Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Laidoff Ninja

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the read-all-about-it dept.

Businesses 237

walmass writes "My first reaction on seeing the book was, 'Oh no, another book with "Ninja" in the title.' But in this case, the authors have established a case for that: they explained that the first ninjas were peasants who could not take the abuse from the samurai anymore and how they used everyday objects as weapons." Keep reading to see what walmass has to say.The authors are co-founders of The Layoff Support Network, which seems to be a collective knowledge-sharing site for people looking for jobs, and the authors say that the book distills the knowledge from the website collected over the past 2 years. The authors also started off by stating that this is not just a book about finding a job; this is also a book about surviving until finding a job. I think The Laidoff Ninja (henceforth, "LON") fares well on these claims.

The pre-ramble is listed as section zero (0) — perhaps not surprising considering the two authors are techies: information security is their day job. Keep that in mind when we look at what they manage to extract out of LinkedIn.

One thing I liked about this book right out of the gate is what the authors (or their editor?) decided to call "Quick-shot" guides. Instead of traditional table of contents, they have provided a listing of topics they thought might be interesting to the following types of readers:
- Job seekers with work experience.
- Recent graduates with limited work experience.
- People who are feeling "cash strapped."
- People who are feeling overwhelmed and emotionally distraught.

Considering the last bullet, I was not really surprised to see a section titled "Ninja Psychiatry." The authors made it clear that they do not have any formal training in Psychiatry and are not licensed to practice psychology, psychiatry or any mental health related profession. They then proceeded to dispense advice on feelings of Loss, Depression, Anxiety, Financial Worries and how to deal with rejection after interviews. The section ends with an admonition to say no to drugs, and encouragement to say yes to humor.

There are lots of "Guerrilla this" or "Ninja that" related to layoffs and job hunting, but I don't think I have come across any other book that addresses the mental aspects of being unemployed.

The next section, "Survival" contains a chapter titled "Pull money out of your butt." Crude but effective, and while whole books have been written about making money on eBay, LON addresses this in a practical way.

Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.

There are some tips about maximizing your available financial resources by delaying payment on some utility bills. While legally OK, I question the morality of providing such advice to readers.

Part 4, "Getting a Job" is where the book begins to read like a traditional book, but there are some surprises and hidden gems there. The sections begin with a job-applications toolkit that recommends free email services, OpenOffice and other technological free-bees that would be required for a job-searcher. These are items that the typical Slashdot reader find amusingly basic, but would certainly be useful for seekers who have been out of the hunt for a while.

Part 5, "Finding opportunities" focuses heavily on LinkedIn. It contains a useful exercise where a job-seekers "needs and wants" are sorted in a "value sort" to determine what type of job would be suitable. But in the next breath, the authors suggest folding away the values-list and taking a job (any job) that will pay the bills. I fail to understand this contradictory advice, and wish they would make up their mind.

The LinkedIn content is useful, but only to a new user of LinkedIn. Experienced LinkedIn users may miss the nuggets buried among these basic facts.

Facebook, Twitter and Myspace are also covered. The well-known but often ignored warnings about being careful with what one posts on one's social networking profiles are posted here.

There is a scathing chapter on recruiters. While certain good qualities of recruiters are mentioned, it seems the authors generally believe that recruiters are uncaring commission-hounds that just want to place a candidate and don't care about individuals. The brutal honesty was refreshing, and I'd be curious whether a majority of Slashdot readers would agree or disagree with the authors.

If you consider that stress and anxiety for a jobless person comes from being, well, jobless, then Part 6, "Preparing for the battle" is the most important section in the book. It covers the basics like resumes, cover letters and elevator pitches, etc.

The next chapter is "Reconnaissance" and this is where the hacker background of the authors finally shows up. They show, with examples, how to find the name and email address of recruiters and HR people at practically any company. The theory being, if you can directly contact the HR people at a company, your resume will not be lost in the 1000 other resumes that people send in. There is just one problem with this theory being put into practice. The book assumes, and does not make abundantly clear, that without building up your network first to some reasonable degree this isn't easy to do. But after I have spent a few hours inviting people and joining groups as the book suggested, I was indeed able to pull up the names of some recruiters at Apple and Google. That accomplished, based on the techniques suggested in the LON, I was able to figure out their email addresses and email them. I hope spammers and marketing droids will not read this book and find out these techniques.

For example, I did not know that one could search Facebook by email and zero in on any individual. It is also a violation of my social norms to approach strangers on Facebook about jobs, but the authors provided guidance and specific examples on how to do that, and also when to step back and look for alternatives.

But some of the techniques, such as querying "whois" records to find out the email address format used by a particular company may not be for the average non-technical Joe, and also seem to skirt ethical boundaries without exactly stepping over the line.

This chapter alone is probably worth the price of the book

The book is a good value at 278 pages and the authors have not done any "white space tricks" to make it seem bigger. A laid-off person would probably appreciate the price/performance of this book.

Overall, "The Laidoff Ninja" is an extremely valuable resource on dealing with the mental stress and anguish that may come from being laid off. It presents creative and novel ways of finding jobs by leveraging social media. The book is a tool in itself that can help the reader survive and prepare for the battle that is a job-search, and do it in a highly effective way.

This book is an excellent value if you need help dealing with the stress of unemployment, or want an edge in reaching hiring managers or recruiters at potential employers. This book is not meant to teach you how to write your resume or cover letter. It will work for novice and experienced candidates alike, although the LinkedIn tricks would definitely favor a more technical reader. I highly recommend it.

You can purchase The Laidoff Ninja from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews — to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Obvious missing section (4, Funny)

Skyshadow (508) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073446)

I was going to try and write a funny post here about taking revenge against your coworkers, but the Onion did such a better job:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/disgruntled-ninja-silently-kills-12-coworkers,1575/ [theonion.com]

From the article (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32073696)

people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.

Um...no. Starvation drives people to the perfectly-rational extremes of stealing food (or stealing the means of obtaining food). Then, when they get caught, they get sent to jail, where they are provided with food, clothing, and shelter, all at the taxpayer's expense.

It is a symptom of severe economic decay when crime becomes a rational choice. However, that does not change the fact that a point can be reached when crime is, in fact, the most rational option.

Re:From the article (1)

ChipMonk (711367) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074380)

It is a symptom of severe economic decay when crime becomes a rational choice.

Or, it is a symptom of a broken legal system, in which anyone, on any given day, commits dozens of "crimes."

As was pointed out right here on /., Terry Childs' reckless accusers did far more damage to the security of the SF emergency network, but he was the one convicted of a "crime."

