RedFox @ redfox @infosec.pub

Husband, Father, IT Pro, military service.

---

Read more

Posts

9

Comments

273

Joined

1 yr. ago

I’m looking for experience over degree

In most cases, it's assumed you'd hire an experienced dev over one who has never held a job, and by that, I mean they have no proof of skill, if you consider a previous employment any proof of actual skill other than convicting someone to hire them :)

Assume you're hiring a new to workforce person. No previous employment:

• Do you hire a degree or no degree candidate with no previous employment record?
• What do you look for specifically if you are looking for skills?
• If your child/family member was going to pursue a career in dev/IT/whatever, would you push them to get a degree, or just build a portfolio of code/projects/whatever shows their skills in that field?

Did your degree help you with:

• your technical job/duties?
• general business?
• general literacy and soft skills (writing/commination/problem solving)?

Has the author ever worked anywhere?

I wonder if having a degree is a hard requirement for journalism and writing/communication and that's what the author's world perspective is based on?

When coworkers sit around the lunch table and complain/vent about the state of the world, do you imagine that journalist complain about a lack of higher education, so when they see any evidence that threatens the model of college degrees (which = debt), they jump on it as proof of their own path?

while it’s tradition to require a degree, it’s literally a check box

This is a very good challenge to the requirement. If it's just a check box (that you have A degree) and not a very specific one, does it diminish the credibility of the requirement?

Do people like the probationary period idea? It sounds functional and practical to me.

Can you talk about this more?

• Does it mean that a boot camp coder is not skilled enough?
• Would that have those skills if they did a degree program?
• Would any degree in computer/IT suffice?

Yeah, I'm hoping though it progresses to the point that we can reasonably reduce vehicle related incidents.

Between drunk driving, texting, and generally not paying attention, I'd love more people using automated driving if it became statistically safer.

Some people are scared to fly even thought it's statistically safer. They don't want to be the rare happening. Unless Boeing, then check your doors...

Edit, I also agree you can't easily track or correlate things that didn't happen with all the factors here.

What if we compare that to human related injuries?

I bet more people were killed by other human drivers today. Probably another right now...

I'm not excusing lack of tech safety, but I think there's a double standard not in context.

For all information workers who can do our job anywhere, I thoroughly enjoy watching companies go to shit after they pull RTO. So, I definitely enjoy seeing studies that back this up with metrics, performance data, financials, etc.

Some people are stuck with these employers, due to some life circumstances. I am sorry to anyone who either lost their new found freedom and the work/life balanced they probably always wanted, but didn't know they could have.

Some people are lucky and can move on, and every time someone does, it reenforces the idea that people won't tolerate having a boot on their neck, or maybe they care less about greed and stuff and more about balance. To each their own.

Indeed. I'd also be in favor of removing some of their god status in the court room. They can basically tell you off, but if you even open your mouth, contempt of court. Jail.

Where else do you lose your right to utter a word?

Indeed. But it took something insanely egregious. I'm curious what other crap he's pulled.

I've been around judges enough to have seen or heard plenty of BS from court officers, staff, and cops to form my very shitty opinion of their barely checked power.

Their only checks/balances are other judges/country club drinking buddies.

I have a huge issue with judges. They can put people in jail for almost no reason while in their magical room.

They can let murders out on bail, against prosecutors request and not be held liable for the second murder they commit on bail.

Yes, you can appeal verdicts, but that's a long and expensive process. Judges have an extraordinary amount of power that I think should be split amongst multiple. Similar to jury.

Nah, you'd just document your intended changes next time, route those through a group and bosses to sign off on them, then get to claim everyone approved your screw up next time :)

It's not always about towers and signal.

There's call routes and service monitoring involved.

Call routing still has to happen to get you to 911. Service monitoring still happens to try directing your 911 call to another 911 dispatch center. If those two functions are broke, you get nothing no matter what.

They don't always own the tower. Like everything in America, another company fronts the cost, att pays them for tower use. And the other carriers. It's a business model.

Our firstnet was also down. That defeats half of the reason for it, the other being dedicated against network congestion.

I agree.

On the other hand, cellular is pretty much critical infrastructure at this point with no pay phones. Also it took down some 911.

I suggest you frame the issue incorrectly as well.

First, I dont disagree with the notion that cellular networks are now critical infrastructure, and need extra regulation. They have some, but indeed they are still a for profit entity. There will always be motivation for making money in bad ways when culture pushes that the only thing that matters is investment returns and bottom lines.

Second, trying to tie government competency to political parties is ridiculous. I'll accept shenanigans and policy, sure. I have worked in a form of government for twenty plus years. There's all political types and all competency. There are some really good ones, and a lot of super shitty ones. Why a lot? Because they'd absolutely be fired for underperforming in the real world.

There is zero incentive to do anything well, fast, thorough, efficient, etc in government. We buy worse products, more expensive because of trying to support disabled small businesses as an example. You can't buy things you need if you didn't get it all at once, do with out. We waste money if there is any extra because of use or loose budgets. People spend millions of dollars on contracts where it was the wrong product or the right product that was missing a feature because the contracting office doesn't know shit about what you need, and they overlooked a line item. They will never be fired. They are hard core whatever party you are. I'm assuming more D since you've been clear about shittimg on R.

Anyone who asserts government can do better has never worked in government. It can however ensure things are done, shitty or not, like Medicare/Medicare. The fraudulent claims are mostly uncaught because the people working there are also overworked, under paid, under resourced, and constrainted by policies, and political shenanigans.

Third, I don't like greed either, but not every instance of something's wrong can be solved by shitting on a political party. I hate both, but I don't feel the need to tie everything to one of them.

Also, you might check this conversation: https://lemmy.world/post/12163117

Don't forget:

There's my regular irritation with capitalism, and then there's kicking it up to full Lemmy. Never go fully Lemmy...

LOL, Gemini is already spitting out reverse biased founding fathers. This is going to be spectacular...

Agree with all.

Will take a significant change for things to revert back IMO.

There's that saying that comes to me, similar to... hard men make good times, good times make soft (greedy/morally bankrupt) men, soft men make hard times.... Now just take the non-gender / misogynistic verson of that as needed :)

Congratz, you found a really shitty malware.

I don't think that's lockbit quality.