Especially when he was known for ruthlessly going after companies he thought would strengthen his own. Telling them he'd be coming after their market-share directly and pressuring them into selling.
First and foremost, I think this is a good cause,so please don't take this as a negative against the goal.
Second, I have not read the rules for donating/being on the reigstry so I may be jumping the gun and having a preconceived notion that doesn't hold true.
But there's assumption of the number of people who would help someone else if they were found a match as opposed to simply helping out Amit. If they are on the registry and do match someone else are they required to do the donation at that point? Unlike blood donation, the bone marrow is a just in time donation (if I understand it correctly). This puts it in a different category.
Again, I think this is a good idea and I hope those that are putting their names on the registry are doing so for the belief of doing good for all, not just for one.
Then it gets worse... Then it gets better.. Then it gets worse.. Then it gets better... I'm not sure how long that loop lasts.. But dealing with teething, sickness, going from crib to bed, etc.
The hours of sleep change from time to time. But there is nothing quite like seeing your child look at you with a grin from ear to ear when you come home and they come running up to you saying "DADDY!" (or "MOMMY" -- but I'm not a mother ;) ).
Even though I never give references until an offer has been agreed to, I generally will not give my current manager for various reasons -- first it is just way too awkward.
I would be careful with that question. I worked at one company where they were very much against re-hiring anyone that left based on where they went/were going.
Another factor is personal differences can lead to that same false positives (negatives?) about that person.
I guess I'm simply trying to say: that question is not always answered based on work ethic or product.
Depends on what process you are talking about. If you are trying to improve a process which will hurt the time to deliver of a major project costing a company money, then is it really right to call the company a failure?
Every company/division/organization has priorities and while there maybe inefficiencies in their processes, they maybe a minor cost in relation to the other priorities. (I can't believe I actually just played devils advocate/defended this).
No, I stand by it. If a company doesn't include time for process improvement they have failed. Maybe they haven't tanked yet but the first bend in the road will finish them.
This doesn't mean they have to stop and fix every non-problem, but if there's no time budgeted to fix what comes up the first real problem will ruin everything.
Messages: This is the implementation issue and one of rights anyway. If I send a message to a friend, what right do I have to delete it from their in-box or sent items if they save a copy of it? The deletion is a view deletion, not a physical deletion. A large number of deletes work this way (at least initially they go to an archive and then are either time removed or can be manually removed).
Data Security: Anyone who says your data secure is bluffing. Your data is never secure, and people need to stop thinking it is. It's out there. Backups, in transit, in DB, on file system. There is going to be whole. Think about it. Encrypted backups - they are never updated and eventually that encryption is going to be easy to crack. FB could be taking the answer to the extreme, but it is actually a smart answer.
Applications: FB doesn't develop them. It would be similar to MS guaranteeing apps written by third parties. It can't do it. Apple can't even do it. Linux doesn't do it.
FB has it's issues. It's constant update of privacy and not letting the user to choose to expose what data they want. But this is no different than any other system thrown out there.
FB isn't the only one creating shadow profiles (how many tracking websites are out there that companies use to determine site usage). Do you think they are really being transparent? Don't you think the shadow companies could build a shadow profile if they wanted to?
My issues with FB is that when they release new features or alter settings ability they make it the least secure possible.
If they are violating the laws, then they need to be reprimanded for it. But this just has the feel of the MS monopoly issue. Where people are only going after them because they are so big when others are out there doing it as well.
I really wonder how much of that is because the EU is made up of many countries and these countries want to protect their own. It's kind of similar to how the breach disclosure rules are significantly different from state to state.
The other thing that I wonder is how much of the US not having the strict laws is due to Corporate Personhood. I honestly don't know, I'm just throwing it out there.
On corporate personhood - not a big favtor as far as I know. It exists in a lot of European countries much as it does here. A lot of the EU rights are rooted in the social contract ideas of Rousseau and the like, tempered by experience of war, the iron curtain and so on.
You definitely MUST have that heart to heart conversation with him. You should also spell out what is expected over that 60 day time frame. Make sure that the goals are well defined and can be checked off. You both need to agree on what is reasonable.
I'm hesitant to agree with throwing him in to the fire, because if you put him in a position to fail, that's going to hurt him and your friendship.
I believe that 60 (or 90) day checklist is where you can come to an agreement on what a reasonable "trial by fire" is.
Sometimes those "cold call" type (almost want to use the word drones) just phase out the after they hear no.