Feeling ownership doesn't have to mean managers can't contribute at all, that's absurd.
Creative labor is unqiue - Depending on the employee, I know I have X changes I can suggest/propose per project before they start to get annoyed with me, for some it's more than others. Unsurprisingly when its promo time the guys who are easier to work with get brought up (even if the difficult divas work is marginally better) The big thing is trust and respect - earning that early on is key and once you do things are much easier going forward.
you're spot on here, have some relevant experience, I tried to stay above board and not 'cheat' but quickly changed my tune as our competitors started eating us. Don't think the FTC knows how deep this rabbit hole goes. It's play dirty or die 100%.
In a similar boat but at the same time I haven't pulled my VIVE out in almost a week now - when I think about why it's because 1) the hassle of getting the headset on comfortably 2) lack of new and interesting software/games to try. Will come with time, comfortable lightweight HMD + good telepresence apps will be the breaking point for this tech imo
historically the best players have been on the shorter side. Maradona was 5'5'', Pele 5'8''. One of the greatest parts of soccer is that it doesn't immediately disqualify 70%+ of the potential talent pool based on the importance of a single attribute, like height in basketball.
This topic is something that I feel strongly about as a minority that has worked in tech/new media.
I don’t think any reasonable people at this point would disagree that affirmative action/hiring for the sake of racial quotas is the equivalent of passing up qualified candidates based on race. That is to say it’s a destructive practice that creates resentment and unnecessary racial tension.
The main problem with this line of thinking is that it ignores the tremendous societal forces in place that lead to a predominantly white executive work force instead focusing only on the outcome and attempting to change that with affirmative action and minority hires for the sake of diversity. This is so narrow minded and results-oriented that I have a hard time believing intelligent people signed off on it and it was actually legally mandated at one point.
What we should be doing is examining the processes and infrastructure that leads to a predominantly white male executive workforce to determine where discrimination occurs and attempt to curb it there. This discussion is not the one we’re having, instead focusing on sensationalist headlines and click-bait articles that do more harm than good to racial relations in America. Top that off with clowns like Jesse Jackson who just the other day showed up at the facebook shareholders meeting "advocating for hiring more minorities at technology companies, especially into board seats." and you get the sad state of affairs we find ourselves in today.
Louis CK tells a joke in which the general idea is “You know you really trust someone when you reveal to them your inner most racist thoughts”. It’s funny because it’s true, but the prevailing air of secrecy and shame about ones prejudices is a big part of what's preventing us from having honest dialogue about race in this country.
Just the other week Mark Cuban was lambasted by a desperate journalist/blogger who took quotes out of context and misrepresented his remarks to paint him as racist. With an atmosphere like that it’s no wonder white people are afraid to discuss race relations. It's the same reason this thread is full of people getting defensive about "Google isn't racist!"
Now I'm going to lose a lot of you on this next part, but based ONLY on my subjective experiences in the corporate workforce whenever we had new hires, the white males always seemed to be treated as "potential leadership material" not based on merit but simply because they looked the part. Being tall and easy on the eyes helps too. Meanwhile minority hires, even in the same position as their white male counterparts were seen as foot soldiers and worker bees. This perception was prevalent in the last 2 companies I've worked for. Take from that what you will, that's been my experience.
Apparently this guy had a brain tumor and this wasn't the first time he's publicly embarrassed the company. He tweeted from the RapGenius account "WARREN BUFFETT CAN SUCK MY DICK".
"I seemed alien to them somehow, with a weird background that was just too different from their own… so they didn’t know what to make of me on a purely emotional level."
Not saying this was the case here, but I feel like this effect, even if it occurs subliminally, plays such a staggering role in business relationships and decisions that it can be discouraging for anyone outside of the "main" group. Aaron Swartz talked about this in some of his blog posts but it wasn't until I was thrown into the corporate workforce that I saw it for myself first hand.
I don't think it's a conscious malicious effort to keep minorities/non-americans out of executive positions, just a consequence of the reality that people are more comfortable dealing with others that share a similar cultural background. This becomes doubly true when dealing with extremely high value contract negotiations and business decisions - you want to know exactly where the other person is mentally and emotionally - and that's much easier to decipher if you share a culture/race with that person.
The problem stems from "Forbes Contributor" system
"It’s a simple deal: there is a flat monthly fee, a bonus for hitting certain unique visitor targets, and a fee per unique user after bonus targets are achieved. For paid contributors, the arrangement requires a certain number of posts per month and a specified level of audience engagement through our commenting system."
With a setup like that, of course it's ideal to push sensationalist articles that will stir up controversy/comments even if it's fabricated. We saw a ton of this in eSports with a particular Forbes contributor milking the communities "OMG WE'RE ON FORBES" attitude for 30+ articles.
They're not the only major outlet using a similar content farming system, and I can't really blame anyone for their moves in this situation. Sensationalist Misinformation > Meaningful Editorial Content online and it's been that way for a long time.
Creative labor is unqiue - Depending on the employee, I know I have X changes I can suggest/propose per project before they start to get annoyed with me, for some it's more than others. Unsurprisingly when its promo time the guys who are easier to work with get brought up (even if the difficult divas work is marginally better) The big thing is trust and respect - earning that early on is key and once you do things are much easier going forward.