Re:From the article (1)

eleuthero (812560) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074384)

Is it rational to put yourself and your own needs above the needs of others? You are opting for a yes answer to this question (and given the OP's wording, this is reasonable - weasel-wording arguments is never ideal).

On the whole, though, society works better and is more stable when individuals put others first (and no, I am not just suggesting this be done for the obvious Christian connections). Putting the group ahead of the individual achieves long term species survival. Can it be said that the individual is not to blame fully for his current economic condition? Absolutely! But this does not mean that he should rationally choose to act against what is best for the society as a whole. This is particularly true when the society has legal means in place to provide for those in economic distress. In my own city, we have recently spent over $14 million on a homeless shelter and work re-training center. This is certainly not an end-all be-all answer, but it is available to all who come to it.

Re:From the article (3, Insightful)

radtea (464814) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074806)

Is it rational to put yourself and your own needs above the needs of others?

In general, yes.

On the whole, though, society works better and is more stable when individuals put others first

I'm not aware of any such society as this. Can you point to a single example anywhere in the world that exists today?

Social/liberal democratic societies don't fulfill this claim, obviously, as they are in general better for everyone than socialist (China) or corporate/oligarchic (America) societies. But neither do socialist or corporate/oligarchic societies count as ones where people put the needs of others ahead of their own.

The difference between healthy social/liberal democratic societies and sick socialist or corporate/oligarchic societies is not that people put their own interests ahead of others in the latter but not the former. It is the system of checks and balances that exist in social/liberal democratic societies that effectively balances the competing interests of individuals, and a mature recognition on the part of the members of those societies that such a balance is to their own benefit.

I would have thought that after the blood-soaked lessons of the 20th century no one would be dumb enough to suggest that any attempt to organize a society based on the good of the abstract multitude rather than the concrete individual is a good idea. I guess there really is no limit to the depths of human ignorance, or the willingness of the arrogant new generation to repeat the same errors as the previous generations and still feigning suprise when exactly the same causes have exactly the same effect.

Still no (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074866)

Is it rational to put yourself and your own needs above the needs of others?

It is rational to put one's own need to eat above someone else's need to own a yacht. Yes.

When the society as a whole is failing to meet the needs of its individuals, then putting the needs of 'society' ahead of one's own is only actually meeting the needs of the elite few rich controllers at the top of society, to one's own detriment.

A society that cannot meet the needs of its individuals is unworthy of self-sacrifice, and should be dismantled.

Re:From the article (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074394)

Not to mention: "desperate" does not equal "rational"...

It isn't a binary thing, rational one moment stark raving mad the next; but it isn't exactly news that people become steadily less discerning as you put them under greater pressure.

Re:From the article (1)

Lemmy Caution (8378) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074418)

In terms of a moral thought-experiment, I agree with you. In practical terms, in first-world societies, however, it is very rare that committing a crime - or, what is more likely, starting a career as a criminal until circumstances improve - is a better alternative than accepting the existing safety nets (as low as they might be), entering a homeless shelter, getting subsidized housing, going to food banks, etc.

People often confuse a certain down-migration - moving from upper-middle-class to lower-middle-class - with destitution. Yes, it's humiliating and involves a lot of frustration and shame, but it is easier to move from an unemployed shelter-dweller without a criminal record back to a member of the middle class than it is to move from convict with a criminal record back to the middle class.

Re:From the article (1)

harrytuttle777 (1720146) | more than 4 years ago | (#32075218)

What do you mean by 'becoming a criminal'? Joe Kennedy was a bootlegger, and his family rose to the height of political power. Crime Does pay. Especially if you live in Massachusetts.

It just doesn't pay if you are a stupid or poor criminal without a network of associates to support you.

Re:From the article (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074912)

Then, when they get caught, they get sent to jail, where they are provided with food, clothing, and shelter, all at the taxpayer's expense.

Does this happen often?

Re:Obvious missing section (0, Offtopic)

Stephen Samuel (106962) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073702)

Hmm. a first post with actual (and somewhat on-topic) information....
I think that this should be moderated as 'offtopic' just on general principle.

Re:Obvious missing section (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32073740)

Ok, done. What next?

Re:Obvious missing section (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32073892)

2. ???
3. Profit

Re:Obvious missing section (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074576)

Now you will help me conquer the world.

Re:Obvious missing section (1)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073766)

You beat me to it! My favorite part of that particular article:

Sales supervisor Irene Young, whose cubicle was directly across from Tenchumaru's and who on several occasions had questioned the wisdom of having an office ninja, was the next victim...

The Onion's articles are so subtly absurd as to be believable.

Re:Obvious missing section (1)

Hoi Polloi (522990) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074440)

They also left out the part about stealing epic loots during raids. Damn those ninjas!

"Laidoff" is not a fricking word (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32073502)

Cripes.

Re:"Laidoff" is not a fricking word (2, Funny)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073586)

I thought it was the championship round of the Sex Olympics. I'd better search Wikipedia for more info ...

Re:"Laidoff" is not a fricking word (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32075242)

Neither is jackoff yet people use that word when you are around all the time.

Yeah (5, Insightful)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073536)

Yup, I spent some time back in mid-to late 2001 laid off. Sending out hundreds of resumes and follow ups every day without any responses (other than canned messages, or companies that were interested, but weren't willing to hire me because they knew when the economy picked back up I'd be gone) gets really disheartening.

Luckily for me, I'd planned and prepared for being laid off, and honestly, got lucky that I got a job when I did. A lot of people on here state that you should have 6 months of "rainy day" money saved up for your living expenses. I agree with this 100%...if not for the money I'd set aside, I'd have been homeless most likely.

That's a scary thought, how quickly you could conceivably go from productive member of society to homeless.

Re:Yeah (2, Funny)

corbettw (214229) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073724)

Life can be very scary at times. That's why it's so important to be a responsible adult and not leave yourself in a position where you depend upon the kindness of strangers.

Re:Yeah (5, Insightful)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074114)

That's why it's so important to be a responsible adult and not leave yourself in a position where you depend upon the kindness of strangers.

There are times when you don't have a choice. It is impossible to plan for every eventuality and as a middle class person, it isn't possible to save enough money for long term layoff - let alone becoming unhireable. You can save and invest until you're blue in the face and then run into a long lay-off and burn through your savings. It's worse if you have health problems along the way. I don't care how much you save, if you get sick when unemployed, you get wiped out easily and then some. And then, you have crap on your MIB (medical information bureau) file and no employer will hire you because of that - one guy, a college educated guy, had to get a letter from a doctor that his congenital heart condition wouldn't affect his job performance - to drive a school bus. Having insurance, if you can afford it, doesn't make things much better: assuming you can even get it.

