> say, "thousands"? The number of people on the site is not necessarily
>> the number who have actually found it beneficial.
>
> It stands to reason that if it weren't beneficial, people would stop
> using it.  After all, you didn't find it beneficial, and you stopped
> using it.  That's actually a perfectly natural reaction.
>
> So are you assuming you're the only one who stopped using it because you
> didn't find it beneficial?

We'd need to see numbers for how many people signed up, and how many 
people subsequently left.

My profile is still live on the system. It looks like I'm still a 
Linked-In user. And yet, I haven't used it in 3 years. So don't use /my/ 
presence as an indicator of usefulness.

How many of the other profiles are ghosts? I guess that's the opportune 
question...

Regarding Facebook: How many of those profiles are for somebody's cat? ;-)

Post a reply to this message

On 08/06/2012 10:30 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>
> Are you perhaps hinting that a new series is imminent?
>

In May the first recordings were done for the 57th series.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 08/06/2012 11:05 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>>> http://tinyurl.com/28oz8fu
>>
>> That’s the problem, you have all the wrong references.
>>
>> Unless…
>>
>> You’re a Geek?
>>
>> And if you are a geek. Don’t expect to fit in with the muggles. They are
>> just as weird but there are more of them.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/cjscp68

Hamlet:
What a piece of work is a man, how noble in reason, how
infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and
admirable, in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like
a god! the beauty of the world, the paragon of animals—and yet,
to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me—
nor woman neither, though by your smiling you seem to say so.

Rosencrantz:
My lord, there was no such stuff in my thoughts.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 23:28:33 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 08/06/2012 10:30 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>
>> Are you perhaps hinting that a new series is imminent?
>>
>>
> In May the first recordings were done for the 57th series.

That's what I remembered hearing - know offhand when they're airing?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 23:24:24 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>>> There is no magical "tool" which can correctly guess what is hidden
>>> behind a solid object.
>>
>> No, but if you have a picture that shows what's behind a solid object,
>> then you can in fact mask out the object.
> 
> Sure. That I can believe. Doing it from just one photo isn't so easy.

I never claimed it was done from one photo.  Apparently I wasn't clear on 
that point.

>> That's not been my experience.  It is possible to seek out the
>> important facts before making a decision.
>>
>> Business intelligence systems do exactly that, in fact.
> 
> Doesn't BI involve paying vast sums of money to /collect/ the necessary
> information?

Not always (in my experience, not often).

BI involves collecting sales data and information about purchases in a 
lot of cases.  That's data that retail establishments and sales forces 
have as a result of actually selling stuff.

>>> Statements like this make me wonder where this vast endless source of
>>> "easy" counter-examples is... It's as if the entire world knows
>>> something that I don't.
>>
>> How to properly use google?<scnr>
> 
> You laugh, but this is actually non-trivial.

Not in my experience.  But then again, when I was in high school selling 
software and computer books, I was often amazed when people would grab a 
book of the shelf and just flip through it to find what they were looking 
for, rather than looking in the index or TOC first.

I always would start doing word association on the topic and go straight 
to the index.

>> Well, there's also the question of your unwillingness to go where the
>> work is
> 
> I live in a city with a population of 200,000 people, and an
> unemployment rate well below the national average. /Clearly/ there are
> jobs here. I just need to find them.

You've also stated (in the past, maybe it's changed) that you hate living 
there except that it's logically laid out and you can find stuff easily.

But yeah, there are probably jobs there, just perhaps not in the fields 
you're interested in.

When you start filtering by too many criteria, you end up with no 
options.  The logical thing to do when that happens is to relax some of 
the criteria, such as where you're willing to look or what you're willing 
to take as a job.

>> or your unwillingness to believe that anyone on the planet who works a
>> "normal" job makes enough to live on.
> 
> Uh, when did I say that?

It's been a couple of years probably, when you and I were talking about 
it being good for you to move out of your mum's place.  You asserted that 
it simply isn't possible for anyone to make enough money to buy a house 
or rent a flat, regardless of all evidence to the contrary.

>> Heck, I was laid off last May.  I didn't work again until October, and
>> it's been contract work ever since.  A couple of really tight months
>> financially, but we haven't lost the house and are still paying all the
>> bills.
> 
> Then clearly you are a far better person than I am.

I had a reasonable severance package, and my contract rate is decent - 
not outstanding, but decent.  There are some things we're not willing to 
give up, like eating out fairly regularly (which is expensive).

> One time my sister got laid off. 5 days later, she was on the phone
> complaining that of the 3 written job offers she had received from the 5
> interviews she attended, she couldn't decide which one sounded the
> nicest.

I had hoped for a situation like that.  It didn't happen.  I actually had 
an interview the week after the layoff, but I was so badly out of 
practice that I blew it by starting a conversation about pay and 
benefits.  That comes when an offer is made, not at the start of the 
conversation.

>>>> Oooh, he's got teeth, this one does. ;)  That's a fair question.
>>>
>>> Back atcha. ;-)
>>
>> It always makes me smile when you take a stand on something.  Even when
>> the stand isn't necessarily logical in my view.  You have changed in
>> that regard, and it's a good change.  :)
> 
> It's good to be righteous. It's not so good when you're actually wrong.
> :-/

It's good practice.  The stakes ultimately are pretty low here, so it's a 
largely safe environment to try stuff out and see what works and what 
doesn't.

"Practice makes perfect" and all that.

>>> So there's a lot of people /on/ the site.
>>
>> And it stands to reason if it were a waste of time, people wouldn't
>> spend time on the site, would they?  (The point of LinkedIn isn't to
>> waste time, it's to build a professional network.  Facebook, OTOH, is
>> essentially there for people to waste time on so they can be the
>> 'product' sold to advertisers - the two aren't really equivalent).
> 
> Yeah, I'm really not seeing how Facebook is still in business. It must
> cost /millions/ to run all those servers. And yet, their idea of
> "targeted adverts" is about as precise as a blunderbuss. It just seems
> like some day somebody is going to figure out the emperor's magical
> invisible suite is actually non-existent...

It may well - I understand they use SSD storage exclusively (local 
company here in Utah called Fusion-IO provides the hardware, 
apparently).  It's all about advertising, apparently.  Dunno how they 
manage it with ad blockers and things like the fb purity, but I figure 
that's not my problem.  If it goes away, I likely won't miss it.

>>> For example, how do you know that "millions" have found it useful?
>>> Not, say, "thousands"? The number of people on the site is not
>>> necessarily the number who have actually found it beneficial.
>>
>> It stands to reason that if it weren't beneficial, people would stop
>> using it.  After all, you didn't find it beneficial, and you stopped
>> using it.  That's actually a perfectly natural reaction.
>>
>> So are you assuming you're the only one who stopped using it because
>> you didn't find it beneficial?
> 
> We'd need to see numbers for how many people signed up, and how many
> people subsequently left.

Perhaps.

> My profile is still live on the system. It looks like I'm still a
> Linked-In user. And yet, I haven't used it in 3 years. So don't use /my/
> presence as an indicator of usefulness.

Well, you also only have 7 connections, IIRC.  One of the useful things 
to do, though, is to have someone you know introduce you to someone they 
know.  That's how I ended up with an interview in Portland - a colleague 
of mine in Florida knows the HR person at the company I applied to, and 
he introduced me.  Within 2 weeks, I had an in-person interview.  Sadly, 
they didn't feel that what they wanted out of my presentation was 
provided by what I presented to them, and they were looking for a 100% 
match.  They even said I was very well qualified, but that I "didn't 
follow the instructions given" and "didn't show an appropriate amount of 
enthusiasm and investment in the company".  The former I fault myself 
for, for assuming I understood their instructions (and not insisting 
earlier in the process of being told what I should be prepared to present 
on); the latter, I fault them for, because corporate enthusiasm is 
something that can be taught, and to reject a candidate because they 
weren't bouncing off the walls about your product/service even though 
they're highly qualified in the field is just silly.

> How many of the other profiles are ghosts? I guess that's the opportune
> question...
> 
> Regarding Facebook: How many of those profiles are for somebody's cat?
> ;-)

Far, far too many.  I've got a friend on Facebook who has a page for her 
African Grey parrot and for her dog.  I think her cat also has one, now I 
think about it.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 09/06/2012 12:57 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> That's what I remembered hearing - know offhand when they're airing?

'Fraid not.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

>>> How to properly use google?<scnr>
>>
>> You laugh, but this is actually non-trivial.
>
> Not in my experience.

The double-negatives make this ambiguous.

> But then again, when I was in high school selling
> software and computer books, I was often amazed when people would grab a
> book of the shelf and just flip through it to find what they were looking
> for, rather than looking in the index or TOC first.

To be fair, depending on what you're looking for, the TOC may not be 
that helpful. The index usually works though. It depends how badly put 
together the book is.

>> I live in a city with a population of 200,000 people, and an
>> unemployment rate well below the national average. /Clearly/ there are
>> jobs here. I just need to find them.
>
> You've also stated (in the past, maybe it's changed) that you hate living
> there except that it's logically laid out and you can find stuff easily.

I don't hate living here, it's my favourite place. I hate living WITH MY 
MUM, that's for sure. ;-)

> But yeah, there are probably jobs there, just perhaps not in the fields
> you're interested in.

Perhaps. I very much doubt anyone here wants computer programmers. But 
the guy who looks after the computers? Surely any company that has a lot 
of computers will want one of those. (Doesn't mean they need a new one 
though...)

> When you start filtering by too many criteria, you end up with no
> options.  The logical thing to do when that happens is to relax some of
> the criteria, such as where you're willing to look or what you're willing
> to take as a job.

Sure. And if a job was in, say, Northampton, that would be fine. 
Anything that's within a reasonable commuting distance of where I live.

>>> or your unwillingness to believe that anyone on the planet who works a
>>> "normal" job makes enough to live on.
>>
>> Uh, when did I say that?
>
> It's been a couple of years probably, when you and I were talking about
> it being good for you to move out of your mum's place.  You asserted that
> it simply isn't possible for anyone to make enough money to buy a house
> or rent a flat, regardless of all evidence to the contrary.

Interesting...

>> It's good to be righteous. It's not so good when you're actually wrong.
>> :-/
>
> It's good practice.  The stakes ultimately are pretty low here, so it's a
> largely safe environment to try stuff out and see what works and what
> doesn't.
>
> "Practice makes perfect" and all that.

Try "practice makes permanent" and you'll be nearer the mark. ;-)

And hey, I've actually /met/ a tiny few of the people on here, so... 
(Damn, if only I could remember their names!)

>> Yeah, I'm really not seeing how Facebook is still in business. It must
>> cost /millions/ to run all those servers. And yet, their idea of
>> "targeted adverts" is about as precise as a blunderbuss. It just seems
>> like some day somebody is going to figure out the emperor's magical
>> invisible suite is actually non-existent...
>
> It may well - I understand they use SSD storage exclusively (local
> company here in Utah called Fusion-IO provides the hardware,
> apparently).  It's all about advertising, apparently.  Dunno how they
> manage it with ad blockers and things like the fb purity, but I figure
> that's not my problem.  If it goes away, I likely won't miss it.

It seems to be classic Internet bubble type stuff. Everybody is really 
excited about how much money Facebook is going to start making ANY DAY 
NOW... and yet, where's the money?

>> My profile is still live on the system. It looks like I'm still a
>> Linked-In user. And yet, I haven't used it in 3 years. So don't use /my/
>> presence as an indicator of usefulness.
>
> Well, you also only have 7 connections, IIRC.  One of the useful things
> to do, though, is to have someone you know introduce you to someone they
> know.  That's how I ended up with an interview in Portland - a colleague
> of mine in Florida knows the HR person at the company I applied to, and
> he introduced me.  Within 2 weeks, I had an in-person interview.

The idea that somebody actually knows the guy who does the hiring just 
seems... really, really far-out. I mean, I suppose there must *be* a guy 
who does the hiring, and *somebody* must know that guy. But the chances 
of actually connecting with that guy seem vanishingly small. It would be 
like winning the lottery or something.

Actually, you know what? What /really/ sounds far-fetched to me is that 
somebody would know somebody who needs to make a hire, and that person 
would think that *I* am even worth mentioning. I have no skills useful 
in a workplace. I find it hard to imagine anybody wanting to hire me...

> the latter, I fault them for, because corporate enthusiasm is
> something that can be taught, and to reject a candidate because they
> weren't bouncing off the walls about your product/service even though
> they're highly qualified in the field is just silly.

Yeah, about that...

So in the interview, they always seem to ask you something along the 
lines of "what excites you about our company?" or "why did you choose 
us?" or something similar.

The desired response, apparently, is some eulogy about how this company 
is unparalleled in the industry and how the company's vision will 
transform my career or something like that.

Why did I pick this company? The honest truth is obviously "this is all 
I could find". I know that. The person interviewing me must, surely, 
know that too. (Unless they're a total moron.) And yet, if you say that, 
you're instantly removed from consideration. WTF?

I mean, if you were applying to work for *Google* or somebody, yes, you 
could legitimately claim to be actually *excited* about the prospect. 
But for any other company? It's a job. I need the money. End of story. 
It seems silly to have to pretend otherwise...

>> How many of the other profiles are ghosts? I guess that's the opportune
>> question...
>>
>> Regarding Facebook: How many of those profiles are for somebody's cat?
>> ;-)
>
> Far, far too many.  I've got a friend on Facebook who has a page for her
> African Grey parrot and for her dog.  I think her cat also has one, now I
> think about it.

I read an article somewhere about how investors hear that there are X 
million accounts on Facebook and they think "wow, if I could just be on 
Facebook, I could have X million customers!" Yet these same investors 
don't really understand what "be on Facebook" actually means. And most 
of those millions of profile are for people's cat, fictional TV 
characters, people's children who can't read or write yet, etc. (E.g., 
Jamie's son has a profile. He's 4 weeks old. His mum posts all the 
actual stuff...)

Post a reply to this message

On 09/06/2012 12:40 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> And hey, I've actually /met/ a tiny few of the people on here, so...
> (Damn, if only I could remember their names!)

So much for fame.
I obviously made a big impression. :-(

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Le 2012-06-08 06:18, Invisible a écrit :
> I don't know that there are any sites that do /exactly/ what Linked-In
> does. But there are plenty of sites that let you search humans for
> various reasons. (Exhibit A: Monster.)
>

Monster is nothing like LinkedIn.  Linked-In is much closer to Facebook 
than Monster.

In Linked-in, you are supposed to build a network of contacts (school 
buddies, coworkers, family, etc...), which then lets you get introduced 
to THEIR contacts, etc... Hopefully helping you on your quest to find a 
good job.  E.g.:  There's this guy in your dance classes that works in 
accounting at a big company.  You become a contact in LinkedIn. While 
taking a break, he mentions the sad state of their IT.  YOu say: "I 
betcha I could help improve things."  The next day, you ask him over 
LinkedIn to introduce you to his HR rep or IT manager.  you get 
introduced, you go on an interview, you may not get hired, but the HR 
person knows you exist, and when the time comes to hire an Haskell 
expert, she'll have one in her network already.

Just like Facebook or Myspace, LinkedIn lets post blog-like messages; 
you can make recommendations on books, seminars, speeches, and other 
people's work.  You can also participate in various forums on a variety 
of topics.

You can (and could back in 2007, when I joined! so it must have been 
there when you did too) also join trade groups, alumni groups, interest 
groups, etc...  All have mailing lists that will let you know of other 
group members' postings, forum discussions, etc...

> I've noticed, on multiple forums, that I seem to piss people off. I
> guess I'm just a bad human being. In the past, people used to just
> ignore me. Now people talk to me, but only to tell me that I'm an idiot.
> I'm not sure that's an improvement...

I don't think anyone here thinks you're an idiot. You do have a tendency 
to make broad assumptions, combined with hyperbole when discussing 
topics that you haven't researched properly.  People who know about 
those topics will then have a knee-jerk reaction and point out the 
errors of your ways.  What irks them is that you appear unwilling to 
learn from your mistakes and will continue to argue ad vitam aeternam 
why you think there's nothing wrong with your initial impression.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

On 09/06/2012 03:11 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:
> Le 2012-06-08 06:18, Invisible a écrit :
>> I don't know that there are any sites that do /exactly/ what Linked-In
>> does. But there are plenty of sites that let you search humans for
>> various reasons. (Exhibit A: Monster.)
>>
>
> Monster is nothing like LinkedIn. Linked-In is much closer to Facebook
> than Monster.

Both LinkedIn and Monster let you search for humans for work-related 
purposes though. That was the comparison I was going for.

> In Linked-in, you are supposed to build a network of contacts (school
> buddies, coworkers, family, etc...), which then lets you get introduced
> to THEIR contacts, etc... Hopefully helping you on your quest to find a
> good job. E.g.: There's this guy in your dance classes that works in
> accounting at a big company. You become a contact in LinkedIn. While
> taking a break, he mentions the sad state of their IT. YOu say: "I
> betcha I could help improve things." The next day, you ask him over
> LinkedIn to introduce you to his HR rep or IT manager. you get
> introduced, you go on an interview, you may not get hired, but the HR
> person knows you exist, and when the time comes to hire an Haskell
> expert, she'll have one in her network already.

That's a great story. Pity I don't know anybody like that...

> Just like Facebook or Myspace, LinkedIn lets post blog-like messages;
> you can make recommendations on books, seminars, speeches, and other
> people's work. You can also participate in various forums on a variety
> of topics.
>
> You can (and could back in 2007, when I joined! so it must have been
> there when you did too) also join trade groups, alumni groups, interest
> groups, etc... All have mailing lists that will let you know of other
> group members' postings, forum discussions, etc...

1. I had no idea that any of this functionality existed.

2. I'm not really sure how you would use such functionality to do 
anything "useful". (Not that I'm saying you can't, I'm just saying I'm 
not sure how.)

>> I've noticed, on multiple forums, that I seem to piss people off. I
>> guess I'm just a bad human being. In the past, people used to just
>> ignore me. Now people talk to me, but only to tell me that I'm an idiot.
>> I'm not sure that's an improvement...
>
> I don't think anyone here thinks you're an idiot. You do have a tendency
> to make broad assumptions, combined with hyperbole when discussing
> topics that you haven't researched properly. People who know about those
> topics will then have a knee-jerk reaction and point out the errors of
> your ways. What irks them is that you appear unwilling to learn from
> your mistakes and will continue to argue ad vitam aeternam why you think
> there's nothing wrong with your initial impression.

Being mistaken is common enough. Failing to learn from your mistakes? I 
think that probably /does/ qualify somebody as an idiot.

Alternatively, somebody phrased it like this:

   "Every man is a damned fool for five minutes of every day. Wisdom 
resides in not exceeding this quota."

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 12:40:52 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>>>> How to properly use google?<scnr>
>>>
>>> You laugh, but this is actually non-trivial.
>>
>> Not in my experience.
> 
> The double-negatives make this ambiguous.

I find it to be trivial.  Occasionally I have to do some word 
association, but it's rare that I have trouble finding stuff with the 
right selection of keywords.

One thing that helps tremendously is to just use keywords, not to write a 
novel as the question.

>> But then again, when I was in high school selling software and computer
>> books, I was often amazed when people would grab a book of the shelf
>> and just flip through it to find what they were looking for, rather
>> than looking in the index or TOC first.
> 
> To be fair, depending on what you're looking for, the TOC may not be
> that helpful. The index usually works though. It depends how badly put
> together the book is.

The TOC can provide a good high-level view, but I do tend to agree, which 
is why I always started with the index.

>>> I live in a city with a population of 200,000 people, and an
>>> unemployment rate well below the national average. /Clearly/ there are
>>> jobs here. I just need to find them.
>>
>> You've also stated (in the past, maybe it's changed) that you hate
>> living there except that it's logically laid out and you can find stuff
>> easily.
> 
> I don't hate living here, it's my favourite place. I hate living WITH MY
> MUM, that's for sure. ;-)

Your favourite place from a very limited selection, admittedly.  

>> But yeah, there are probably jobs there, just perhaps not in the fields
>> you're interested in.
> 
> Perhaps. I very much doubt anyone here wants computer programmers. But
> the guy who looks after the computers? Surely any company that has a lot
> of computers will want one of those. (Doesn't mean they need a new one
> though...)

Yes, but if there are largely small companies, they may typically hire 
some kid recently out of school (often times before they've been to uni) 
because they know the kid because he/she fixed their computer once.

>> When you start filtering by too many criteria, you end up with no
>> options.  The logical thing to do when that happens is to relax some of
>> the criteria, such as where you're willing to look or what you're
>> willing to take as a job.
> 
> Sure. And if a job was in, say, Northampton, that would be fine.
> Anything that's within a reasonable commuting distance of where I live.

What distance would you consider?

>>>> or your unwillingness to believe that anyone on the planet who works
>>>> a "normal" job makes enough to live on.
>>>
>>> Uh, when did I say that?
>>
>> It's been a couple of years probably, when you and I were talking about
>> it being good for you to move out of your mum's place.  You asserted
>> that it simply isn't possible for anyone to make enough money to buy a
>> house or rent a flat, regardless of all evidence to the contrary.
> 
> Interesting...

You don't recall that?  At around the same time, you were making 
assertions about the uselessness of car insurance IIRC.

>>> It's good to be righteous. It's not so good when you're actually
>>> wrong. :-/
>>
>> It's good practice.  The stakes ultimately are pretty low here, so it's
>> a largely safe environment to try stuff out and see what works and what
>> doesn't.
>>
>> "Practice makes perfect" and all that.
> 
> Try "practice makes permanent" and you'll be nearer the mark. ;-)

Of course, I was citing a common quote. ;)

> And hey, I've actually /met/ a tiny few of the people on here, so...
> (Damn, if only I could remember their names!)

Don't worry about remembering names - I never remember names myself, 
especially when it comes to seeing people out of context.  I went for 
sushi with my wife last week, and ended up seated at a table next to two 
software engineers I'd worked a contract with in January.  I said 'hi' as 
we sat down (they recognised me), and then we got to talking and I had to 
admit that I couldn't remember their names, but I did remember working 
with them.

