I suggest you build a network of people you can trust to handle the money in envelopes, and pass them around in person, and secretively.
788 karma · joined April 20, 2016
From Webster's (1948):
engineer: n. 1. [Rare], a person who makes engines. 2. a person skilled or occupied in some branch of engineering: as, a mechanical engineer, an electrical engineer. 3. the operator of an engine; especially the driver of a railroad locomotive. 4. in military science, a member of that branch of the army which is concerned with the construction and demolition of bridges, roads, and fortifications, the laying and sapping of mines, etc. Abbreviated E., e., eng., engin., engr. v.t. 1. to plan, construct, or manage as an engineer; hence, 2. to contrive; manage skillfully; superintend; guide (a measure, action, etc. through).
engineering: n. 1. the planning, designing, construction, or management of machinery, roads, bridges, buildings, fortifications, waterways, etc.; science, profession, or work of an engineer: abbreviated E., e., eng., egin. 2. a maneuvering or managing.
Another reason to choose "engineering" was to encourage software practitioners to incorporate some of the proven methods of traditional engineering. As an example, I've noticed recently that ethics training is an established part of an Engineer's education, but not so with Software "Engineers".
There is always room to improve, and I don't think ignoring the past, and justifying that ignorance by saying "but we're different" is necessarily the best way to achieve that improvement.
In your note, you say you aren't sure why. Please talk to someone instead. You are a very valuable person and the world needs more people like you, not less.
Please reconsider.
As for books, I highly recommend "A Language Older Than Words" by Derrick Jensen.
That first sentence is a doozy, but if you can re-arrange the "to [Recruiter Company Name]" so that it comes at the end of the sentence instead of the beginning, then you can add your "on site" stipulation at the end.
Then it would read something like the following.
"The Supplier hereby assigns all existing and future Intellectual Property Rights in the Services and the Inventions and all materials embodying these rights to the fullest extent permitted by law to [Recruiter Company Name] for only those Services, Inventions, and materials produced at the business establishment ("on-site") of [Recruiter Company Name]."
It wouldn't hurt to add another sentence as well to make it clear that you will retain rights of authorship and ownership of code that you write outside work.
Something like, "Furthermore, The Supplier retains all rights of ownership and authorship of materials which are not produced at the business establishment ("not on-site") of [Recruiter Company Name]."
The most important thing in contracts is clarity. So be explicit and make clear what you are looking for in the contract, and that the contract contains the wording to your satisfaction.
I think the more immediate concern is that we begin to turn over everyday life-and-death decisions (driving, obvs) to machines which are, at the end of the day, unconscious, and programmed by us oh-so-fallible human beings.
But really, if you consider that "politics" is the art of directing policy, and policy is just another word for legislation, technically all prisoners are "political" prisoners.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Night_Thoreau_Spent_in_Jai...
Our star actually casts white light. It just looks yellow from Earth. If the sun were yellow, then the moon would look yellow when it was straight overhead. The moon looks white overhead, because the light from our star is white.
Sounds very "black and white" to me. Besides, I believe in magic.
I've struggled to stop identifying as white, and to not think "black" when I see a black person. But I was raised in the white supremacist society that is the united states, and the programming/brainwashing runs deep.
This article reminds me of the work we still need to do. And how close we are to presiding over another holocaust.
I would be interested to find out if you are using the phrase, and what would happen to your search for candidates if you changed the title to something less "sexy"[1], like "data analyst"?
Two gems from the rant are, "You actually don't need to be open-minded about Oracle," and "Don't anthropomorphize the lawnmower."
I think if you can work on accepting this fact of "primate-ness" that we have, and look not just at your work relationships, but also your personal relationships to see how you are at times either dominant or submissive, you will begin to see how accepting a "subordinate" role not only benefits you (with a paycheck), but also benefits the person "above" you (your manager who gets to feel dominant), and the people who depend on you (family and friends who care about you, they can see you holding down a job).
This quote by Robert Heinlein springs to mind:
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
If the government had not intervened, those banks would have been bankrupted, and rightfully so, because they essentially made a giant bet on the housing market and lost.
The government intervention in the case of the banks prevented a valuable feedback mechanism from taking place, whereby the "bad players" (as in, bad at the game --- at gambling) would have learned from their mistakes. So instead of the negative feedback of bankruptcy, they got the positive feedback of bailouts, and we should expect to see another financial crisis in the not-too-distant future.
What remains to be seen is whether the government itself has a working feedback mechanism for this situation. Will they bail out the banks again? in other words.