And during bad times, if you've been out of work for a while, employers just start passing you by because they think there's something wrong with you or that your skills are "rusty". They won't even check it out, they don't even bother because they think everyone else "knows" something that they don't know. And if you're middle aged or older; you're going to have some real problems.

Then there are the folks who say, "Well, just suck up your pride get any job."

Well guess what, a lot of people are in fact doing that and that's why there's this HUGE problem with under-employment along with unemployment. And that's assuming you CAN get a "lesser" job. I tried getting a roofing job (I grew up in the trades) and they wouldn't even talk to me - even though they have all these Mexicans on their payroll.

I hear all this talk about being "responsible" from folks who really don't know how bad it is out there and it really gets depressing - like shoving a 9mm in the mouth depressing. Others who are old enough are just retiring early because that's all they can do. And being out of work sucks, btw. The stigma of being an out of work bum or being called "irresponsible" is heart wrenching. Is there something wrong with me? Maybe, but no one ever says anything so you just keep sending out resumes wondering what's happening.

Starting something one your own? Ha! I started a business and got tons of calls from other IT guys - website designers, admins, you name it - that market for IT support is saturated beyond belief! It was like "dude, I don't need your services. Do you need mine?" Unfucking believable!

Volunteering is nice and it keeps one busy but the thing is, you can't pay student loans volunteering. And no, volunteering does not lead to employment; at least these days.

I don't expect anyone to understand - and no one ever does because they've never have had to live it.

Re:Yeah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074378)

one guy, a college educated guy, had to get a letter from a doctor that his congenital heart condition wouldn't affect his job performance - to drive a school bus.

SHOCKING AND SCANDALOUS!..... unless your kids are on the bus.

Re:Yeah (0, Troll)

lgw (121541) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074676)

There are times when you don't have a choice. It is impossible to plan for every eventuality and as a middle class person, it isn't possible to save enough money for long term layoff - let alone becoming unhireable. You can save and invest until you're blue in the face and then run into a long lay-off and burn through your savings. It's worse if you have health problems along the way. I don't care how much you save, if you get sick when unemployed, you get wiped out easily and then some.

This is certainly true, but anyone with a steady income can save an plad for the first disaster. Yes, yes, if you get two disasters at once you're now depending on the kindness of your fellow man, but at that point you'll find a lot of sympathy.

Got laid off while living paycheck to paycheck? Now you see why responsible adults don't live that way.

Got laid off, and were OK until 6 months later after the CORBA ran out you got cancer? Let's pitch in and help out.

The former story is far more common than the latter, though, and tends to drain the community resources.

Re:Yeah (2, Informative)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 4 years ago | (#32075096)

This is certainly true, but anyone with a steady income can save an plad for the first disaster.

I disagree. How about never getting another job ever again? The system has broken down: there are plenty of healthy people who want to work and can't because no one will hire them.

Things aren't the way they were during the last downturn. Jobs that were lost this time are not coming back. Some economists are saying we're going to have to live with a 10%+/- unemployment permanently. America's job creation machine has broken down. I hope that's wrong - really I do.

As far as the living paycheck to paycheck people are concerned, I can't comment on that because I never lived that way. But there are plenty of people who did save and have exhausted their savings and unemployment - like I said, a middle class person can't save enough these days - even for one disaster.

Re:Yeah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074828)

Also if you see somebody panhandling, the very last thing you should say is "Get a job!" Odds are the person panhandling has tried already, got tired of the lack of results for way too long, and desparation is why they're panhandling. To a person in a dire financial situation that can't get work it's very insulting. It's a lot like walking up to somebody of a different race or culture and saying some rude epithet into their face. If you're alone and do such a thing, don't be too surprised if you're the victim of a beating/robbery/stabbing.

It's just best to handle panhandlers by saying "sorry" or offering food (something that stays edible for a long time like a packaged granola bar is preferable) if not some token amount of cash. Also if you have work available and feel that this person may be capable (ruling out the crazy and drug addled), it's also fair to offer such a job. Unlike the insulting "get a job", saying "I have a job for you if you want it" means you're actually willing to help out and perhaps provide the panhandler a possible honest way out of their situation. If you're willing to take this step, don't rule out technical or clerical busywork either. Don't let their looks fool you. If you're homeless for too long, you'll look like shit regardless of how skilled or educated you are. Remember that some time at a barber, fresh clothes, and a stay at a hotel can fix that very quickly.

Re:Yeah (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074900)

I tried getting a roofing job (I grew up in the trades) and they wouldn't even talk to me - even though they have all these Mexicans on their payroll.

If you start your own roofing company (get a few friends, or whatever), you will have no problem getting jobs (at least around here in CA, and the housing crisis wasn't much worse in other places), if you manage to do good work, be on time, present yourself well, don't rip people off, etc. There are a lot of people in construction who have personal issues that get in the way of their work, it's really depressing. If you don't, you are ahead of a LOT of people.

Re:Yeah (1)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 4 years ago | (#32075128)

CA - don't you have to be licensed; which if it's like every other state means working for two years for someone else to be eligible. It's an idea though. I love Berkeley and I have family out there.

Here in GA you don't need a license - there are guys putting signs on the side of the road "Hungry Roofer! Need Work!" right along side the "Computer Service and web design: eCommerce website $99!" signs - that's how bad it is.

Re:Yeah (1)

kestasjk (933987) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073746)

Doesn't your country have a welfare system?

Re:Yeah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32073854)

Not the original poster, but, my country does, including unemployment insurance (which everyone pays for), though I act as if it doesn't.

Might be the same for OP too.

Re:Yeah (3, Informative)

AstrumPreliator (708436) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074084)

I'm not sure what country you are from, but in the US not everyone pays unemployment insurance. About 8 months ago I lost my job and after applying for unemployment and going through several phone conversations I was denied since my job class didn't pay into UI and didn't qualify. I can think of only two job classes that don't pay into UI, select state-defined jobs and self-employed. I worked at a university and now I am a "consultant". So I don't get unemployment at all. Then again my friend worked in construction and was laid off in December of '08 and they just decided to extend his unemployment benefits again.

C'est la vie.

Re:Yeah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074544)

It does. It's called the ghetto.

Re:Yeah (1)

Itninja (937614) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074018)

Homeless? What country do you live in? I pay a significant portion of my earning so as to avoid being homeless upon unemployment. I would probably lose my house and car and have to live in some cheap subsidized housing (or maybe with family), but I would never be a sleeping on a park bench somewhere.

unemployment and homelessness (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074138)

Having been laid off twice (2001, 2005) I have no problem sleeping in my car or on the street. Why? I won't accept a dime of tax payer's money.