>> It may well - I understand they use SSD storage exclusively (local
>> company here in Utah called Fusion-IO provides the hardware,
>> apparently).  It's all about advertising, apparently.  Dunno how they
>> manage it with ad blockers and things like the fb purity, but I figure
>> that's not my problem.  If it goes away, I likely won't miss it.
> 
> It seems to be classic Internet bubble type stuff. Everybody is really
> excited about how much money Facebook is going to start making ANY DAY
> NOW... and yet, where's the money?

Indeed, the IPO happened and the stock has been pretty much declining 
since.

>> Well, you also only have 7 connections, IIRC.  One of the useful things
>> to do, though, is to have someone you know introduce you to someone
>> they know.  That's how I ended up with an interview in Portland - a
>> colleague of mine in Florida knows the HR person at the company I
>> applied to, and he introduced me.  Within 2 weeks, I had an in-person
>> interview.
> 
> The idea that somebody actually knows the guy who does the hiring just
> seems... really, really far-out. I mean, I suppose there must *be* a guy
> who does the hiring, and *somebody* must know that guy. But the chances
> of actually connecting with that guy seem vanishingly small. It would be
> like winning the lottery or something.

When you only are networked to 7 people directly, the chances are pretty 
small.  When you are networked to 500+ people, the chances get 
significantly larger.  After all, people know their HR managers 
typically.  Bosses have people who report to them and those people know 
them.

> Actually, you know what? What /really/ sounds far-fetched to me is that
> somebody would know somebody who needs to make a hire, and that person
> would think that *I* am even worth mentioning. I have no skills useful
> in a workplace. I find it hard to imagine anybody wanting to hire me...

It's a question of scale.  And you don't be someone worth mentioning, you 
have to pursue it.  Most HR professionals say that they're not interested 
in hiring someone who doesn't show initiative.  You don't say to an HR 
person "if you see something that looks like a good fit, get in touch 
with me".

> So in the interview, they always seem to ask you something along the
> lines of "what excites you about our company?" or "why did you choose
> us?" or something similar.

Yep.  So you have to find something to be excited about - and there has 
to be something that interests you beyond the paycheck, or there's little 
reason for you to stay.  Hiring people is expensive, so they want to hire 
people who have a peripheral interest.

So in my case, the company in question has an administrative automation 
product (it's their primary product).  I've long had an interest in 
automating administrative tasks on systems, and their implementation is 
somewhat unique in how it approaches the problem of distributing 
automated tasks and performing system inventories.

So while the position was a "Certification program manager" position, I 
demonstrated interest in the company by (a) downloading and looking at 
the product, (b) downloading and looking at their training VM, and (c) 
being familiar with how the product works.

> Why did I pick this company? The honest truth is obviously "this is all
> I could find". I know that. The person interviewing me must, surely,
> know that too. (Unless they're a total moron.) And yet, if you say that,
> you're instantly removed from consideration. WTF?

m-/

Telling them "nobody else will hire me" makes them think "yeah, so there 
must be a reason for that so we'll just back away slowly".

You have to find something about what they do that piques your interest.

> I mean, if you were applying to work for *Google* or somebody, yes, you
> could legitimately claim to be actually *excited* about the prospect.
> But for any other company? It's a job. I need the money. End of story.
> It seems silly to have to pretend otherwise...

You don't have to pretend about it.

My first job out of college was working for a company that manufactured 
painting equipment.  I had worked there during the summers on the 
assembly line, and had considered getting a forklift license to work in 
the warehouse (assembly line work is very demanding work).

I left college for a job in their MIS department.  What excited me about 
the job?  Flexible hours, the ability to build new systems and to affect 
the bottom line indirectly.  I did my first large-scale project (only 
$30,000, but it was a full rewiring of the building for voice/network), 
and had a chance to learn from someone I came to respect how to make a 
business case so I could do the things I wanted to do.

It was an exciting job for me at that time - I worked with good people 
who were good at their jobs.

I left that job for one with a call centre here in Utah that handled 
company benefits administration.  What excited me about that job?  The 
ability to move out of my parents' basement and get out on my own, and 
the ability to work with a larger environment than the one I was (at that 
time) currently working in.  Opportunity to work with a multi-site 
company and to pick up additional skills, learn new things, and grow 
professionally.

That job ended up largely sucking because of management changes. <shrug>  
It happens.  Next job was working on the corporate network for a Fortune 
50 food & drug retail company.  More users, larger systems, more complex 
network, etc.  That job was a lot of fun.

After that, I changed career paths and became a technical instructor.  
The challenge of presenting to students and interacting in a classroom 
was a draw for me.  A chance to teach people how to properly implement a 
product I'd built up expertise in.

Loved the work, ultimately disliked the travel.  So I moved into product 
support, and then into community building and program management.  On the 
surface, what's exciting about program management?  Nothing in particular 
(I fell into that job because I was at risk of being laid off), but I 
ended up helping set direction for the training department.  Figuring out 
what customers needed in terms of training and then figuring out how to 
get it to them - that was fun.

Now I'm looking to move into product management.  Looks like I'll 
probably start out doing some writing or product testing or something 
along those lines, and then move into defining product specs and finding 
out what customers want from a product.

The point is that while yeah - it's a job and you need the money - there 
should be something about the job or the company that makes you /want/ to 
get up and go to work in the morning.

> I read an article somewhere about how investors hear that there are X
> million accounts on Facebook and they think "wow, if I could just be on
> Facebook, I could have X million customers!" Yet these same investors
> don't really understand what "be on Facebook" actually means. And most
> of those millions of profile are for people's cat, fictional TV
> characters, people's children who can't read or write yet, etc. (E.g.,
> Jamie's son has a profile. He's 4 weeks old. His mum posts all the
> actual stuff...)

Well, not "most of those millions", but yeah, a not insignificant number 
of them.

But at the same time, TV advertisers spend a fair bit of money on 
advertising on TV that is watched by 4-year-olds, birds, cats, and dogs.  
The TV folks figured out a way to count how many they're advertising to 
that matter, and that's the trick with something like Facebook (as an 
advertising engine).

Ads are primarily Google's "product" as well.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 15:27:41 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>> In Linked-in, you are supposed to build a network of contacts (school
>> buddies, coworkers, family, etc...), which then lets you get introduced
>> to THEIR contacts, etc... Hopefully helping you on your quest to find a
>> good job. E.g.: There's this guy in your dance classes that works in
>> accounting at a big company. You become a contact in LinkedIn. While
>> taking a break, he mentions the sad state of their IT. YOu say: "I
>> betcha I could help improve things." The next day, you ask him over
>> LinkedIn to introduce you to his HR rep or IT manager. you get
>> introduced, you go on an interview, you may not get hired, but the HR
>> person knows you exist, and when the time comes to hire an Haskell
>> expert, she'll have one in her network already.
> 
> That's a great story. Pity I don't know anybody like that...

You don't know that.

Just with the 4 contacts I have in the UK (with a quick filter - and I 
know there are more in the UK who for some reason aren't showing up as 
being there - ah, because there is a city filter as well), you're a step 
away from knowing one of the product release managers at Applied Card 
Technologies, someone who works at T-Systems, and the owner and CEO of 
b2lateral (which is a training/consultancy).

I also know someone who's the systems engineering team leader at City 
College in Brighton, people who work at both Cambridge and Oxford 
universities (including a research professor who's not on LinkedIn - he's 
worked very hard to keep a very small online footprint).

Spend some time looking at the companies represented in your broader 
network and see what looks like it might be moderately interesting.

Then see what positions those companies have posted on LinkedIn, and if 
you find something that looks interesting, ask the person you know there 
to introduce you to the person they know ho works there.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> That's a great story. Pity I don't know anybody like that...
>
> You don't know that.
>
> Just with the 4 contacts I have in the UK (with a quick filter - and I
> know there are more in the UK who for some reason aren't showing up as
> being there - ah, because there is a city filter as well), you're a step
> away from knowing one of the product release managers at Applied Card
> Technologies, someone who works at T-Systems, and the owner and CEO of
> b2lateral (which is a training/consultancy).
>
> I also know someone who's the systems engineering team leader at City
> College in Brighton, people who work at both Cambridge and Oxford
> universities (including a research professor who's not on LinkedIn - he's
> worked very hard to keep a very small online footprint).

That's impressive and everything, but... why would any of these people 
give a damn about me? I'm nobody.

(I'm also not sure what you mean by "one step away"...)

> Spend some time looking at the companies represented in your broader
> network and see what looks like it might be moderately interesting.
>
> Then see what positions those companies have posted on LinkedIn, and if
> you find something that looks interesting, ask the person you know there
> to introduce you to the person they know ho works there.

It's literally news to me that LinkedIn lets you do this. I didn't 
realise it /had/ jobs listings, or company data, or anything remotely 
like that...

Post a reply to this message

>>>>> How to properly use google?<scnr>
>>>>
>>>> You laugh, but this is actually non-trivial.
>>>
>>> Not in my experience.
>>
>> The double-negatives make this ambiguous.
>
> I find it to be trivial.

Wow. OK, that's impressive. Next time I can't find something, I'll know 
who to ask...

(Oh, wait, I can't do that. Warp will yell at me. :-P )

> One thing that helps tremendously is to just use keywords, not to write a
> novel as the question.

Well, sure. But you still gotta pick out the /right/ words. That's what 
makes them KEY words...

>> I don't hate living here, it's my favourite place. I hate living WITH MY
>> MUM, that's for sure. ;-)
>
> Your favourite place from a very limited selection, admittedly.

Like I said, everywhere else I've seen is really old and dilapidated...

>>> But yeah, there are probably jobs there, just perhaps not in the fields
>>> you're interested in.
>>
>> Perhaps. I very much doubt anyone here wants computer programmers. But
>> the guy who looks after the computers? Surely any company that has a lot
>> of computers will want one of those. (Doesn't mean they need a new one
>> though...)
>
> Yes, but if there are largely small companies, they may typically hire
> some kid recently out of school (often times before they've been to uni)
> because they know the kid because he/she fixed their computer once.

We've got Unisys, we've got the UK headquarters of the OU, we've got a 
brand new building for Network Rail. Actually I know somebody who works 
for them; she reckons that should be my next target...

>> Sure. And if a job was in, say, Northampton, that would be fine.
>> Anything that's within a reasonable commuting distance of where I live.
>
> What distance would you consider?

Well, commuting time isn't proportional to just /distance/, but I'd at 
least /look at/ anything within about 25 miles or so, I guess.

>> Interesting...
>
> You don't recall that?

Vaguely. I still don't get how anybody can /buy/ a house outright, but 
renting seems plausible, if you make a lot of money.

>> And hey, I've actually /met/ a tiny few of the people on here, so...
>> (Damn, if only I could remember their names!)
>
> Don't worry about remembering names - I never remember names myself,

Everywhere I go, I can never remember anybody's names, and yet they all 
seem to know exactly who I am. It's weird...

(Or maybe *I* am weird, which is why everybody knows me.)

