Has anyone ever been extradited simply for failing to pay U.S. income tax while living permanently abroad, and having neglected to renounce citizenship?
I highly doubt it. I think it's more of a "if you step on our shores, you're ours" situation.
But even tho I am far from being rich enough to be on their radar, better safe than sorry. Saving $50k/yr in taxes is a bad optimization if it lands your ass in jail.
I agree that the author's understanding of the term is imprecise but rather than refer him to an etymology of the term, I think this wiki would be more appropriate to convey the term's common usage:
The post begins -> "This text has circulated quite a number of times on Usenet, and so far as I know is authentic. This version (less, of course, the HTML airs and graces) was posted by one jenm289@aol.com to rec.arts.books, 13 Nov 1995 03:21:23 -0500, message-id 486v63$9an@newsbf02.news.aol.com. Jenm289 wrote: "The following was written several months ago by Noam Chomsky in a discussion about po-mo and its contribution to activism et al. The discussion took place on LBBS, Z-Magazine's Left On-Line Bulletin Board (contact sysop@lbbs.org to join)."
After reading only a few lines of this article it struck me as inconsistent in tone from other speeches and writings of Chomsky. So I would first like to get Chomsky's response on whether he authored this. Considering how many interviews and public speeches Chomsky gives, I find it hard to imagine him having the time to debate his ideas on Internet bulletin boards. Unless he was experimenting with the format back in 1995.
Heh. I had exactly the same response: it didn't sound like Chomsky to me. I even commented to that effect, but then had second thoughts and deleted it. It wouldn't be unnatural to use a different voice in a casual email than in a published article. Also, some of the things in there do sound distinctively like Chomsky (e.g. the second last paragraph).
I searched around for more on Chomsky and postmodernism and came up with http://archive.zcommunications.org/chomchatarch.htm, which includes quotes from the OP. So it seems it's at least partially authentic.
As for whether he would have had time, that's easy. It's already impossible to explain how he has time to do what he does.
Edit: I also ran across a clip of Chomsky's discussion with Foucault on Dutch TV from the early 70s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kawGakdNoT0), which was fun to take a look at. Can you imagine anything more un-TV-like? The very length of their sentences is unthinkable - I was going to say "nowadays" but I bet it was unthinkable on TV even then.
->"Rather, it is an attempt to foist a fully-formed, complex system onto the online ecosystem, and the Web rejects such approaches."
Ozzie's arguments as presented in this condensed article seem vague to me. I'm not sure if he's trying to argue that Google Wave represents the AOL "walled garden" approach. If so, I don't think Wave is comparable.
I disagree with that quote by Ozzie. The wave protocol is an extension of an existing IM protocol. The app is a combination and rethinking of existing web concepts (IM, email, and others). This isn't something entirely new. Also, other providers, along with robots and gadgets, do not need to be nearly as complex as the Wave app to participate, allowing more interop than is possible now with the old protocols.
Inaccurate editorializing at that. I would say this development actually makes it easier for better techies to find jobs by harnessing their SO reputation and, consequently, perhaps makes life a little more difficult for the mediocre.
This confirms my suspicion that I need more than one SO profile: one for answering questions and using on a resume; and a separate profile that gives me the freedom to ask as many stupid questions as I like on topics that I know very little about currently -- but that I may know enough about at some point in the future to apply for a related job without needing to worry that my earlier noob questions will be taken out of context and unfairly disqualify me. On the other hand, my habit of writing long-winded sentences may be a bigger disqualifier.
I'd say the problem isn't with asking quirky questions, but with idiotic employers who expect their staff to be unrealistic, dishonest automatons.
No-one's perfect. We all ask stupid questions, many of us have crazy things in our online profiles, and we've all gone off the rails at some level or another. Employers who want to see people who are 100% "proper" all the time at their interviews are idiots.
And, no, I have no problem with employers like these pulling up this very message and reading it back to me in the future because I'll know they're not worth working for. Smart employers use smart criteria.
i think what the parent was saying is that (s)he is trying to avoid any possible ding. it's not that all employers demand 100% propriety (well, some do, but we certainly don't) -- just that, when browsing through a list of comments haphazardly, one errant comment, now out of context, might affect the perception of the candidate. in a tight labor market, that might be enough to put one candidate above another.
it's similar to the need of all college grads to clean up their facebook profile.
ask your "stupid" questions on highly specific IRC channels on Freenode and get the answers you need in seconds.
P.S. I used a handle to ask "stupid" questions on USENET, more than a decade ago, and now I wish I had asked them under my own name: the people who replied to me where pioneers of systems programming, and geek-gods.