Now, today, after this has happened twice I have ~one year rainy day fund. My security and safety are not the responsiblity of the government.

I'm sorry so many people here think that the Government has some responsiblity in taking care of people who are capable of working, have the ability to save during times of prosperity. The reason I slept in my car and on couches is because I wasn't financially prepared.

You ever live in subsidized housing? My parents were landlords to those leaches. I rather have my second property go empty before I let some government leach destroy my hardearned property.

Re:unemployment and homelessness (2, Insightful)

Lemmy Caution (8378) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074454)

It is one thing to couch-surf when you are single. When you have a family (and even in your case, perhaps one medical emergency away from wiping out a year's savings) one becomes less sanguine about it.

Re:Yeah (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074088)

I talked with a friend that has been out of work for 1 year now... he talks about how hard it is to make ends meet, yet he still has Cable TV and him and his entire family have iphones. I give him no pity. Drop Cable TV, Drop netflix, Drop everything you can. take the phones away from the kids he is off contract so he can drop them all and go to a simple plane for him and nothing for the kids. etc... They live in a 4500 sq foot mc mansion.... the electric bill is over $300 a month because they wont turn off their junk.

I dont feel bad for him as he dug the hole he is in. they did not need that house, they wanted to look rich. Nope no safety fund of savings...

Re:Yeah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074346)

This. So so this.

When I got laid off in September of last year we did several things with my severance pay like switch to a cheaper cellphone plan, change to dedicated DSL and drop the home phone (I run my own servers for mail and such), and finally get around to installing all those X10 timers so I can script for reduced power usage in the house. We haven't got rid of satellite but we've pared down most everything else.

I also did the one thing that the unemployment people said I shouldn't do - I paid off all our debt except for the house. That means while I have less on-hand cash resources I can do more with what I have because I have less overhead.

Now in the competing marketplace I can work for less than what is the norm and get the job.

Now if there were only jobs to get...

Re:Yeah (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074144)

I had my job taken from me 3.5 years ago now. (Quick story, I found the executives with a nice little vendor kickback/embezzelment scheme, and I quickly got fired). Anyways, I moved from Silicon Valley to a smaller town (pop 300k or so) to raise a family, and the wife had a good job opportunity. We BARELY get by on her salary, and I still can't find any work. Like many of you, my education and experience has made me very overpriced for this market, and I've been living off savings for the whole time. (I never bought fancy things, so, oh well, there goes my retirement savings.) We love where we live, have family nearby to help with the kids, and the environment is wonderful. That's what's keeping me here. Wife & I could find jobs elsewhere, but we'd give all that up, and be back in a geography we probably wouldn't like. Its the emergency plan, but I hope it doesn't come to that.

So, in summary:
* yes, have a LOT of cash saved up.
* do not count on ANYONE who doesn't share your same last name. (Friends can scatter when you need them, at least most of them.)
* I don't think most people realize how close to insolvency they really are. That, too, is scary.

This has been a humbling experience, that in the end has only relit my spirit to be independent, as well as increased my anger at our fascist corporatism.

Wish me luck.

Re:Yeah (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074464)

That's a scary thought, how quickly you could conceivably go from productive member of society to homeless.

You are a vile racist for making that statement. There are at least 10 jobs that make over $100,000 per year for each person in the United States now.

Re:Yeah (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074660)

I have been out of work for 3 years. Count that.. 36 months. I am also the only person I know who actually had 6 months of rainy day money, but that went very quickly (well, 6 months seem quick when you don't have a job)

I am deemed "over-qualified" by many. I am 44 years old, so that also hurts although the employers won't admit it.

Oh sure, I've had consulting gigs in between but for short periods of time. Tried out Best Buy GeekSquad and worked for a pimply 27-year old at the princely sum of $12.70/hour (their best rate?)

Luckily I have family who supported me, but this is not sustainable.

I may end up killing myself. Seriously.

Pray for me.

Re:Yeah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074766)

Luckily I have family who supported me, but this is not sustainable.

I may end up killing myself. Seriously.

Pray for me.

Come on buddy, don't think like that! The economy is picking up and hopefully you will land a job soon. I was on the authors' website just now and read an article called The Hole [layoffsupportnetwork.com] that describes my situation: about $40,000 credit card debt that I can not pay back any time soon. What am I going to do?

But offing yourself solves no problem. That is not the right way to pay back the kindness of your family. Why don't you write to the authors and ask for a free copy of the book and see if it can really help you? And talk to your friends--they may not be able to help you with a job or money but just talking it out would help.

I will pray for you, and I will ask my friends and family to pray for you too.

Re:Yeah (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074730)

That's a scary thought, how quickly you could conceivably go from productive member of society to homeless.

I spent some time 2 years ago in that rut, About August 2008 to January 2009. Being a recent Graduate, I didn't have the experience other laid off people had, so I found it extremely difficult to find a job. Monster.com, Workopolis, newspapers, billboards, anything and everything. I put my heart and soul into finding a job, but everyone wanted 5+ years experience in this or that.

However, I had a few really good breaks that helped me get through it.
#1) I got a job at Chapters (Indigo), for 10 bucks an hour recieving and opening boxes of books and putting them on the shelf. It wasn't glorious, or anything I was educated for, pretty much what you could get straight out of high school, or even as a summer job DURING high school. It paid the phone bill and my food, but not a whole lot else.

#2) The hardest part, is trying to tell your landlord "I can not afford next months rent, or the month after, and I don't know when I'll be able to." - I didn't have a whole lot saved up having just gotten out of school. Luckily, she didn't sue me to my bottom penny for breaking the lease early. Basically, we just agreed that the damage deposit would be next months rent and I'd have to be out of there.

#3) Friends. I have had some disagreements with my father, so moving back in with my parents wasn't going to happen. However, I made friends during high school, and we've always kept in touch. More than that, we still hang out, to this day. And during Post secondary, I met a lot of good people, who I wouldn't consider good friends but they help during a pinch. I was quite literally homeless, with nothing but a car full of laundry and a laptop. I rotated through my friends on who's couch I could sleep on, so I didn't become a big burden on anybody. This was when it paid to have lots of friends on Facebook. A status Update "Officially Homeless" basically got me tons of offers to crash for a while. I would probably have been sleeping in my car if it weren't for my friends, and I don't even know where I would have gone to shower.

