Why wait to be outsourced when you can do it yourself?
-
I've been surprised at how mildly everyone is viewing this. It's like folks think he's clever for gaming the system. If this guy had worked for me, there would be a black, glassy crater where his cubicle used to be. The lazy motherfucker defrauded me in the most basic terms of his employment contract. Worse, he opened my internal network to an outside agency. Not only would I have terminated his employment, I would have filed a criminal complaint against him and sought civil penalties as well.
Software Zen:
delete this;+5 I'm suprised I had to read this far into the comments to see this reality check. And what about the bigger picture? We're in the middle of a cyber esionage war with China right now. Any IP he had access to, that was of any interest to the Chinese military, can be assumed to be in their hands now. If it were my company, I'd be digging through every log I had to see what IP he gave to them.
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
-
But would you consider one person's work a complex project? If one person can do one person's work, one person managing that same work doesn't sound difficult.
I assume mission critical projects of a national carrier is not a single man's job. There is a team, there is testing, integration with third party systems, there are deployments etc. etc. There are meetings, prototypes, architecture decisions etc etc. Whoever wrote that article probably has never seen a sofware project in his life.
-
I assume mission critical projects of a national carrier is not a single man's job. There is a team, there is testing, integration with third party systems, there are deployments etc. etc. There are meetings, prototypes, architecture decisions etc etc. Whoever wrote that article probably has never seen a sofware project in his life.
Sitalkes wrote:
I assume mission critical projects of a national carrier is not a single man's job.
But he was only outsourcing his own work, not an entire team's worth (unless I missed something in the article). So he'd only have to manage the work he would have normally had to do. And that seems completely plausible to me.
-
Sitalkes wrote:
I assume mission critical projects of a national carrier is not a single man's job.
But he was only outsourcing his own work, not an entire team's worth (unless I missed something in the article). So he'd only have to manage the work he would have normally had to do. And that seems completely plausible to me.
You cannot outsource "your" work unless it's a single man project. There is too much day to day interaction within the team members and the other parts of the company to do that. Unless they provide more details than the youtube url that he was visiting all day, Bob is a fictional character to me in a poorly written article, cleary targeted at us programmers. Edit: BTW the original article of Verizon is not credible at all as well. They clearly are trying to sell their secirity auditing services by scaring potential customers.
-
You get this in all walks of employment. Hiring a construction company to do work will get you a contractor with some of his own workers and specialties, and several sub contractors he hires. Many times the people you hire never do any actual work, it's all subs.
If it moves, compile it
Yes, but that's understood in that kind of relationship. It's part of the contract. In this case, an employment contract, the assumption is that the individual being employed will do the work.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
I think there's a subtle difference here. The guy in this case isn't doing the work at all. His employer agreed to pay him for his skills and his time, not some third party of unproven capability. Presumably when you obtain code from CP to do your job, you're also assuming responsibility for that code meeting all the considerations involved. Somehow, I doubt this guy cared about that.
Software Zen:
delete this;I disagree. If the employer paid him to come to work and get busy and spend eight hours a day in the treadmill, the employer is stupid. If the employer paid him just to get the work done, the employer is reasonable. And that's exactly what Bob did - getting the job done. I too think the only issues to consider are those of IP/confidentiality/security. If Bob wasn't working on security-sensitive code, I'd say there wasn't anything he did wrong. And also, even if I'm making a living writing code myself, I consider most code not to be worth not opening (although my employer thinks otherwise). The the companies I write code for don't actually derive value from the code I write for them by selling it, the code is just a tool allowing them to provide a service for which they get paid. The tool is most often so specialized that other companies wouldn't be in a good position to use it anyway. If it's a tool I build, without somebody using it it's worthless. If I find a way to provide my customer with a better tool at a lower cost, should he be angry at me?
-
Stumbled on this article[^], apparently the guy outsourced his own work at a fraction of his pay...I wish I had thought of that! :laugh:
That guy was smart enough to understand the benefits of outsourcing; and his employer was not efficient enough to outsource the he proved that could be done easily. :)
Regards, Jwalant Natvarlal Soneji http://jwalantsoneji.com[^]
-
You cannot outsource "your" work unless it's a single man project. There is too much day to day interaction within the team members and the other parts of the company to do that. Unless they provide more details than the youtube url that he was visiting all day, Bob is a fictional character to me in a poorly written article, cleary targeted at us programmers. Edit: BTW the original article of Verizon is not credible at all as well. They clearly are trying to sell their secirity auditing services by scaring potential customers.
http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/4476241/Re-Why-wait-to-be-outsourced-when-you-can-do-it-yo.aspx[^]
Regards, Jwalant Natvarlal Soneji http://jwalantsoneji.com[^]
-
That guy was smart enough to understand the benefits of outsourcing; and his employer was not efficient enough to outsource the he proved that could be done easily. :)
Regards, Jwalant Natvarlal Soneji http://jwalantsoneji.com[^]
-
Only problem is that he was fundamentally lying to his company. He let unknown foreign hackers have his login credentials, even shipping them a hardware security token. It's not a surprise the company were miffed to find unknown people on their network, looking at their proprietary code (and who knows what else). C'mon, this was an outrageous breach of trust. This guy ought to go to jail. Even if you think Bob was a hero, if anything had gone wrong (foreign hackers being what they are) Bob would have been in some deep legal doo-doo.
I think if Bob were smarter this could be entirely avoided. All Bob needed to do was allow them to login to his computer, which had access to his work and would have prevented the logs from showing access from China. They would not need his security token that way as well. It's pretty amazing that he even kept the transactions on his work email as well.