Questions on one account, and Answers on the other.
I have no idea how to delete the questions I've asked already though, the system doesn't seem to allow for account and question deletion.
But this is the way I'm going... nuke everything, start again with 2 two accounts.
Reputation is starting to become a bitch online, no-one is always impeccable and because of the power of search we stand to be judged on the few dumb things we do.
The only way to counter it seems to be to act as if online there is a Stasi watching and to only put against our identity that which we wish to be judged by at any future point in our lives... which certainly doesn't include the dumb questions we might ask when it's 11pm and we're tired of fixing some annoying issue or defect.
I would say that these recent changes now reduce the value of these sites for me. I'll use it as a resource but I'm now less likely to contribute.
People who judge your fitness for a job on "a few dumb things you do" aren't fit to employ you.
One of the most positive realisations after I left my employment in a large corporation was that everyone is unique and different, with special quirks and "dumb things they do" and weird stuff attached to them. The myth of the perfect corporate drone is just that - a myth. Everyone does weird stuff. It's just that, within the corporate environment, that weird stuff is repressed and hidden, so you never get to find out about it.
Hopefully the corporate world will wake up to this some day and become a competitive employer again - I mean, hopefully for them. I'm sure some of the leading companies (large and small) out there are already ahead of that curve, and they have an edge over more backwards rivals who only hire people who behave "properly" all the time.
Just so you're aware, the JoS/SO/ServerFault job boards do not even have a concept of applying via the website. The idea here is to reach the crowds that are on StackOverflow and ServerFault--not to force you to expose your profile in your résumé. Doing so is entirely up to you. Don't like your profile? Don't mention it in your cover or résumé. Simple as that. The résumés are always cross-listed, so there's no way for your employer to even know that you necessarily saw the post on SO instead of Joel on Software.
All that said: admitting I might be atypical, if you gave me your SO profile, I'd be curious whether you were asking well-thought-out questions and providing reasoned answers--not what your question:answer ratio was, or what topics you needed questions and answers on. Although I see one hell of a lot of posturing, both her and on reddit, that "real" programmers would never deign use StackOverflow, most "real" programmers I know, no matter how experienced, at some point, have to use a technology they've never used before, and get stuck with something simple. The ones I'd hire at that point go ask a question; the ones I wouldn't spend the next eight hours stumbling through manpages because their pride prevents them admitting they might have a knowledge gap.
AdWords brought this kind of statistical rigor to affiliate marketing quite a while back. What you're describing sounds like the bread and butter of that field. The fact that it is only now catching on in the advertising world seems like an indication of just how behind the times the advertising industry really is. They're a little late to the party if they're only now starting to hire people with statistical expertise to help out with these problems. But from what I know of the ad industry being an East Coast old boy's network, this doesn't surprise me too much.
It's so easy to rationalize not doing it but actually, sooner is always better than later when it comes to making yourself happier - life is short and unpredictable and what we think of as security is often a big joke at our own expense.
Well that was my thoughts before I actually did it.. Now that I have the experience, I would say that planning a bit before quitting is important too (that was my failure), also make sure you have sufficiant reserve money to bounce back.
So go do it, but don't jump in with wide-eyed optimism without planning exactly what you want and need to do (but of course be prepared to change the plan)
"Fear, I've come to believe, keeps more people from starting businesses than any other single factor. You hear about other obstacles--lack of money, inadequate support, bad advice--but they pale in comparison with the fear most people have that their new venture will fail."
I was in your position two years ago but in my case I had a serious health problem. I was scared shitless. I didn't want to give up my job because I needed the health insurance. But my job was making my health worse. I quit and second guessed myself for a long time afterwards. But two years later I am fighting fit again. Thinking back, my only question is, why did I wait so long to do what was in my best interest? Most people who knew me thought I had the best job in the world. But I was miserable. For several years (!) I listened to them instead of myself and made my health even worse. Complete and utter irrationality combined with a lack of self-confidence. In the end I only did it because I had to, not because I am a shining example of courage. I really thought I was throwing everything away and yet I was so wrong. Let my stupidity be your guide. Oh, and the company went under after I quit. So much for throwing away my security. The question is really much simpler than you think.
"Typically a verb, but also used as a noun, it is the name given to 'too much information,' whether willingly offered or inadvertently revealed. It is the word for both the tedious minutiae on personal Web sites and blogs, and the accidental slips of the tongue in public."
For anyone who uses Facebook this is an important word to know about.