>> It seems to be classic Internet bubble type stuff. Everybody is really
>> excited about how much money Facebook is going to start making ANY DAY
>> NOW... and yet, where's the money?
>
> Indeed, the IPO happened and the stock has been pretty much declining
> since.

Heh. Burn, baby, burn...

>> The idea that somebody actually knows the guy who does the hiring just
>> seems... really, really far-out.
>
> When you only are networked to 7 people directly, the chances are pretty
> small.  When you are networked to 500+ people, the chances get
> significantly larger.

Yeah, I suppose so.

>> Actually, you know what? What /really/ sounds far-fetched to me is that
>> somebody would know somebody who needs to make a hire, and that person
>> would think that *I* am even worth mentioning. I have no skills useful
>> in a workplace. I find it hard to imagine anybody wanting to hire me...
>
> It's a question of scale.  And you don't be someone worth mentioning, you
> have to pursue it.  Most HR professionals say that they're not interested
> in hiring someone who doesn't show initiative.  You don't say to an HR
> person "if you see something that looks like a good fit, get in touch
> with me".

I can't imagine any way of "showing initiative".

>> So in the interview, they always seem to ask you something along the
>> lines of "what excites you about our company?" or "why did you choose
>> us?" or something similar.
>
> Yep.  So you have to find something to be excited about - and there has
> to be something that interests you beyond the paycheck, or there's little
> reason for you to stay.  Hiring people is expensive, so they want to hire
> people who have a peripheral interest.

I have a hard time imagining somebody being interested in a company for 
any reason other than the money.

>> Why did I pick this company? The honest truth is obviously "this is all
>> I could find".
>
> m-/
>
> Telling them "nobody else will hire me" makes them think "yeah, so there
> must be a reason for that so we'll just back away slowly".

In my case, it's more like "I couldn't find anybody else to ask". It's 
not as if job openings grow on trees...

> You have to find something about what they do that piques your interest.

Sounds infeasible to me.

> You don't have to pretend about it.

Oh really?

> I left college for a job in their MIS department.  What excited me about
> the job?  Flexible hours, the ability to build new systems and to affect
> the bottom line indirectly.  I did my first large-scale project (only
> $30,000, but it was a full rewiring of the building for voice/network),
> and had a chance to learn from someone I came to respect how to make a
> business case so I could do the things I wanted to do.

> The point is that while yeah - it's a job and you need the money - there
> should be something about the job or the company that makes you /want/ to
> get up and go to work in the morning.

I'm astonished. I never thought I'd meet somebody who ACTUALLY GETS 
EXCITED about doing a job...

> Ads are primarily Google's "product" as well.

I've been wondering about that. I mean, it's no secret that Google is 
hugely successful. The secret is WHO THE HELL PAYS THEM MONEY?! They 
don't SELL anything!

(People say "they sell advertising", but have YOU ever seen any of these 
adverts that they purportedly sell?)

Post a reply to this message

On 9-6-2012 20:57, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> Well, sure. But you still gotta pick out the /right/ words. That's what
> makes them KEY words...
>
>>> I don't hate living here, it's my favourite place. I hate living WITH MY
>>> MUM, that's for sure. ;-)
>>
>> Your favourite place from a very limited selection, admittedly.
>
> Like I said, everywhere else I've seen is really old and dilapidated...

That is precisely the point: you haven't seen much.

>> I left college for a job in their MIS department. What excited me about
>> the job? Flexible hours, the ability to build new systems and to affect
>> the bottom line indirectly. I did my first large-scale project (only
>> $30,000, but it was a full rewiring of the building for voice/network),
>> and had a chance to learn from someone I came to respect how to make a
>> business case so I could do the things I wanted to do.
>
>> The point is that while yeah - it's a job and you need the money - there
>> should be something about the job or the company that makes you /want/ to
>> get up and go to work in the morning.
>
> I'm astonished. I never thought I'd meet somebody who ACTUALLY GETS
> EXCITED about doing a job...

Sorry to correct you here, but there are quite a few of those in this 
group. Or you may not count that as meeting. If you restrict yourself to 
actually physically meeting, you might have a point, but only by not 
interacting with people from outside your isolated community. It may 
look pretty and comfortable to you, but it is not the place where 
interesting things happen.

Post a reply to this message

On 09/06/2012 8:42 PM, andrel wrote:
>> I'm astonished. I never thought I'd meet somebody who ACTUALLY GETS
>> EXCITED about doing a job...
>
> Sorry to correct you here, but there are quite a few of those in this
> group. Or you may not count that as meeting. If you restrict yourself to
> actually physically meeting, you might have a point, but only by not
> interacting with people from outside your isolated community. It may
> look pretty and comfortable to you, but it is not the place where
> interesting things happen.

So true. I have had three careers and I would have paid money to do 
them, I enjoy(ed) them so much. Working 9 to 5 in a job that is only a 
means of getting money to live. Is my idea of hell, unless your social 
live makes up for it.
(My tuppence worth)

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 19:57:21 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>> I find it to be trivial.
> 
> Wow. OK, that's impressive. Next time I can't find something, I'll know
> who to ask...
> 
> (Oh, wait, I can't do that. Warp will yell at me. :-P )

Earlier today, I was looking for ways to analyse mbox headers.  Took a 
few tries and different combinations, but I found some scripts in about 
15 minutes that gave me a start.

>> One thing that helps tremendously is to just use keywords, not to write
>> a novel as the question.
> 
> Well, sure. But you still gotta pick out the /right/ words. That's what
> makes them KEY words...

And if one set of words doesn't work, you try a different set (see 
above).  It ain't rocket science.

>>> I don't hate living here, it's my favourite place. I hate living WITH
>>> MY MUM, that's for sure. ;-)
>>
>> Your favourite place from a very limited selection, admittedly.
> 
> Like I said, everywhere else I've seen is really old and dilapidated...

Dubai?  Minneapolis?  Sydney?  Switzerland?

Surely you've seen pictures of those places.

>> Yes, but if there are largely small companies, they may typically hire
>> some kid recently out of school (often times before they've been to
>> uni) because they know the kid because he/she fixed their computer
>> once.
> 
> We've got Unisys, we've got the UK headquarters of the OU, we've got a
> brand new building for Network Rail. Actually I know somebody who works
> for them; she reckons that should be my next target...

That's a good start.  Look at the job postings, see if she knows someone 
in the department (or knows someone who knows someone in the department, 
odds are she does if she doesn't herself) for a job that looks 
interesting to you.

>>> Sure. And if a job was in, say, Northampton, that would be fine.
>>> Anything that's within a reasonable commuting distance of where I
>>> live.
>>
>> What distance would you consider?
> 
> Well, commuting time isn't proportional to just /distance/, but I'd at
> least /look at/ anything within about 25 miles or so, I guess.

Well, sure, it isn't proportional, but usually you can't say "show me 
companies that are within 30 minutes of a location at 8 AM and 5 PM" and 
get useful results.  So distance is as good a measure as anything.

25 miles isn't very much.  My last full-time job (and possibly my next 
full-time job) has an office 45 miles away, but I telecommuted most of 
the time.

Something to consider.

>>> Interesting...
>>
>> You don't recall that?
> 
> Vaguely. I still don't get how anybody can /buy/ a house outright, 

Most people don't.  They get a mortgage.  Our 30-year mortgage (IIRC) is 
about $1,300/month.

> but
> renting seems plausible, if you make a lot of money.

Or if you room with someone else.  My stepson and his girlfriend are 
looking at renting with a couple friends of theirs.  Round here, rent's 
not too bad, about $700/mo on average IIRC.

>>> And hey, I've actually /met/ a tiny few of the people on here, so...
>>> (Damn, if only I could remember their names!)
>>
>> Don't worry about remembering names - I never remember names myself,
> 
> Everywhere I go, I can never remember anybody's names, and yet they all
> seem to know exactly who I am. It's weird...

It's not weird.  I've known people who could remember names and faces 
very well.  I've met literally thousands of people at tradeshows, and 
they always remember me, but if they're not wearing a nametag, I usually 
don't remember them unless I've spent time talking to them away from the 
show.

Though often when they tell me their name, I'll remember them - maybe 
it's more the association of names and faces that I have trouble with.

> (Or maybe *I* am weird, which is why everybody knows me.)

You do have some /interesting/ traits that make you memorable.  Not in a 
bad way, either.

>> It's a question of scale.  And you don't be someone worth mentioning,
>> you have to pursue it.  Most HR professionals say that they're not
>> interested in hiring someone who doesn't show initiative.  You don't
>> say to an HR person "if you see something that looks like a good fit,
>> get in touch with me".
> 
> I can't imagine any way of "showing initiative".

Find a job that looks interesting, contact someone you know at the 
company and say "Hey, I saw this job at your company, and I'm interested 
in it".  If you've previously interviewed there, contact the person you 
interviewed with and say "I know this other position didn't work out, but 
I found another one that looks like a better fit, could you give me a 
hand with it?" - especially if you did a screening interview with the HR 
department in the past.

Persistence pays off.

Sending a CV and saying "contact me if there's a good fit" - not showing 
initiative.  Showing that you know something about the company, finding a 
position, and then getting hold of someone you've talked to before there 
and saying "hey, this is something I'm interested in, and I'd be a good 
fit for it and here's why" (and then framing 'why' in terms of what they 
do - show that you know what they do) - that is a good thing.

>>> So in the interview, they always seem to ask you something along the
>>> lines of "what excites you about our company?" or "why did you choose
>>> us?" or something similar.
>>
>> Yep.  So you have to find something to be excited about - and there has
>> to be something that interests you beyond the paycheck, or there's
>> little reason for you to stay.  Hiring people is expensive, so they
>> want to hire people who have a peripheral interest.
> 
> I have a hard time imagining somebody being interested in a company for
> any reason other than the money.

Wouldn't it be fun, for example, if you found a company that worked on/
with Haskell?  Sure, the money is an important thing, but working on 
something you find interesting - that's a reason to be interested in a 
particular organisation.

>>> Why did I pick this company? The honest truth is obviously "this is
>>> all I could find".
>>
>> m-/
>>
>> Telling them "nobody else will hire me" makes them think "yeah, so
>> there must be a reason for that so we'll just back away slowly".
> 
> In my case, it's more like "I couldn't find anybody else to ask". It's
> not as if job openings grow on trees...

You just said unemployment is quite low where you are.  As population 
grows, if unemployment stays the same or drops, then jobs are in fact 
growing.

>> You have to find something about what they do that piques your
>> interest.
> 
> Sounds infeasible to me.

Maybe you need to extend your search beyond 25 miles from where you are, 
and consider that moving where you are might well be beneficial.

>> You don't have to pretend about it.
> 
> Oh really?

Really.  I took on teaching because I was interested in helping people 
learn how to use the product.  I'd never done formal instruction before 
(presented at conferences a few times, but that's different from 
constructing and delivering a 3-day classroom experience with hands-on 
labs).

>> The point is that while yeah - it's a job and you need the money -
>> there should be something about the job or the company that makes you
>> /want/ to get up and go to work in the morning.
> 
> I'm astonished. I never thought I'd meet somebody who ACTUALLY GETS
> EXCITED about doing a job...

A fair number of people get excited about doing a job.  Many people 
derive meaning in their lives based on the job they do, and it helps 
define who they are.

