My daily readings 06/29/2013

    • That said, direct examination of the IIT examination item content

      http://www.askiitians.com/iit-papers/iit-jee-papers.aspx

      may suggest what level of performance on specific item content is necessary to be part of the small subset of the large number of IIT joint entrance examination test-takers who gain admission to an IIT campus. On that basis, I agree with the statement that the IIT undergraduate programs are highly selective and likely to collect on one campus many very smart young people who provide a good peer group to one another so that everyone on campus picks up habits of aiming high intellectually, as the IIT alumni I know here in Minnesota all seem to do.

    • This discusses two rulings. DOMA and Proposition 8. I like the DOMA decision. I like the specific result of the Proposition 8 ruling, but do not like the way they got there.

      The issue with proposition 8 is that California lost, and then chose not to appeal. Lawyers for the group that passed proposition 8 then stepped in and took the case. Their argument basically was that if they were not allowed to do this, then any proposition passed by Californians that the government did not like the government could unpass by posting a lackluster defense and then not appealing it.

      The 9th circuit did not know whether they should grant standing. They remanded it to the California Supreme Court to decide that. The California Supreme Court said that under California law they did have standing. The 9th heard it. The Supreme Court has now disagreed.

      But I agree with that argument from the supporters of proposition 8. California gives voters the power to pass proposition that the state does not like. The state has now been handed a legal tool which undermines that in federal court. (I do not understand precedent well enough to know whether state courts will look to the Supreme Court or the California Supreme Court on this.)

    • This discusses two rulings. DOMA and Proposition 8. I like the DOMA decision. I like the specific result of the Proposition 8 ruling, but do not like the way they got there.

      The issue with proposition 8 is that California lost, and then chose not to appeal. Lawyers for the group that passed proposition 8 then stepped in and took the case. Their argument basically was that if they were not allowed to do this, then any proposition passed by Californians that the government did not like the government could unpass by posting a lackluster defense and then not appealing it.

      The 9th circuit did not know whether they should grant standing. They remanded it to the California Supreme Court to decide that. The California Supreme Court said that under California law they did have standing. The 9th heard it. The Supreme Court has now disagreed.

      But I agree with that argument from the supporters of proposition 8. California gives voters the power to pass proposition that the state does not like. The state has now been handed a legal tool which undermines that in federal court. (I do not understand precedent well enough to know whether state courts will look to the Supreme Court or the California Supreme Court on this.)

      • Test
    • The issue with proposition 8 is that California lost, and then chose not to appeal. Lawyers for the group that passed proposition 8 then stepped in and took the case. Their argument basically was that if they were not allowed to do this, then any proposition passed by Californians that the government did not like the government could unpass by posting a lackluster defense and then not appealing it.

      The 9th circuit did not know whether they should grant standing. They remanded it to the California Supreme Court to decide that. The California Supreme Court said that under California law they did have standing. The 9th heard it. The Supreme Court has now disagreed.

      But I agree with that argument from the supporters of proposition 8. California gives voters the power to pass proposition that the state does not like. The state has now been handed a legal tool which undermines that in federal court. (I do not understand precedent well enough to know whether state courts will look to the Supreme Court or the California Supreme Court on this.)

    • He asked me when I wanted to leave, and I said today as I had already spoken to the only other dev on my team and committed and pushed all my code along with documentation I wanted to leave for the other dev. He threatened (implied) that “people” would be pissed if I didn’t come in tomorrow, so I agreed to go tomorrow for knowledge transfer.
    • If it were me, I’d show up as planned.

      Remember, you’re the professional here. They’re the company with the crazy project manager that flipped out on you for working the hours you agreed to work when you were hired. The rest of the company is still fine in your opinion, and you’re on similarly good terms with the rest of the dev team and management. If they give you any grief, it’s them behaving badly.

      Incidentally, if they do want you to come back to help with knowledge transfer, you’ll be quoting your day rate for consulting. This is not going to be less than $1,000 per day (or fraction thereof), and will be double that if you were anything other than a junior dev.

      Good luck. Let us know four days from now when you’ve landed your next gig for more money!

  • tags: Go

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: