1,017 karma · joined December 13, 2008
She has more than a dozen LLCs just to protect what little she owns.
I know this because my sister is a prominent ex-scientologist and they've been harassing her to the point that everything she owns needs to be in a separate LLC.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/07/fake_irises_fo...
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-18997580
The basic principle of biometric reading is the equivalent to sliding your photo under the door to a guard. The guard checks the photo against an already existing set of photos and lets you in. They don't check that the photo is of you - which is a common failing when you let marketing design your security.
The folks who thought they had options at Skype found out that there were secret addenda to the option grant that let them swindle you out of your options when you leave.
http://framethink.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/lee2.pdf
http://framethink.wordpress.com/2011/06/24/how-employees-get...
Yogi Berra described the situation as "Nobody goes there anymore. Its too crowded".
Sample: http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/14827/typical...
The highest upvoted user got 122 points for that question.
One thing to remember about these rules is that there are some other ones not publicized. All you know when it refuses to take your password is that it says "password doesn't match" instead of "password doesn't meet the rules." I got some different error message when I tried using Russian obscenities, but I forget that error message.
For item #5, you should be aware that they check for dictionary words of 3 or more letters, both forwards and backwards. I'm not sure what dictionaries they were using, but I found that most of the Japanese, Russian and Finnish words/phrases that I frequently pick from were forbidden.
Sample: http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2010/08/17/contract-gag-sil...
Previously, when posting code I wrote, I'd pick MIT license which would allow users to do what they wanted. Picking GPL would mean that many potential users would be prohibited by company policy from using it.
That hasn't worked out well for Madoff's "investors".
> Look companies that are "bad actors" are going to cheat the SEC and the public anyway...
And Congress passed Sarbanes-Oxley to prevent future Enrons and WorldComms. HR 3606 repeals SOX for the first 5 years of an "emerging growth company" stock issuance and returns us to the "good old days" when fraudsters were able to run wild.
> Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission shall revise subsection (d)(1) of section 230.144A of title 17, Code of Federal Regulations, to provide that securities sold under such revised exemption may be offered to persons other than qualified institutional buyers, including by means of general solicitation or general advertising...
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr3606/text
They no longer have to limit their pre-prospectus info to qualified investors - it is now wide open to advertising to everyone. And instead of only selling to qualified investors, they now can sell to anyone that the seller reasonably believe is a qualified institutional buyer. I can imagine the conversations now: "I can only sell to qualified investors wink, so since you want to buy it, I believe that you are a qualified investor!"
Something rather common was for most of the pieces to end up on one board, so my guess is that these strange openings are intended to block off places you'd normally use to drop in a piece that your team-mate captured. So it becomes more like Go,
It seems to me that mismanagers never get the point that longer hours "in the seat" do not correlate to more positive work acomplished. In our profession, we've been aware that "crunch mode" is counter productive, but the lessons don't seem to get uphill to the people that dictate such things.
http://www.igda.org/why-crunch-modes-doesnt-work-six-lessons
That truth seems to stop flowing upwards in organizations is something that appears far more often than I'd like to happen. In the worst companies I've worked for, truth stops moving upwards at my direct superior's level. In the better ones, it is a few levels uphill. The most bureaucratic and hidebound company I worked for - GM - had 15 levels of people between myself (and I was salaried) and the CEO; which was more than enough for multiple thermoclines of truth to occur.
http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/15/the-wetware-crisis-the-t...
Well, I'm running for election this November, so I suppose I could show them my campaign site.
Competency based interviewing is a bit harder, since you first have to figure out what the actual job competencies are and then base some questions around them. The questions won't have "correct" answers, instead they help you - the interviewer - determine how the interviewee thinks/makes decisions and you can then decide how they'll fit into your organization.
In addition, you may want to look at their resume and tailor one or 2 questions based on what they did at companyX. The PDF linked below should give you some idea of what sort of questions to ask.
One book that may be of interest: http://www.amazon.com/Competency-Based-Interviews-Master-Int...
Some example questions: https://sharepoint.sandiego.edu/hr/Employment/CompetencyInte...
Website with some explanation and examples: http://www.wikijob.co.uk/wiki/competency-based-interview
Wikipedia articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situation,_Task,_Action,_Result
Under the Signalling Theory approach, going to an expensive university is a stronger "signal" to prospective employers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_theory
These 2 show wildly different results when you consider the difference between forgetting a subject and failing the subject. You may know just as much as another person, but the one of you that passes some hurdle signals to prospective employers that the hurdle passer is the better candidate. This is because hiring a person is trying to predict future behavior/success with limited information, and many people use signals as heuristics. http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2012/02/the_career_cons....
One dissertation that described some of these differences is called "Hiring and inequality in elite professional service firms". An interesting read, and it explains some of the "unfairness" of employers using signalling instead of the human capital model. http://books.google.com/books/about/Hiring_and_inequality_in...
In 1983, the Able Archer got the Soviet hierarchy in a tizzy. They misinterpreted a NATO exercise for an imminent attack. Reagan's announcement of SDI (more commonly called "Star Wars") lead the Soviets to believe that the US possessed technology that would shoot down any retalitory Soviet nuclear missile strikes, while permitting the US to fire nuclear missiles at will - thus defeating Mutually Assured Destruction. Add this to some jokes by Reagan such as the remark "My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes." While the "5 minute" remark happened the following year, it was in character with Reagans other remarks about (and hostility towards) the Soviet Union.
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intellig...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RYAN
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83
To the Soviets, this exercise looked too much like a repeat of Operation Barbarossa, where the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union causing about 20 million deaths during WW2.
To make things more difficult, the America Invents bill passed last year changes a lot of things, so folks studying for the exam now have twice as much material to study in order to pass.