Thing is, being laid off really does suck. It'd be nice to have yourself financially prepared, but not everyone has that luxury.The trick is that you really have to lower your standards to get by, like a minimum wage job. I had even take up part time at Dairy Queen so that I could save up money even if I wasn't going to find an IT related job quickly. During my Interview for my current job they asked "Where are you working now?" and I told them "I work as a merchandiser for Chapters and a cook at Dairy Queen." That inspired some kind of sympathy, and I was pretty much offered the job on the spot. I think just showing that putting in the effort even at crap jobs impresses an employer more than someone saying "I was laid off from my DBA position a month ago".

To everyone complaining about the positive review (4, Funny)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073542)

If you were going to post "Oh my god another review that's a 9/10... why don't they use a scale that doesn't give every single book a 7 or higher" boy have I got good news for you! I am in the process of writing a review of the 2009 Danielle Steele novel "Matters Of The Heart". I don't want to spoil the review (or the book) but I will say that I am prepared to give it a 4/10 for it's lack of detail and an unconvincing plot.

Re:To everyone complaining about the positive revi (1)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073644)

People almost never take the time to write a review of a book that sucks.

Re:To everyone complaining about the positive revi (1)

ottothecow (600101) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073726)

I would imagine that the publishers do a pretty good job of keeping books off the shelves that score on the low end of the scale.

Now if you bought an ebook or something off lulu, then maybe it might have a chance at scoring a 2...but a low score is going to be truly awful to the point where it wouldn't be worth finishing and reviewing let alone publishing

Re:To everyone complaining about the positive revi (3, Insightful)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073874)

If every book that gets reviewed receives a 7 through 10, what is the point of having a 1-10 scale since you could just as easily express it via a 1-4 scale, or better yet a 0-3 scale and store it directly in a two bit integer.

As an engineer (of any sort, even the armchair type) you should feel compelled to seek out the simplest method that gets the job done. While this may be a situation where aesthetics is called for over simplicity, that shouldn't stand in the way of a joke.

Re:To everyone complaining about the positive revi (1)

mooingyak (720677) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074032)

Think of it as an edge case rather than a non-existent one. Poor reviews are rare, but exist.

Re:To everyone complaining about the positive revi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074206)

You aren't saying the review distribution is a hockey stick graph, are you? *facepalm*

Re:To everyone complaining about the positive revi (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 4 years ago | (#32075168)

If every book that gets reviewed receives a 7 through 10, what is the point of having a 1-10 scale since you could just as easily express it via a 1-4 scale, or better yet a 0-3 scale and store it directly in a two bit integer.

Oh, see, and I thought the point of your original post was that the observation that most every book reviewed gets a high score was silly, because generally terrible books aren't reviewed by a lot of people, because few people care or want to hear about those books; e.g. nobody on /. wants to hear about the latest Daniel Steele abomination. I thought that was your point. Guess not.

Okay. So the problem with adjusting the scale such that the book that receives a 7 in the 1-10 scale receives a 1 or 0 on the new scale is that everyone's expectation is that the lowest number on a scale means "awful", when that simply isn't the case for the book that receives a 7. The point of a review scale, while inherently subjective, is still to rate the book against all possible books, not simply those that have achieved popular recognition enough that many reviewers have written reviews. Basically, while 7 may be the lowest score books that are reviewed actually get, it is not the lowest score any hypothetical book could get, and that's the way it should be.

There are coarser-grained rating scales that make a lot of sense, because let's face it justifying a 7 vs an 8 vs 7.5 is pretty much impossible. I like Flickfilosopher.com's traffic light scale, Green for see it in theatres, Yellow for wait for rental, and Red for don't see it ever. But the equivalent of a '7' is probably a yellow light and changing that so it was red would mean denying the existence of some truly awful movies.

So yeah. 10 pt scale isn't perfect, but it's not an accident that most of the reviews we care about are for things on the higher end of the scale, and no that should not be changed.

Re:To everyone complaining about the positive revi (1)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074396)

"I would imagine that the publishers do a pretty good job of keeping books off the shelves that score on the low end of the scale."

I'm sure they do, but a 1-10 scale for books seems to rate books relative to other books since there is no well defined or accepted rubrik for what defines a good or bad book.

If all books reviewed are above average, then the review really doesn't say anything because general perception doesn't distinguish a 7 from an 8, or an 8 from a 9 or 10.

Now, it might be the case that a 7 isn't really all that different from a 10, but I'd think that someone who spends their time reading books in the 7-10 range would disagree, and want a scale that started at 7 (1) and went to 10 (4).

That 1-4 scale would represent the difference much better in a sea of 7 rated books.

Re:To everyone complaining about the positive revi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074174)

I am prepared to give it a 4/10 for it's lack of detail and an unconvincing plot.

I am prepared to give your sentence a 4/10 for its lack of spelling.

Re:To everyone complaining about the positive revi (1)

Capt James McCarthy (860294) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074196)

If you were going to post "Oh my god another review that's a 9/10... why don't they use a scale that doesn't give every single book a 7 or higher" boy have I got good news for you! I am in the process of writing a review of the 2009 Danielle Steele novel "Matters Of The Heart". I don't want to spoil the review (or the book) but I will say that I am prepared to give it a 4/10 for it's lack of detail and an unconvincing plot.

Would you prefer a scale that goes to 11?

Ninjas were assassins, not peasants (2, Informative)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073608)

They were assassins who had to hide their weapons in plain sight, so they used farming implements and straight swords (Ninja-to) that could be hidden easily. They weren't the "Rebel Alliance" rising up against the evil Empire.

Re:Ninjas were assassins, not peasants (4, Informative)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073754)

It said the first ninjas were peasants, not all of them. Do you have an alternative history of their origins you would like to present?

Re:Ninjas were assassins, not peasants (2, Funny)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073796)

It said the first ninjas were peasants, not all of them. Do you have an alternative history of their origins you would like to present?

Well, the Oedipus arc in the original "The Tick" comic covers it pretty well, I'd say...

(We are a hedge. Please move along.)

Re:Ninjas were assassins, not peasants (0, Offtopic)

dcollins (135727) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074552)

I'd like address your signature in a spirit of open discussion.

"Why do criminals use guns since someone could just take it and use it against them? Or police? Or Marines?"

My response would be something like this: Because all those types are usually using the gun in an aggressive, offensive manner. It would be very different from a civilian intending to use one in a reactionary, defensive manner, anticipating an attack, and making a judgment about when lethal force is justified. Here's some notes from the book to the self-defense class that I attend:

A recent study of cop killers showed that violent career criminals, with their disregard for the conventional fundamentals of shooting (e.g., sight alignment, stance), their aggressive mindset (i.e., no compunction against killing), their use of surprise attacks, and their more frequent practice with firearms (average once per month versus a police officer's practice twice per year), often achieve a far higher level of real-world effectiveness with firearms than do conventionally trained police officers...

