Prev: Data-path accuracy in IIR filters?
Next: Special Issue on Cognitive Information Processing
From: Manny on 29 Jul 2010 22:44
On Jul 30, 3:09 am, Fred Marshall <fmarshall_xremove_the...(a)xacm.org>
wrote:
> It really pays to ask: "Who is the audience?"  In this case, it appears
> it was the high level guys - whether you had that figured out up front
> or not.  That is, their reaction appears to have hurt you (real or
> imagined) and it's not clear that the low level guys could have done that..
> - He who pays is the audience.
> - He who buys is the audience.
> - He who can hurt is the audience.
With the benefit of hindsight, I know have a better grasp of the inner
workings of the organization. The difficulty is that the godfather
whom I was trying to impress is a techie. Turned out he leaves small
matters to be managed to less senior people and I don't think he
interferes too much with their decisions. End of the day, I'm just a
number. So it all went wrong from here and all the colour-coded
adaptation plots turned out to be "a failure to abstract away the
detail."

> Then do a skillful job of blending your message with their needs and
> wants.  If you find a strong mismatch then you have the wrong product
> for that particular audience.  It's nobody's fault - it just is.  But,
> lack of clarity should not be allowed to be a reason to fail.  In your
> case now you need to be the picture of clarity.  Use the KISS principle..
Guess it's a swift act of fate after all. But what really really gets
on my nerves is how by placing the bar low, you actually do better
than trying to do something genuinely true. Rationale here is that the
impact of 3 small pieces of mediocre work is definitely greater that
trying to come up with something new, and if anything an incentive to
keep things average at best riding the tide of the common sense. This
is what really hurts me, the dreadful thought of having wasted the
last 3 years of my life. Again you live and learn.

> I don't understand why you're giving up.  But then, I'm sure there's a
> lot I don't understand.  Is there no way to convey pieces of the message
> here and there, now and then until it becomes *their* idea, their need
> so that they come to you?  And, in the process be Mr. Clarity?
Because my time expires soon and everything I've been doing has been
deemed cool, but unclear! The people I work with have agendas and it's
all to do with maximizing perceived output. I only realized this now.
I'm not trying to victimize myself here, I'm simply unwanted I guess.

> If it's in Power Point or similar form, you might share for some
> critique.  Right how it's all pretty vague.  Or, should I say: "lacks
> clarity"?   :-)
I just angry with the excuse they came up with; clarity. Pretty
symbolic comes across to me and was directed more at me as an
individual rather than at my work as evident by the phrase "we don't
work with people who lack clarity." I.e. they never said: "alright, if
you convince us you'r in." More like: "it's over and don't try again."

Ah. Thanks Fred for your post.

-Momo

From: Jerry Avins on 30 Jul 2010 00:14
On 7/29/2010 8:39 PM, Manny wrote:
> On Jul 30, 1:36 am, Greg Berchin<gberc...(a)comicast.net.invalid>
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:23:33 -0700 (PDT), Manny<mlou...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> And if the "high level" dude chose to override the
>>> "low level" dude's judgement, it tells you a thing or two, doesn't it?
>>
>> Yes. It tells me that you need to re-read the final sentence in my description
>> of option (6).
>>
>>> That said, there are
>>> certain things that I could stall and go and do with the Asians while
>>> completely operating within the law and the professional code of
>>> conduct.
>>
>> I can only conclude that you don't "get it".
> I am doing research on something. And by definition, everything I come
> up with is mine AND is in the public domain.

Only if you didn't draw a salary for doing it. If you were paid,
everything you come up with belongs to whomever paid you.

Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
�����������������������������������������������������������������������
From: Manny on 30 Jul 2010 01:11
> If your command of language is accurately reflected in what you wrote, I
> have a bit of sympathy for the high-level people. They should see past
> that to what you actually mean, but some people can't see beyond what
> you say. Why not clarify what you mean -- maybe in writing, then try
> again before getting too drastic.
>
> "What has conspired ..." should probably be "What has transpired ..."
> Say "What happened ..." if big words sometimes trip you up.
Only when I'm wound up. Goes to tell me that I should keep my mouth
shut more often.

> "I'm not pissed off as hell ..." Did you mean that?
>
> There's more, but I aim to raise your awareness, not to embarrass you.
Roger.

Thanks.

-Momo
From: Manny on 30 Jul 2010 01:18
On Jul 30, 5:14 am, Jerry Avins <j...(a)ieee.org> wrote:
> On 7/29/2010 8:39 PM, Manny wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 30, 1:36 am, Greg Berchin<gberc...(a)comicast.net.invalid>
> > wrote:
> >> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:23:33 -0700 (PDT), Manny<mlou...(a)hotmail.com>  wrote:
> >>> And if the "high level" dude chose to override the
> >>> "low level" dude's judgement, it tells you a thing or two, doesn't it?
>
> >> Yes.  It tells me that you need to re-read the final sentence in my description
> >> of option (6).
>
> >>> That said, there are
> >>> certain things that I could stall and go and do with the Asians while
> >>> completely operating within the law and the professional code of
> >>> conduct.
>
> >> I can only conclude that you don't "get it".
> > I am doing research on something. And by definition, everything I come
> > up with is mine AND is in the public domain.
>
> Only if you didn't draw a salary for doing it. If you were paid,
> everything you come up with belongs to whomever paid you.

Yes. But whatever I was compensated for didn't call for an average of
at least 10+ hours a day. And according to people, I've exceeded the
target for deliverables. So I might as well leave something for me to
tinker with later.

I'll get all the legal matters clarified by a professional. Thanks for
the note.

-Momo
From: Muzaffer Kal on 30 Jul 2010 12:30
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:18:04 -0700 (PDT), Manny <mloulah(a)hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Jul 30, 5:14�am, Jerry Avins <j...(a)ieee.org> wrote:
>> On 7/29/2010 8:39 PM, Manny wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jul 30, 1:36 am, Greg Berchin<gberc...(a)comicast.net.invalid>
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:23:33 -0700 (PDT), Manny<mlou...(a)hotmail.com> �wrote:
>> >>> And if the "high level" dude chose to override the
>> >>> "low level" dude's judgement, it tells you a thing or two, doesn't it?
>>
>> >> Yes. �It tells me that you need to re-read the final sentence in my description
>> >> of option (6).
>>
>> >>> That said, there are
>> >>> certain things that I could stall and go and do with the Asians while
>> >>> completely operating within the law and the professional code of
>> >>> conduct.
>>
>> >> I can only conclude that you don't "get it".
>> > I am doing research on something. And by definition, everything I come
>> > up with is mine AND is in the public domain.
>>
>> Only if you didn't draw a salary for doing it. If you were paid,
>> everything you come up with belongs to whomever paid you.
>
>Yes. But whatever I was compensated for didn't call for an average of
>at least 10+ hours a day. And according to people, I've exceeded the
>target for deliverables. So I might as well leave something for me to
>tinker with later.
>
If you are a salaried person, they might as well have paid you 10
cents/month and they'd still own all your output (of course you'd not
have accepted 10c/m but you accepted what ever you're being paid now).
Also you most probably used the company's resources (computers, other
equipment, office etc.) to do your work so you really don't get to
keep anything for yourself in these conditions; other than the
knowledge that what ever you did can be done.

>I'll get all the legal matters clarified by a professional. Thanks for
>the note.

I'd do that now rather than later because the way your thought process
is going now, you might get yourself in significant trouble if you
follow it.
--
Muzaffer Kal

DSPIA INC.
ASIC/FPGA Design Services

http://www.dspia.com
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Data-path accuracy in IIR filters?
Next: Special Issue on Cognitive Information Processing