For people who fall into that category, not being excited about the job 
is like not being alive.

>> Ads are primarily Google's "product" as well.
> 
> I've been wondering about that. I mean, it's no secret that Google is
> hugely successful. The secret is WHO THE HELL PAYS THEM MONEY?! They
> don't SELL anything!

Subscribers to Google Docs - there is a business edition.  Ads.  I'm sure 
Darren could tell you all sorts of things they sell.

> (People say "they sell advertising", but have YOU ever seen any of these
> adverts that they purportedly sell?)

Sure, I have.  AdWords is all over the 'net.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 19:42:53 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>> I also know someone who's the systems engineering team leader at City
>> College in Brighton, people who work at both Cambridge and Oxford
>> universities (including a research professor who's not on LinkedIn -
>> he's worked very hard to keep a very small online footprint).
> 
> That's impressive and everything, but... why would any of these people
> give a damn about me? I'm nobody.

You have skills.  Perhaps they need your skills.  If you're a fit for a 
job and can do it for a price they can afford, then they benefit from 
hiring you.

> (I'm also not sure what you mean by "one step away"...)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_degrees_of_separation

That's a good place to start.

>> Spend some time looking at the companies represented in your broader
>> network and see what looks like it might be moderately interesting.
>>
>> Then see what positions those companies have posted on LinkedIn, and if
>> you find something that looks interesting, ask the person you know
>> there to introduce you to the person they know ho works there.
> 
> It's literally news to me that LinkedIn lets you do this. I didn't
> realise it /had/ jobs listings, or company data, or anything remotely
> like that...

You've been away from three years, assuming it's never changing. <shrug>  
It's changed, and that's part of what's changed about it.  If you've put 
enough information in, it can even recommend jobs you may be interested 
in.

That's how I found the one I almost got in Portland.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> Well, sure. But you still gotta pick out the /right/ words. That's what
>> makes them KEY words...
>
> And if one set of words doesn't work, you try a different set (see
> above).  It ain't rocket science.

Incidentally... what's so hard about rocket science anyway?

>>>> I don't hate living here, it's my favourite place. I hate living WITH
>>>> MY MUM, that's for sure. ;-)
>>>
>>> Your favourite place from a very limited selection, admittedly.
>>
>> Like I said, everywhere else I've seen is really old and dilapidated...
>
> Dubai?  Minneapolis?  Sydney?  Switzerland?
>
> Surely you've seen pictures of those places.

Hell, I've *visited* Switzerland.

It's a pleasant enough place to visit, but I wouldn't want to /live/ 
there...

>> We've got Unisys, we've got the UK headquarters of the OU, we've got a
>> brand new building for Network Rail. Actually I know somebody who works
>> for them; she reckons that should be my next target...
>
> That's a good start.  Look at the job postings, see if she knows someone
> in the department (or knows someone who knows someone in the department,
> odds are she does if she doesn't herself) for a job that looks
> interesting to you.

I don't think she knows anybody in a hiring position. Basically she told 
me to go look at their openings and see what they want. Apparently 
they're in the middle of a multi-million pound expansion plan. (Which 
seems bizarre, when you consider that IT'S NETWORK RAIL!)

>>> What distance would you consider?
>>
>> Well, commuting time isn't proportional to just /distance/, but I'd at
>> least /look at/ anything within about 25 miles or so, I guess.

> 25 miles isn't very much.  My last full-time job (and possibly my next
> full-time job) has an office 45 miles away, but I telecommuted most of
> the time.
>
> Something to consider.

Well, yeah, it's the distance I have to travel that's important, not 
where their registered office nominally is...

>> (Or maybe *I* am weird, which is why everybody knows me.)
>
> You do have some /interesting/ traits that make you memorable.  Not in a
> bad way, either.

I'm very spessial. :-/

>> I can't imagine any way of "showing initiative".
>
> Find a job that looks interesting, contact someone you know at the
> company and say "Hey, I saw this job at your company, and I'm interested
> in it".  If you've previously interviewed there, contact the person you
> interviewed with and say "I know this other position didn't work out, but
> I found another one that looks like a better fit, could you give me a
> hand with it?" - especially if you did a screening interview with the HR
> department in the past.
>
> Persistence pays off.
>
> Sending a CV and saying "contact me if there's a good fit" - not showing
> initiative.  Showing that you know something about the company, finding a
> position, and then getting hold of someone you've talked to before there
> and saying "hey, this is something I'm interested in, and I'd be a good
> fit for it and here's why" (and then framing 'why' in terms of what they
> do - show that you know what they do) - that is a good thing.

IME, you apply to a company, never hear back from them ever again, the 
end. I'm not sure how you would "know somebody there". Even if you've 
been interviewed before, I'm not sure how you'd have the person's 
contact details.

>> I have a hard time imagining somebody being interested in a company for
>> any reason other than the money.
>
> Wouldn't it be fun, for example, if you found a company that worked on/
> with Haskell?  Sure, the money is an important thing, but working on
> something you find interesting - that's a reason to be interested in a
> particular organisation.

There are roughly 3 companies globally that pay people to code in 
Haskell. The one in the UK consists of 3 people, and their registered 
office is somebody's house. If they want a Haskell programmer, they have 
the entire global community to choose from, and therefore they will not 
be hiring me.

Sure, a tiny handful of people out there have really cool jobs. These 
are vanishingly rare. Us mere mortals have to accept that only the sucky 
jobs are open to us.

>>> Telling them "nobody else will hire me" makes them think "yeah, so
>>> there must be a reason for that so we'll just back away slowly".
>>
>> In my case, it's more like "I couldn't find anybody else to ask". It's
>> not as if job openings grow on trees...
>
> You just said unemployment is quite low where you are.

Sure. I've also said, many times, that *I* have great difficulty finding 
job openings. Surely they must be out there, but apparently I suck at 
finding them.

>>> You have to find something about what they do that piques your
>>> interest.
>>
>> Sounds infeasible to me.
>
> Maybe you need to extend your search beyond 25 miles from where you are,
> and consider that moving where you are might well be beneficial.

I am /not/ working in London. End of story.

>> I'm astonished. I never thought I'd meet somebody who ACTUALLY GETS
>> EXCITED about doing a job...
>
> A fair number of people get excited about doing a job.  Many people
> derive meaning in their lives based on the job they do, and it helps
> define who they are.
>
> For people who fall into that category, not being excited about the job
> is like not being alive.

Sure. But that must be a really, really small category...

>>> Ads are primarily Google's "product" as well.
>>
>> I've been wondering about that. I mean, it's no secret that Google is
>> hugely successful. The secret is WHO THE HELL PAYS THEM MONEY?! They
>> don't SELL anything!
>
> Subscribers to Google Docs - there is a business edition.  Ads.  I'm sure
> Darren could tell you all sorts of things they sell.

I thought they closed down Docs? (Or am I thinking of Google Wave?)

>> (People say "they sell advertising", but have YOU ever seen any of these
>> adverts that they purportedly sell?)
>
> Sure, I have.  AdWords is all over the 'net.

You say "adwords", but I've yet to see it...

Post a reply to this message

On 10/06/2012 10:57 AM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> Incidentally... what's so hard about rocket science anyway?

The engineering.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 6/10/2012 2:57, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> Incidentally... what's so hard about rocket science anyway?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THNPmhBl-8I

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
   "Don't panic. There's beans and filters
    in the cabinet."

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 10:57:55 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>>> Well, sure. But you still gotta pick out the /right/ words. That's
>>> what makes them KEY words...
>>
>> And if one set of words doesn't work, you try a different set (see
>> above).  It ain't rocket science.
> 
> Incidentally... what's so hard about rocket science anyway?

I'm sure a rocket scientist could answer that question.  Closest I get is 
a couple of people I know with their PhDs and Masters degress in nuclear 
physics.

>> Dubai?  Minneapolis?  Sydney?  Switzerland?
>>
>> Surely you've seen pictures of those places.
> 
> Hell, I've *visited* Switzerland.
> 
> It's a pleasant enough place to visit, but I wouldn't want to /live/
> there...

Did you see all of it?  There may well be places that meet your criteria 
that you haven't visited.  But you've closed your mind to even the idea 
of there being another place on the entire planet where you might be 
happy.

>>> We've got Unisys, we've got the UK headquarters of the OU, we've got a
>>> brand new building for Network Rail. Actually I know somebody who
>>> works for them; she reckons that should be my next target...
>>
>> That's a good start.  Look at the job postings, see if she knows
>> someone in the department (or knows someone who knows someone in the
>> department, odds are she does if she doesn't herself) for a job that
>> looks interesting to you.
> 
> I don't think she knows anybody in a hiring position. Basically she told
> me to go look at their openings and see what they want. Apparently
> they're in the middle of a multi-million pound expansion plan. (Which
> seems bizarre, when you consider that IT'S NETWORK RAIL!)

(a) you don't know that she knows someone who's hiring until you ask, and 
(b) you don't know if she knows someone who knows someone who's hiring.

As they're expanding, it's a good time to look.  So go look already.

Very often in larger companies, the person who refers someone who gets 
hired gets a bonus (usually after the hiree has been on staff for 6 
months or so) - so there's incentive for staff to recruit from outside 
the company.  So not only could she help you get a new job, she might be 
eligible for a bonus for finding you - which would make it in her 
interest to help you as well.  (It's not a universal practice, but it's 
far from uncommon IME).

>>>> What distance would you consider?
>>>
>>> Well, commuting time isn't proportional to just /distance/, but I'd at
>>> least /look at/ anything within about 25 miles or so, I guess.
> 
>> 25 miles isn't very much.  My last full-time job (and possibly my next
>> full-time job) has an office 45 miles away, but I telecommuted most of
>> the time.
>>
>> Something to consider.
> 
> Well, yeah, it's the distance I have to travel that's important, not
> where their registered office nominally is...

Of course.  (BTW, that company's "registered office" - ie corporate HQ - 
was in Boston in my case.  Just the local office was 45 miles away).

>>> I can't imagine any way of "showing initiative".
>>
>> Find a job that looks interesting, contact someone you know at the
>> company and say "Hey, I saw this job at your company, and I'm
>> interested in it".  If you've previously interviewed there, contact the
>> person you interviewed with and say "I know this other position didn't
>> work out, but I found another one that looks like a better fit, could
>> you give me a hand with it?" - especially if you did a screening
>> interview with the HR department in the past.
>>
>> Persistence pays off.
>>
>> Sending a CV and saying "contact me if there's a good fit" - not
>> showing initiative.  Showing that you know something about the company,
>> finding a position, and then getting hold of someone you've talked to
>> before there and saying "hey, this is something I'm interested in, and
>> I'd be a good fit for it and here's why" (and then framing 'why' in
>> terms of what they do - show that you know what they do) - that is a
>> good thing.
> 
> IME, you apply to a company, never hear back from them ever again, the
> end. 

That's because you use the "normal" way of applying, which doesn't work 
for the applicant.

> I'm not sure how you would "know somebody there". Even if you've
> been interviewed before, I'm not sure how you'd have the person's
> contact details.

You know someone at Unisys, you said.

So in my case - I know someone (a few people, actually) who work at 
VMware, and one who works at Mozy (both are divisions of EMC).  My friend 
at VMware pointed me to someone in their HR department - so now I know 
someone in the HR department there.

There was a position in a division called "SpringSource" that I was 
interested in and interviewed for, but in the end they found someone who 
met the job requirements and knew the product already (otherwise I was a 
very good fit for what they were looking for - a technical writer).

The next time I saw a job there that looked interesting, I pinged the guy 
in HR, and he said the job was in a different division so he couldn't 
help other than by giving me the name and e-mail address of his 
counterpart in that division.

That's how it's done.

>>> I have a hard time imagining somebody being interested in a company
>>> for any reason other than the money.
>>
>> Wouldn't it be fun, for example, if you found a company that worked on/
>> with Haskell?  Sure, the money is an important thing, but working on
>> something you find interesting - that's a reason to be interested in a
>> particular organisation.
> 
> There are roughly 3 companies globally that pay people to code in
> Haskell. The one in the UK consists of 3 people, and their registered
> office is somebody's house. If they want a Haskell programmer, they have
> the entire global community to choose from, and therefore they will not
> be hiring me.

You're missing my point.  It's not about Haskell, it's about finding 
something you like doing or are good at doing and using that as a 
criteria for finding a job.

And no, there aren't "roughly 3 companies globally that pay people to 
code in Haskell" - that's the sort of absurd comment that makes people 
pound their heads on their desks.

A search on Google turned up this page:

http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Jobs

Which lists 5 companies and some academic places.  That was with a 5-
second quick search on "Haskell programming jobs" and was the first hit 
(and I'm betting not every company that hires Haskell programmers has 
posted to that page).

If the language were that unpopular, it would cease to exist.

http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Haskell_in_industry lists a 
significant number of companies that use Haskell (probably still not an 
exhaustive list) including AT&T and Facebook.

> Sure, a tiny handful of people out there have really cool jobs. These
> are vanishingly rare. Us mere mortals have to accept that only the sucky
> jobs are open to us.

Many people are happy in their jobs and like their jobs.  There's nothing 
particularly "cool" about being a technical instructor or a program 
manager - but those are both jobs I enjoyed doing.  I'm not going to be 
an astronaut or a F1 race car driver, so I've found what I'm good at and 
applied that to a number of different types of positions over the years.

>>>> Telling them "nobody else will hire me" makes them think "yeah, so
>>>> there must be a reason for that so we'll just back away slowly".
>>>
>>> In my case, it's more like "I couldn't find anybody else to ask". It's
>>> not as if job openings grow on trees...
>>
>> You just said unemployment is quite low where you are.
> 
> Sure. I've also said, many times, that *I* have great difficulty finding
> job openings. Surely they must be out there, but apparently I suck at
> finding them.

It starts with search criteria and methods.

>>>> You have to find something about what they do that piques your
>>>> interest.
>>>
>>> Sounds infeasible to me.
>>
>> Maybe you need to extend your search beyond 25 miles from where you
>> are, and consider that moving where you are might well be beneficial.
> 
> I am /not/ working in London. End of story.

I didn't say London.  But consider the possibility of working for a 
company based in London but working from home.  As you said earlier, it's 
not where the company is based but where you have to drive to.  If your 
commute is 25 feet to your home office, who cares if the office is in 
London - even if you have to go there once a month?

>>> I'm astonished. I never thought I'd meet somebody who ACTUALLY GETS
>>> EXCITED about doing a job...
>>
>> A fair number of people get excited about doing a job.  Many people
>> derive meaning in their lives based on the job they do, and it helps
>> define who they are.
>>
>> For people who fall into that category, not being excited about the job
>> is like not being alive.
> 
> Sure. But that must be a really, really small category...

Not in my experience.  It helps one do the job well if one can get up in 
the morning and be looking forward to what they're going to do.

>>>> Ads are primarily Google's "product" as well.
>>>
>>> I've been wondering about that. I mean, it's no secret that Google is
>>> hugely successful. The secret is WHO THE HELL PAYS THEM MONEY?! They
>>> don't SELL anything!
>>
>> Subscribers to Google Docs - there is a business edition.  Ads.  I'm
>> sure Darren could tell you all sorts of things they sell.
> 
> I thought they closed down Docs? (Or am I thinking of Google Wave?)

Yes, you're thinking of wave.  Docs has been incorporated into Google 
Drive now.

If you followed the news, you'd know that Google hosts e-mail and office 
suite software for businesses (it was/is called "Docs for Business", I 
think).

>>> (People say "they sell advertising", but have YOU ever seen any of
>>> these adverts that they purportedly sell?)
>>
>> Sure, I have.  AdWords is all over the 'net.
> 
> You say "adwords", but I've yet to see it...

m-/

Do you use an ad blocker?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> Hell, I've *visited* Switzerland.
>>
>> It's a pleasant enough place to visit, but I wouldn't want to /live/
>> there...
>
> Did you see all of it?  There may well be places that meet your criteria
> that you haven't visited.  But you've closed your mind to even the idea
> of there being another place on the entire planet where you might be
> happy.

Well, in the case of Switzerland, it's the language barrier more than 
anything. (Yes, I realise that almost all Swiss people speak English 
better than I will ever speak French.)

>> I don't think she knows anybody in a hiring position.
>
> (a) you don't know that she knows someone who's hiring until you ask, and
> (b) you don't know if she knows someone who knows someone who's hiring.

Given that we were discussing my next career move, don't you think if 
she knew who I need to speak to, she might have mentioned this exact fact?

> As they're expanding, it's a good time to look.  So go look already.

Sure.

>> IME, you apply to a company, never hear back from them ever again, the
>> end.
>
> That's because you use the "normal" way of applying, which doesn't work
> for the applicant.

I assumed it's just that I'm not worth hiring...

>> I'm not sure how you would "know somebody there". Even if you've
>> been interviewed before, I'm not sure how you'd have the person's
>> contact details.
>
> You know someone at Unisys, you said.

I don't think I did...

> So in my case - I know someone (a few people, actually) who work at
> VMware, and one who works at Mozy (both are divisions of EMC).  My friend
> at VMware pointed me to someone in their HR department - so now I know
> someone in the HR department there.
>
> There was a position in a division called "SpringSource" that I was
> interested in and interviewed for, but in the end they found someone who
> met the job requirements and knew the product already (otherwise I was a
> very good fit for what they were looking for - a technical writer).
>
> The next time I saw a job there that looked interesting, I pinged the guy
> in HR, and he said the job was in a different division so he couldn't
> help other than by giving me the name and e-mail address of his
> counterpart in that division.
>
> That's how it's done.

>> There are roughly 3 companies globally that pay people to code in
>> Haskell.
>
> You're missing my point.  It's not about Haskell, it's about finding
> something you like doing or are good at doing and using that as a
> criteria for finding a job.

Well, that's why I'm in computing, after all. But nobody is going to pay 
me to do what I like doing; they're going to pay me for the work that 
actually needs to be done, whether I enjoy that or not. And what 
actually needs to be done is almost by definition doomed to be something 
extremely dull. It's pointless to pretend that a mere /job/ is ever 
going to fire my imagination or anything like that.

> And no, there aren't "roughly 3 companies globally that pay people to
> code in Haskell" - that's the sort of absurd comment that makes people
> pound their heads on their desks.

If I can't convince anybody to hire me to write Java (pro tip: Java is 
popular), then nobody is ever going to hire me to write Haskell.

> If the language were that unpopular, it would cease to exist.

For twenty years, it /was/ that unpopular.

Things don't have to be popular in order to exist. /Products/ have to be 
popular to continue to be produced. But a piece of software? Doesn't 
have to be popular. Heck, I wrote Logic Box in Java. Logic Box is not 
popular. Yet, it exists. QED.

> http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Haskell_in_industry lists a
> significant number of companies that use Haskell (probably still not an
> exhaustive list) including AT&T and Facebook.

Sure, but nobody works for AT&T or Facebook. (Actually, given our 
earlier discussion, I wouldn't /want/ to work for Facebook...)

>> Sure, a tiny handful of people out there have really cool jobs. These
>> are vanishingly rare. Us mere mortals have to accept that only the sucky
>> jobs are open to us.
>
> Many people are happy in their jobs and like their jobs.  There's nothing
> particularly "cool" about being a technical instructor or a program
> manager - but those are both jobs I enjoyed doing.  I'm not going to be
> an astronaut or a F1 race car driver, so I've found what I'm good at and
> applied that to a number of different types of positions over the years.

There are people who don't hate their job, sure. But I can't imagine 
many people are truly /excited/ about their job. And in an interview, 
they don't ask you "so what parts of this job do you think /don't/ 
completely suck?"

>>> Maybe you need to extend your search beyond 25 miles from where you
>>> are, and consider that moving where you are might well be beneficial.
>>
>> I am /not/ working in London. End of story.
>
> I didn't say London.

No, that's just where *all* of the main computer jobs are.

Actually, take out "computer" - that's where almost all the advertised 
jobs are.

> But consider the possibility of working for a
> company based in London but working from home.

That I could live with.

>> Sure. But that must be a really, really small category...
>
> Not in my experience.  It helps one do the job well if one can get up in
> the morning and be looking forward to what they're going to do.

I'm not arguing that liking your job isn't a good thing. I'm arguing 
that it isn't a common thing.

>> You say "adwords", but I've yet to see it...
>
> m-/
>
> Do you use an ad blocker?

Not until recently.

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 21:16:44 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

> Well, in the case of Switzerland, it's the language barrier more than
> anything. (Yes, I realise that almost all Swiss people speak English
> better than I will ever speak French.)

So then it's not really a language barrier, is it?

One of the companies I've applied to is based in Germany.  I don't speak 
German.  The position specifically calls for an English-speaking/writing 
candidate, though.

>>> I don't think she knows anybody in a hiring position.
>>
>> (a) you don't know that she knows someone who's hiring until you ask,
>> and (b) you don't know if she knows someone who knows someone who's
>> hiring.
> 
> Given that we were discussing my next career move, don't you think if
> she knew who I need to speak to, she might have mentioned this exact
> fact?

Not necessarily.  In fact, if she were to get a referral bonus, I'd 
expect her not to tell you, but to take your info and submit it 
internally herself.

>>> IME, you apply to a company, never hear back from them ever again, the
>>> end.
>>
>> That's because you use the "normal" way of applying, which doesn't work
>> for the applicant.
> 
> I assumed it's just that I'm not worth hiring...

We've talked about this before, Andy.  If you go through the front door, 
you're on the same level as everyone else applying for the job.  One way 
to get an advantage - and to show initiative - is to find other ways to 
get your info in front of the hiring manager.

>>> I'm not sure how you would "know somebody there". Even if you've been
>>> interviewed before, I'm not sure how you'd have the person's contact
>>> details.
>>
>> You know someone at Unisys, you said.
> 
> I don't think I did...

Um, not the person that you above said "I don't think she knows anybody 
in a hiring position."?

Yes, you did actually say you know someone who works at Unisys.  She may 
not be the person who's hiring, but she certainly is better placed to 
pass info along to a hiring manager than you are.

>>> There are roughly 3 companies globally that pay people to code in
>>> Haskell.
>>
>> You're missing my point.  It's not about Haskell, it's about finding
>> something you like doing or are good at doing and using that as a
>> criteria for finding a job.
> 
> Well, that's why I'm in computing, after all. But nobody is going to pay
> me to do what I like doing; they're going to pay me for the work that
> actually needs to be done, whether I enjoy that or not. And what
> actually needs to be done is almost by definition doomed to be something
> extremely dull. It's pointless to pretend that a mere /job/ is ever
> going to fire my imagination or anything like that.

What do you /like/ doing?  You might be surprised at what people will 
actually pay for.

>> And no, there aren't "roughly 3 companies globally that pay people to
>> code in Haskell" - that's the sort of absurd comment that makes people
>> pound their heads on their desks.
> 
> If I can't convince anybody to hire me to write Java (pro tip: Java is
> popular), then nobody is ever going to hire me to write Haskell.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.  If you're competent in Haskell and that's what 
they're looking for, then being one of a smaller number of developers who 
write in a language that they're using is far, far better than being one 
of the billion people (yes, hyperbole, but there are a /lot/ of Java 
programmers out there) who can write code in Java.

>> If the language were that unpopular, it would cease to exist.
> 
> For twenty years, it /was/ that unpopular.

Yet it still exists.

> Things don't have to be popular in order to exist. /Products/ have to be
> popular to continue to be produced. But a piece of software? Doesn't
> have to be popular. Heck, I wrote Logic Box in Java. Logic Box is not
> popular. Yet, it exists. QED.

Now you're just being silly.

There are a fair number of companies that write and use Haskell for 
production systems.

>> http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Haskell_in_industry lists a
>> significant number of companies that use Haskell (probably still not an
>> exhaustive list) including AT&T and Facebook.
> 
> Sure, but nobody works for AT&T or Facebook. (Actually, given our
> earlier discussion, I wouldn't /want/ to work for Facebook...)

"Nobody works for AT&T or Facebook" - are you /serious/?  AT&T is one of 
the larger companies in the world.  Facebook has a fairly significant 
sized staff.  Those server rooms don't take care of themselves, and 
people don't do it for no pay.

AT&T:  https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:T

Number of employees:  252,330

Facebook:  https://www.google.com/finance?q=fb

Number of employees:  3,539

Far from "nobody".

> There are people who don't hate their job, sure. But I can't imagine
> many people are truly /excited/ about their job. And in an interview,
> they don't ask you "so what parts of this job do you think /don't/
> completely suck?"

No, because they want to know what you're interested in, not what you 
hate about them.

So if programming in Haskell is something that interests you, you're not 
going to want to say "well, it wouldn't suck to write code in Haskell", 
you'd say "I'd enjoy writing code in Haskell."

>>>> Maybe you need to extend your search beyond 25 miles from where you
>>>> are, and consider that moving where you are might well be beneficial.
>>>
>>> I am /not/ working in London. End of story.
>>
>> I didn't say London.
> 
> No, that's just where *all* of the main computer jobs are.
> 
> Actually, take out "computer" - that's where almost all the advertised
> jobs are.

It makes sense there would be more jobs where there is a population 
center, that's true.

But you also might find something that wouldn't require a daily commute.  
It's worth looking into.

>> But consider the possibility of working for a company based in London
>> but working from home.
> 
> That I could live with.

So that would make it worth exploring the option.

>>> Sure. But that must be a really, really small category...
>>
>> Not in my experience.  It helps one do the job well if one can get up
>> in the morning and be looking forward to what they're going to do.
> 
> I'm not arguing that liking your job isn't a good thing. I'm arguing
> that it isn't a common thing.

I've worked in companies with 200 employees and companies with 250,000 
employees.  Most of the people I have known in those companies have liked 
their jobs.

I had a conversation once with a software engineer in Bangalore who said 
that he took the job because he had to - he found it interesting, but he 
held a similar view to yours - that not everyone loves their job or has 
the potential to take a job that they love (in his case, he liked the job 
well enough and was good at it - but in India, that's where the money is, 
and he has a family to take care of, so that was the primary reason he 
took it).

But all the people I know in the UK also seem to really enjoy what they 
do.  Now I don't know everyone in the UK, probably not even enough to 
constitute a statistical sample - but of the ones I know, you're the only 
one who actively /hates/ his job.

>>> You say "adwords", but I've yet to see it...
>>
>> m-/
>>
>> Do you use an ad blocker?
> 
> Not until recently.

Then you must not use Google a lot.  Oh, wait....

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> Given that we were discussing my next career move, don't you think if
>> she knew who I need to speak to, she might have mentioned this exact
>> fact?
>
> Not necessarily.  In fact, if she were to get a referral bonus, I'd
> expect her not to tell you, but to take your info and submit it
> internally herself.

Well, she didn't offer to do that either. She just said "you should 
totally apply here".

>> I assumed it's just that I'm not worth hiring...
>
> We've talked about this before, Andy.  If you go through the front door,
> you're on the same level as everyone else applying for the job.  One way
> to get an advantage - and to show initiative - is to find other ways to
> get your info in front of the hiring manager.

Given that I don't even really understand the correct procedure for 
getting in the front door, it seems unlikely that I'd succeed trying to 
talk my way in through the back. And, at the end of the day, if I'm not 
worth hiring, they aren't going to hire me, no matter what I do.

>>> You know someone at Unisys, you said.
>>
>> I don't think I did...
>
> Um, not the person that you above said "I don't think she knows anybody
> in a hiring position."?

No. Network Rail.

> What do you /like/ doing?  You might be surprised at what people will
> actually pay for.

Nobody is going to pay me to write a ray-tracer. Because, as cool as 
that is, it's a solved problem. Similarly, nobody is going to pay me to 
sit around playing with compression algorithms or designing weak ciphers 
or generating pretty pictures from sound signals or... you know what? 
These things are all very cool, but none of them actually generate 
money. What people /actually/ want is somebody who can migrate their SQL 
Server database to Oracle, or find a way to run a legacy MS-DOS program 
on a shiny new server farm, or something like that.

>> If I can't convince anybody to hire me to write Java (pro tip: Java is
>> popular), then nobody is ever going to hire me to write Haskell.
>
> Wrong, wrong, wrong.  If you're competent in Haskell and that's what
> they're looking for, then being one of a smaller number of developers who
> write in a language that they're using is far, far better than being one
> of the billion people (yes, hyperbole, but there are a /lot/ of Java
> programmers out there) who can write code in Java.

It puts me in a smaller pool of employees, but it also puts them in a 
smaller pool of employers.

>>> If the language were that unpopular, it would cease to exist.
>>
>> For twenty years, it /was/ that unpopular.
>
> Yet it still exists.

See, the thing is, when you're not making a product for profit, it 
doesn't /matter/ whether it's popular or not. It doesn't /need/ to be 
popular in order to exist.

>> Sure, but nobody works for AT&T or Facebook. (Actually, given our
>> earlier discussion, I wouldn't /want/ to work for Facebook...)
>
> "Nobody works for AT&T or Facebook" - are you /serious/?  AT&T is one of
> the larger companies in the world.  Facebook has a fairly significant
> sized staff.  Those server rooms don't take care of themselves, and
> people don't do it for no pay.
>
> AT&T:  https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:T
>
> Number of employees:  252,330
>
> Facebook:  https://www.google.com/finance?q=fb
>
> Number of employees:  3,539
>
> Far from "nobody".

OK, so let me get this straight: Out of all the people IN THE ENTIRE 
WORLD, only three thousand of them work for Facebook? And only a quarter 
of a million of them work for AT&T? Yeah, those are some huge percentages...

>> I'm not arguing that liking your job isn't a good thing. I'm arguing
>> that it isn't a common thing.
>
> I've worked in companies with 200 employees and companies with 250,000
> employees.  Most of the people I have known in those companies have liked
> their jobs.

> But all the people I know in the UK also seem to really enjoy what they
> do.  Now I don't know everyone in the UK, probably not even enough to
> constitute a statistical sample - but of the ones I know, you're the only
> one who actively /hates/ his job.

I guess when The Bangles sang "Manic Monday", nobody could relate to 
waking up on Monday morning and dreading going to work, which explains 
why the song sold to well.

>>>> You say "adwords", but I've yet to see it...
>>>
>>> m-/
>>>
>>> Do you use an ad blocker?
>>
>> Not until recently.
>
> Then you must not use Google a lot.  Oh, wait....

Alternatively, maybe there aren't many adverts actually related to 
"transfinite cardinal numbers" or something...

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 09:17:22 +0100, Invisible wrote:

>>> Given that we were discussing my next career move, don't you think if
>>> she knew who I need to speak to, she might have mentioned this exact
>>> fact?
>>
>> Not necessarily.  In fact, if she were to get a referral bonus, I'd
>> expect her not to tell you, but to take your info and submit it
>> internally herself.
> 
> Well, she didn't offer to do that either. She just said "you should
> totally apply here".

Then you should do that.  Or ask her if she might be able to help/gets a 
referral bonus.

>>> I assumed it's just that I'm not worth hiring...
>>
>> We've talked about this before, Andy.  If you go through the front
>> door, you're on the same level as everyone else applying for the job. 
>> One way to get an advantage - and to show initiative - is to find other
>> ways to get your info in front of the hiring manager.
> 
> Given that I don't even really understand the correct procedure for
> getting in the front door, it seems unlikely that I'd succeed trying to
> talk my way in through the back. And, at the end of the day, if I'm not
> worth hiring, they aren't going to hire me, no matter what I do.

You'd probably do better with the back door rather than doing the same 
thing everyone else is doing.

>>>> You know someone at Unisys, you said.
>>>
>>> I don't think I did...
>>
>> Um, not the person that you above said "I don't think she knows anybody
>> in a hiring position."?
> 
> No. Network Rail.

That makes no sense to me.

>> What do you /like/ doing?  You might be surprised at what people will
>> actually pay for.
> 
> Nobody is going to pay me to write a ray-tracer. [...]

You didn't answer my question.  What do you /like/ doing?

>>> If I can't convince anybody to hire me to write Java (pro tip: Java is
>>> popular), then nobody is ever going to hire me to write Haskell.
>>
>> Wrong, wrong, wrong.  If you're competent in Haskell and that's what
>> they're looking for, then being one of a smaller number of developers
>> who write in a language that they're using is far, far better than
>> being one of the billion people (yes, hyperbole, but there are a /lot/
>> of Java programmers out there) who can write code in Java.
> 
> It puts me in a smaller pool of employees, but it also puts them in a
> smaller pool of employers.

It's not the size of the pool of employees or the size of the pool of 
employers, it's the relative sizes of each and whether there's *one* 
opportunity that's a good fit.

And unless you're willing to take the time to *look* and *do* something, 
you'll never know.

>>>> If the language were that unpopular, it would cease to exist.
>>>
>>> For twenty years, it /was/ that unpopular.
>>
>> Yet it still exists.
> 
> See, the thing is, when you're not making a product for profit, it
> doesn't /matter/ whether it's popular or not. It doesn't /need/ to be
> popular in order to exist.