One of the biggest missing links in most armed citizens' and police officers' preparations in the ability to access, present, and use the carry gun while under attack. It seems that many students and even trainers assume they'll see any attack coming from far away, or perhaps that the violent criminal will announce his intentions from a distant, stationary position, allowing time for the victim to execute his practiced stationary draw from concealment into a perfect shooting stance and obtain perfect sight alignment. Reality, unfortunately, usually doesn't happen that way. ["Atttack Proof" 2E, p. 242]

Re:Ninjas were assassins, not peasants (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074696)

Good points that I haven't previously heard. However, what I am frequently told is that I am safer without a gun since it can be used against me. As a former Marine, I find this hard to swallow. With just a little training, it is easy to draw fast and shoot well. Most gunfights occur fewer than 9 feet, so you don't have to be a crackshot to be effective. I carry a small-caliber automatic in my back wallet pocket in case I am mugged, so it would look like I am reaching for my wallet. I also sometimes carry it in my jacket pocket in winter time with my finger off the trigger. Haven't timed myself, but I think I could respond pretty fast if I had to. There are over 6 million defensive uses of handguns per year in the US by average citizens, so while criminals might be more effective, it's not like handguns in the hands of citizens aren't providing benefit.

There is a great book called More Guns, Less Crime written by an admitted left-wing liberal Harvard professor who started researching the book to show how owning guns is just plain bad. It is an extremely in-depth thorough academic work. His research led him to the inescapable conclusion that it is the reverse, and he ended up buying a gun. Legal gun ownership lowers crime, and it lowers it safer and cheaper than any other method available.

Re:Ninjas were assassins, not peasants (1)

cyber-vandal (148830) | more than 4 years ago | (#32075070)

That means that the US should have about the lowest crime rate in the developed world. Does it?

Re:Ninjas were assassins, not peasants (1, Interesting)

fermion (181285) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074166)

Also, I would hardly compare a laid off worker to an oppressed peasant. The only peasents, at least in the US, are those that choose to think of themselves in that way. If one works day in and day out, and thinks that the job is an entitlement bestowed by a lord, then that is more a problem with the worker, maybe beginning with their education. Too many people ignore the free and cheap education, knowing that they will be given an unskilled job. Even twenty years ago in the large urban district that I went to school in, we had computers and labs that many students chose to ignore. We had and have relatively cheap universities where one can get degrees and training.

I doubt that anyone who thinks of themselves as a peasant, and the employer as the enemy, is going to have a great deal of luck finding a job quickly. Maybe that is why we so much unemployment. All these peasants waiting for the lord of the manner to give them a job.

I know that young people are having a hard time finding a job right now. I also know that the same advice I was given is applicable today. No experience means no job, so one has to find a job prior to graduation, even it is sweeping floors. The worst thing for a young person to do is act like their elders in thinking they are too good for a hard days work. A nobleperson is willing to do whatever needs to be done to get the job done. A peasant has to protect their limited dignity.

Capitalism canot be reformed! (2, Funny)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073660)

For international socialist revolution! Workers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your chains!

My Book Title (3, Funny)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073676)

There are lots of "Guerrilla this" or "Ninja that" related to layoffs and job hunting, but I don't think I have come across any other book that addresses the mental aspects of being unemployed.

My book is going to be "The Zen Ninja Guerrilla's Tao of Job Hunting and Getting Rich Quick in Real Estate."

Then I realized that it was an overused use of terms. So, I changed the title to "The Ch'an Kung Fu Guerrilla's Tao Guide to Job Hunting and The Way of Getting Rich Quick."

No hyperbole for me!

Crime doesn't pay? (3, Funny)

whitroth (9367) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073756)

"Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person."

So, the author of the review implies that you should only commit crimes when you're *not* desperate for money? Then only rich people would, oh, right, Goldman Sach, Enron, the S&L debacle (33% of that was white collar crime)... I guess he's right. Get rich, *then* steal.

                    mark

Ronin (2, Interesting)

Animats (122034) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073780)

A "laid off ninja" is called a ronin. But using that as a title would have given the wrong impression.

30 years ago, the chance for an individual Americans of experiencing a 50% reduction in income in any given year was a few percent. Now it's about 20%. The normal case today is that being laid off means a permanent reduction in income.

The people who post on LinkedIn all seem to be looking for work. Typical job descriptions: "Consultant; Marketing Strategist; Social Media Architect", "Community leader & sales pro looking for a sales/service operations, training or leadership role", "Strategic Consultant || Marketing || Advertising || Technology". And lawyers. Lots of lawyers.

Re:Ronin (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32073840)

A "laid off ninja" is called a ronin. But using that as a title would have given the wrong impression.

Wrong impression indeed, as ronin were samurai, not ninja.

Re:Ronin (1)

carleton (97218) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073846)

Pretty sure ronin = laid off samurai, not ninja.

Re:Ronin (2, Funny)

Steauengeglase (512315) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073848)

And lawyers. Lots of lawyers.

\

For great justice?

Re:Ronin (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073886)

And lawyers. Lots of lawyers.

It is difficult to understate how little security there is in the legal field.

Re:Ronin (1)

jmcvetta (153563) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074526)

It is difficult to understate how little security there is in the legal field.

Is there any field -- besides government workers and investment bilkers -- that has job security? Not an entirely rhetorical question...

Re:Ronin (1)

Warui Kami (104676) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074596)

Nursing. There's a huge shortage that's been going for years and projected to continue for a goodly while.

My tip for the day.

Re:Ronin (3, Informative)

mjwalshe (1680392) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073954)

a Ronin Is a masterless Samurai - in theory they where suposed to kill themselves on losing thier master.

Re:Ronin (1)

eugene_roux (76055) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074078)

Isn't that a bit extreme...

Shouldn't they at least look under the pillows on the couch first? I tend to find my lost remote there quite often...

Re:Ronin (1)

oh-dark-thirty (1648133) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074002)

Most of those descriptions are euphemisms for "pay me too much money for mediocre results that you can't measure anyway". The lawyers always have the option of career-changing to politician...

Re:Ronin (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074034)

you can NEVER have too many out of work lawyers, Shakespeare was right

Crimes and rationality (4, Informative)

thewiz (24994) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073782)

Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.

Unfortunately, there are people that do become irrational when they lose their source of income. I have had several ex-coworkers call and ask for monetary assistance. There was one that pulled a knife on me when I told him I couldn't help as my wife had lost her job the previous week.

It's never easy to be laid off. It took me being laid off of several jobs to realize that the company isn't angry at you, it's just that the PHBs want to save their own asses by cutting staff. However, I've seen many otherwise rational people become irrational when they are told that they're being laid off. I've seen adults beg, cry, plead and throw temper tantrums to keep their jobs. It's at times like these to remind them to act like adults and it's not the end of the world.

Re:Crimes and rationality (1)

Stregano (1285764) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074822)

Well for some parts, I could see a person being upset. If you work for a company for 15 years and get laid off when many others should have been let go, it would piss me off too.

That is not my situation, but in all honesty, I have worked through lay off and been laid off once. When I was laid off, it was no big deal. I took phone calls. Granted, it is never fun to be laid off, but I was informed, as were the rest of the people, that we were getting laid off about 1 month before it happened.

I just do not see why you would lay off in 1 day without some kind of prior warning. Sure, some people will slack off if they find that out, but it is way better to inform people ahead of time rather than just doing it in 1 day without warning.

Honestly, I am still young and have alot of bills I am paying. I simply do not have that 6 months saved up. I have maybe 2 weeks saved up and that is about it.

See, I help support my god daughter since her parents are struggling to make ends meat themselves. With rent, I moved in with 2 people that I have been friends with for years, and these two also have money problems (I am one of the few people out of my group of friends that has a decent job).That is where most of my extra money goes (well, that and paying off student loans). If I were to lose my job, I would not be able to afford my student loans, would not be able to pay rent (which would mean not only would I get evicted, but so would my roommates and their kid, who is a different kid than my god daughter), and social services would take my god daughter.

And I should not try to say whatever I can to get my job back? No offense dude, but some of us have paychecks that effect alot of people. None of these people I help asked for the help. I gave it to them because I could. Now if that is cut off, well then they are all in trouble. I guess I am like the big brother guardian of my group of friends. I chose it, and I do not mind it. Me losing my job, oh man, if I did not have something lined up, there would be bad news. I would do whatever I could to keep my job. Throwing a temper tantrum is probably a bad idea unless you throw stuff, because thay would be cool to see a guy flip out and throw a laser printer or something.

I guess what it boils down to is that yes, money is needed to survive, but it should not be a motivator to ruin other people's lives. If somebody has a compelling enough case and got hit in a lay off when they are a very competent worker, then why not let them stay? Who cares about saving money when you are ruining lives.

It is something that my company is working through (the company name will remain nameless until you read about it eventually), but they are finally getting the picture. What they are doing is laying off from the top down instead of the other way around. See, the company I work for finally realized that it would be cheaper for them in the long run to lay off the people who lay off (who are also directors, presidents, vp's, avp's) and hire some new person internally for half the cost than to deal with pissed clients for missed deadlines since they keep laying people off.

Re:Crimes and rationality (1)

lucifron (964735) | more than 4 years ago | (#32075224)

Compare heroin prices in your neighborhood ghetto to bulk prices in Afghanistan (at _least_ 1500% -- what kind of interest rates do you see in your bank?). It might not be ethical, but it certainly could be rational -- even when you factor in the risk of getting caught, or killed by the competition.

No amount of tax payer money wasted on police and prisons can stop that kind of profit; all we manage to do is drive up prices, thus making recruitment even more lucrative.

hmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32073786)

The problem I always had with these kinds of books is that they don't really address underlying problems, lack of jobs, but simply attempt to arbitrarily make it so the people who buy the book are advantaged, and people who don't are disadvantaged.

Re:hmm (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32073888)

and the problem with your post is that it just whines a lot, and doesn't really address the underlying problem that you're a fucking idiot. also, the problem with my toaster is that it isn't a rodeo clown.

Mod Up (1)

Jeng (926980) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074168)

That was beautiful.

Re:hmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074410)

Hats off to you, sir.

Committing crimes (2, Insightful)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073812)

Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.

How about because inciting a person to commit a crime is a criminal offense? And the authors like to stay out of pound-the-arse prisons?

Re:Committing crimes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074816)

citation for this? In the US, there is a high high bar to criminalize incitement.
See Brandenburg v. Ohio

Re:Committing crimes (1)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 4 years ago | (#32075084)

citation for this? In the US, there is a high high bar to criminalize incitement. See Brandenburg v. Ohio

The repercussions of that case are that the government cannot prosecute abstract speech. However I would not want to be the authors of a book where defendants of an actual crime all were saying ".. The book said it was OK to do this."

bootstrapping (2, Funny)

CityZen (464761) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073856)

> But in the next breath, the authors suggest folding away the values-list and taking a job (any job) that will pay the bills.

You'd think that they'd relate this to the bootstrapping process: A fancy filesystem (desired job) that's well-thought out is nice and good, but when you've got no OS ($) loaded, you need to get that code loaded by any means possible first, such as reading in the first few blocks off the boot drive (taking any job you can get). Once you've got a good base of code loaded, you can approach the task of loading data the right way.

the trouble with direct appraoch (1)

mjwalshe (1680392) | more than 4 years ago | (#32073900)

Is that an ethical HR person especially for big companies would probably dump any direct approaches as they have processes for that. The only way this would work is say pitching a VC or Archangel that you already know trolling linkedin won’t work.

For example if I ever get my ass in gear to write up the business case I have in mind. Id be happy going up to people who I know and pitch them – even if it was a chance meeting at first Tuesday ages ago though I think id try the “ordinary millionaires” first before pitching to Rothschild :-)

Hotjobs/Monster/CareerBuilder (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32073922)

All of the Job recruiting firms I've worked for (Mww, Yhoo, ETFC) are sales driven, and we were trained to meet numbers or find another job. Every quarter, if your numbers aren't met your gone, no warnings, they tell you up front, if you don't sell enough job ads, or place enough folks your out, minimal severance if any. It's numbers numbers numbers, especially if unemployment is down, the stock is down. I quit working for each after a short while, no one else at these divisions or companies(monster) matters other than the sales folk. If something affects them in some negative (time) fashion, but yet increases security or fixes a long standing issue, there is a ton of cat fighting to push for roll-back of the "fix" so the sales folk don't miss their deadline. Nothing else matters, the myopia of these places is astounding.

Interviews (1, Insightful)

physburn (1095481) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074038)

What about Interviews, being a geek, I give terrible interview. I also seem to sit with bored interviewers, and try and catch there interest something that oft seem impossible.

---

Job Hunting [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]

Re:Interviews (4, Insightful)

eln (21727) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074162)

Treat the interview the same way you would treat a technical discussion among coworkers: keep it light and relaxed, but make sure you know what you're talking about. It's often difficult to be relaxed in an interview, especially if you're currently unemployed and it's the first interview you've had in months. However, being a nervous wreck who can't answer any questions without stammering will sink you faster than anything, even if you are technically competent. Try to tell yourself that, although you might want this particular job, not getting it isn't the end of the world. There will always be other opportunities. It may be hard to convince yourself of that, but unless you're actually living in your car and you just sold your left shoe for a loaf of bread, it's probably more true than you realize.

Interviewers, especially in the technical interview, are looking for people they want to work with. This means they want people who are technically competent, but more importantly people who they can get along with. The better you are at being the kind of person most people (at least most people in your field) can get along with, the better off you'll be.

Morality of providing such advice to readers? (4, Insightful)

gestalt_n_pepper (991155) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074060)

Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.
Unless of course, you're laid off form the banking industry, in which case, you can start a hedge fund. After all, if you're going to commit a crime, start with the legal ones.

There are some tips about maximizing your available financial resources by delaying payment on some utility bills. While legally OK, I question the morality of providing such advice to readers.
Good lord, aren't we all just a bit past that sort of sanctimonious BS? The banks and credit card companies would dig up sell our dead grandmothers for hamburger seasoning if it helped their quarterly numbers a bit. Do you think we really owe them *any* moral consideration?

Re:Morality of providing such advice to readers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074120)

What kind of hamburger seasoning?

Re:Morality of providing such advice to readers? (1)

ktappe (747125) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074412)

There are some tips about maximizing your available financial resources by delaying payment on some utility bills. While legally OK, I question the morality of providing such advice to readers.
Good lord, aren't we all just a bit past that sort of sanctimonious BS? The banks and credit card companies would dig up sell our dead grandmothers for hamburger seasoning if it helped their quarterly numbers a bit. Do you think we really owe them *any* moral consideration?

Perhaps the reviewer meant it is immoral to suggest anyone get themselves in arrears and thus in danger of losing their electricity/water. At least that's how I read it.

Re:Morality of providing such advice to readers? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074504)

"The banks and credit card companies would dig up sell our dead grandmothers for hamburger seasoning if it helped their quarterly numbers a bit. Do you think we really owe them *any* moral consideration?"

Of course not, but you do owe it to yourself.

There's an old story about a New York Feminist coming to Atlanta for a business meeting in the 80s and getting offended when one of the locals held a door open for her. She snapped at him "You don't have to hold the door for me just because I'm a lady!"

He looked back unblinking and said "I'm not. I'm holding it because I am a gentleman."

Integrity isn't about what other people deserve, it's about what standards you hold yourself to--regardless of others' behaviour.

Re:Morality of providing such advice to readers? (4, Funny)

tool462 (677306) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074538)

The banks and credit card companies would dig up sell our dead grandmothers for hamburger seasoning

Oh good lord! So you mean there actually was a Mrs. Dash?

Rational person? (1)

Kevlar_Sindome (763483) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074080)

Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person.

You're new here, aren't you?

What about white collar crimes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074230)

"Frankly, I was a bit surprised to see LON come out and suggest people should not commit crimes when they are desperate for money. I think this would be obvious to any rational person."

Like taking a job with Goldman Sachs?

Recruiters aren't evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074266)

Sure, recruiters want their commission. Yes, most of them probably couldn't give a flying proverbial if you're going to be happy in the position, as long as you stay long enough for the recruiter to get his/her full commission. (Some recruiters actually make the candidate sign a contract stating that they're responsible for paying back that commission if they leave the job too soon).

But... does that matter? If you don't have a contact inside the company you're targeting, a recruiter is your man on the inside. He is talking direct to HR there. You're not. So it doesn't matter, really, if he's the most loathsome human being the world has ever known - if it increases your chances of getting hired, who cares?

recruiters (5, Informative)

thoth (7907) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074278)

There is a scathing chapter on recruiters. While certain good qualities of recruiters are mentioned, it seems the authors generally believe that recruiters are uncaring commission-hounds that just want to place a candidate and don't care about individuals. The brutal honesty was refreshing, and I'd be curious whether a majority of Slashdot readers would agree or disagree with the authors.

I found recruiters to be entirely self-serving. Last year when I was looking for a job, the ones I dealt with seemed to have a strict "two and out" policy: they present you to two companies MAX, and if those interviews don't go well, it'll be months if you ever hear from them again - i.e. you got dropped, they stopped trying to market you. One recruiter totally shoehorned me into an interview for a job I had no background for. Another set an interview up and the phone screen didn't go well. In both cases, I didn't hear from those recruiters again.

Yet another tried to convince me to move for an opportunity (I balked due to various expenses that weren't covered, plus the loss on selling my home) and the next interview they lined up was a 2 month scripting contract at a game company, and after that... never heard from them again. The way they handled the first job (that required the move) was totally fishy - they wanted me to agree that I'd accept the job and move IF there was a job offer, while I pushed back I can't pre-accept what doesn't exist especially without even meeting or talking to the group first. They wouldn't even set the interview up so I had more info for the decision. I figure there must have been something weird about their finder's fee and what sequence of steps or how far along things were before payments were exchanged or refunds made, etc. I think they were afraid if the company and I contacted each other (i.e. I interviewed) without an agreement in place for the recruiter, the company would somehow be able to duck their fee.

Cover Image (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32074476)

Do a google image search for "ninja", and the image on the book is one of the first results. I've been using that image as an avatar for years.

Reconnaissance can go horribly wrong (1)

wowbagger (69688) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074682)

The next chapter is "Reconnaissance" and this is where the hacker background of the authors finally shows up. They show, with examples, how to find the name and email address of recruiters and HR people at practically any company. The theory being, if you can directly contact the HR people at a company, your resume will not be lost in the 1000 other resumes that people send in.

Allow me to present the other side of the coin: I am not HR, never been HR - while I review resumes *after* HR has filtered them (to do the actual technical evaluation of "is this person bullshitting or do they actually know what they claim to") I do NOT do front-line filtering of resumes, nor is it appropriate to send me a resume. Yet, I have had several "recruiters" send me their marks - err, "clients" - resumes. And do you know what happens then? Both the recruiter AND the "client" get blacklisted by our HR department when I forward the message onward.

In short: if your "reconnaissance" isn't spot-on, you can hurt yourself more than you help.

Re:Reconnaissance can go horribly wrong (1)

Sabriel (134364) | more than 4 years ago | (#32074882)

Interesting re the blacklisting... especially since I've read of recruiters sending out resumes of people who never even knew it was being done. "Hey, just wondering why I didn't get a response to the application I sent your company last month." "You were blacklisted for sending your resume to our engineer last year." "Uh, I didn't even know you guys existed then..."

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?