*sigh*  It's survived for 20 years.  It hasn't died out.  People use it 
for stuff.  Corporations use it for stuff.  Corporations pay people to 
program in it.  That means YOU CAN GET A JOB DOING IT.

>>> Sure, but nobody works for AT&T or Facebook. (Actually, given our
>>> earlier discussion, I wouldn't /want/ to work for Facebook...)
>>
>> "Nobody works for AT&T or Facebook" - are you /serious/?  AT&T is one
>> of the larger companies in the world.  Facebook has a fairly
>> significant sized staff.  Those server rooms don't take care of
>> themselves, and people don't do it for no pay.
>>
>> AT&T:  https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:T
>>
>> Number of employees:  252,330
>>
>> Facebook:  https://www.google.com/finance?q=fb
>>
>> Number of employees:  3,539
>>
>> Far from "nobody".
> 
> OK, so let me get this straight: Out of all the people IN THE ENTIRE
> WORLD, only three thousand of them work for Facebook? And only a quarter
> of a million of them work for AT&T? Yeah, those are some huge
> percentages...

*sigh*

How many people work for the company you CURRENTLY work for?

One of the companies I worked for was about the size of AT&T.  I was one 
of about 2 dozen systems engineers when I was hired.

And one of about 600 in the IT department as a whole (which included a 
lot of developers).

It's not about the percentage of the global population that works for the 
organisation.  Again, it's about finding a position.

You can continue to despair that nobody's going to hire you and just give 
up, or you can put the effort in to try to find something.

The latter is more productive.  It takes time, it takes rejection, but 
eventually, YOU WILL GET A BETTER JOB IF YOU WORK AT IT.

>> But all the people I know in the UK also seem to really enjoy what they
>> do.  Now I don't know everyone in the UK, probably not even enough to
>> constitute a statistical sample - but of the ones I know, you're the
>> only one who actively /hates/ his job.
> 
> I guess when The Bangles sang "Manic Monday", nobody could relate to
> waking up on Monday morning and dreading going to work, which explains
> why the song sold to well.

Of course people sometimes don't want to get up in the morning and go to 
work on Monday.  *Some* people even do that every Monday.  I know people 
who love their jobs who don't want to work on Mondays.  That doesn't mean 
they don't love their jobs.  It means they're human.

It also doesn't mean there aren't days that they don't bounce out of bed 
in the morning and look forward to what they're going to do.

>>>>> You say "adwords", but I've yet to see it...
>>>>
>>>> m-/
>>>>
>>>> Do you use an ad blocker?
>>>
>>> Not until recently.
>>
>> Then you must not use Google a lot.  Oh, wait....
> 
> Alternatively, maybe there aren't many adverts actually related to
> "transfinite cardinal numbers" or something...

You'd see other types of ads.  They don't just display ads related to 
your searches; if your searches are frequently things that they don't 
advertise for, you'll get generic ads.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Le 2012-06-09 10:27, Orchid Win7 v1 a écrit :
> On 09/06/2012 03:11 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:
>> Le 2012-06-08 06:18, Invisible a écrit :
>>> I don't know that there are any sites that do /exactly/ what Linked-In
>>> does. But there are plenty of sites that let you search humans for
>>> various reasons. (Exhibit A: Monster.)
>>>
>>
>> Monster is nothing like LinkedIn. Linked-In is much closer to Facebook
>> than Monster.
>
> Both LinkedIn and Monster let you search for humans for work-related
> purposes though. That was the comparison I was going for.
>
>> In Linked-in, you are supposed to build a network of contacts (school
>> buddies, coworkers, family, etc...), which then lets you get introduced
>> to THEIR contacts, etc... Hopefully helping you on your quest to find a
>> good job. E.g.: There's this guy in your dance classes that works in
>> accounting at a big company. You become a contact in LinkedIn. While
>> taking a break, he mentions the sad state of their IT. YOu say: "I
>> betcha I could help improve things." The next day, you ask him over
>> LinkedIn to introduce you to his HR rep or IT manager. you get
>> introduced, you go on an interview, you may not get hired, but the HR
>> person knows you exist, and when the time comes to hire an Haskell
>> expert, she'll have one in her network already.
>
> That's a great story. Pity I don't know anybody like that...
>

How do you know that no one you know works for a company that is looking 
for a sysadmin, a programmer, a desk-side support technician, or a 
church organ player?

There was an article posted here a while back, by Darren I think, that 
included this sentence that is very appropriate: "Job offers move at the 
speed of beer".  This means that simply putting your resumé on Monster 
or your blogspot page is not enough, you need to network.  If you are 
looking for work, you need to BUILD and MAINTAIN relationships with 
other people who will (a) let you know of opportunities and (b) may even 
put in a good word about you.

>> Just like Facebook or Myspace, LinkedIn lets post blog-like messages;
>> you can make recommendations on books, seminars, speeches, and other
>> people's work. You can also participate in various forums on a variety
>> of topics.
>>
>> You can (and could back in 2007, when I joined! so it must have been
>> there when you did too) also join trade groups, alumni groups, interest
>> groups, etc... All have mailing lists that will let you know of other
>> group members' postings, forum discussions, etc...
>
> 1. I had no idea that any of this functionality existed.
>
> 2. I'm not really sure how you would use such functionality to do
> anything "useful". (Not that I'm saying you can't, I'm just saying I'm
> not sure how.)
>

Posting in say, a Haskell forum, or general programming forum, might get 
you noticed by the recruiters who scour the site looking for potential 
candidates, or by other programmers who might say "Boss, I don't have 
time to work on this project, but I might know just the guy for you!"

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

Le 2012-06-09 14:42, Orchid Win7 v1 a écrit :
> That's impressive and everything, but... why would any of these people
> give a damn about me? I'm nobody.
>

HE'S JUST A POOR BOY FORM A POOR FAMILY
SPARE HIM HIS LIFE FROM THIS MONSTROSISTY!


-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

Le 2012-06-11 04:17, Invisible a écrit :
> Nobody is going to pay me to write a ray-tracer. Because, as cool as
> that is, it's a solved problem.  Similarly, nobody is going to pay me to
> sit around playing with compression algorithms or designing weak ciphers
> or generating pretty pictures from sound signals or...you know what?
 > These things are all very cool, but none of them actually generate
 > money.

I just spend 8 hours looking at a foetal cardiac / contraction monitor. 
  They were using a custom software made for hospitals.  Do you think 
the company that made this software made it out of the goodness of their 
heart?  No.  They made it for money.

Right before my wife told me we needed to go to the hospital to see if 
everything is ok (it was!  we're back home), I was watching expensive 
cars go reaaaaallly fast around a racetrack.  The tv channel had a cool 
graph that shoew the RPMs of the engines based on the pitch of their 
sound.  Do you think that the company that made this software, made it 
for fun?  No.  They were paid for it.

Making pretty pictures out of sounds DOES make money.


> What people /actually/ want is somebody who can migrate their SQL
> Server database to Oracle, or find a way to run a legacy MS-DOS program
> on a shiny new server farm, or something like that.
>

While these might be in higher demand, there's sometimes demand for 
quirkier skills.

>>> If I can't convince anybody to hire me to write Java (pro tip: Java is
>>> popular), then nobody is ever going to hire me to write Haskell.
>>
>> Wrong, wrong, wrong. If you're competent in Haskell and that's what
>> they're looking for, then being one of a smaller number of developers who
>> write in a language that they're using is far, far better than being one
>> of the billion people (yes, hyperbole, but there are a /lot/ of Java
>> programmers out there) who can write code in Java.
>
> It puts me in a smaller pool of employees, but it also puts them in a
> smaller pool of employers.
>

Most entreprise grade software solution, from HR, to accounts 
payable/receivable, to inventory management, to industrial control 
system has some java-based doohickie somewhere.

>>>> If the language were that unpopular, it would cease to exist.
>>>
>>> For twenty years, it /was/ that unpopular.
>>
>> Yet it still exists.
>
> See, the thing is, when you're not making a product for profit, it
> doesn't /matter/ whether it's popular or not. It doesn't /need/ to be
> popular in order to exist.
>

It's not like every single web site out there uses java, or anything 
like that...

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

On 11/06/2012 02:47 PM, Francois Labreque wrote:

> HE'S JUST A POOR BOY FORM A POOR FAMILY
> SPARE HIM HIS LIFE FROM THIS MONSTROSISTY!

Galileo?

Post a reply to this message

On 6/11/2012 6:46, Francois Labreque wrote:
> There was an article posted here a while back, by Darren I think, that
> included this sentence that is very appropriate: "Job offers move at th
e
> speed of beer".

I don't remember that, but it's certainly true. :-)

 > This means that simply putting your resumé on Monster or
> your blogspot page is not enough, you need to network. If you are looki
ng
> for work, you need to BUILD and MAINTAIN relationships with other peopl
e who
> will (a) let you know of opportunities and (b) may even put in a good w
ord
> about you.

As an aside, I have had exactly three jobs in my career that I got by 
applying for them without already knowing the people I'd be working for. 

I've had a dozen or more because some guy I knew needed someone who could
 do 
what I do, and called me up and said "come work here."

> Posting in say, a Haskell forum, or general programming forum, might ge
t you
> noticed by the recruiters who scour the site looking for potential
> candidates, or by other programmers who might say "Boss, I don't have t
ime
> to work on this project, but I might know just the guy for you!"

And I'd suggest giving your writings a wider distribution too.

For example, go to reddit.com/r/programming and post them there, marked "
OC" 
(Original Content). There are hundreds or thousands of people there starv
ing 
to read about cool stuff like that, as an example, and lots of them work 
at 
places better than your place!

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
   "Don't panic. There's beans and filters
    in the cabinet."

Post a reply to this message

On 16/06/2012 05:32 PM, Darren New wrote:

> And I'd suggest giving your writings a wider distribution too.
>
> For example, go to reddit.com/r/programming and post them there, marked
> "OC" (Original Content). There are hundreds or thousands of people there
> starving to read about cool stuff like that, as an example, and lots of
> them work at places better than your place!

I'd ask "what the heck is reddit", but no doubt everybody will just tell 
me to Google it. (As if that explains anything...)

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 21:16:53 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

> On 16/06/2012 05:32 PM, Darren New wrote:
> 
>> And I'd suggest giving your writings a wider distribution too.
>>
>> For example, go to reddit.com/r/programming and post them there, marked
>> "OC" (Original Content). There are hundreds or thousands of people
>> there starving to read about cool stuff like that, as an example, and
>> lots of them work at places better than your place!
> 
> I'd ask "what the heck is reddit", but no doubt everybody will just tell
> me to Google it. (As if that explains anything...)

First hit of searching points to the reddit site, and includes the text 
(from the page):

"User-generated news links. Votes promote stories to the front page."

So yeah, that does explain something about it. :P

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 6/16/2012 13:16, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> I'd ask "what the heck is reddit", but no doubt everybody will just tell me
> to Google it. (As if that explains anything...)

Or you could, you know, go to the URL I gave to see what's there.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
   "Don't panic. There's beans and filters
    in the cabinet."

Post a reply to this message