One can still copyright material, removing it from public domain, thus making it illegal to copy, print or redistribute it, depending on what license one uses. If you get fired and the employer uses prints for evidence, sue him :tongue:
Not just the HR people, but others as well.Wow, these HR folks do spend an awful lot of company time reading blogs! Can they be fired for that? :tongue:
Um.... [Dana Carvey's voice] could it be.... via GOOGLE [on some topic you blogged about]?What is more ... er... interesting is that, sometime, in my Physics Blog, I get hits from pentagon.mil! Now I know for a fact that I make zero link to them! So I have no idea how or why they even found the blog.
Furthermore, you don't know if the person on the blog is the same person applying (without pictures, of course). There are plenty of people with my name, and I go to school with three girls who all have the same first and last name, and even the same middle initial!They are spying on you ZapperZ.
I would personally say that using blog entries as acceptance criteria for any sort of situation is simply silly. It could have been a friend who 'hacked' into the account and posted some stupid blog, or the person in question might be into coming home from the bar and writing blog entries before bed, you never know. Although of course this world is not perfect and you cannot expect that people will not search for your blog/name on the internet and form opinions through that information.
In response to Evo, in Canada you don't have to share information regarding crimes you were charged with but never convicted of. I don't know how it works in the US but I'd just tell them that it wasn't an appropriate question. If it was a dream job I might just say "no". (Assuming that I was arrested but not convicted, which I haven't been :P)
The telecommunications industry, like defense-related aerospace and nuclear industries, subject employees to more rigorous scrutiny than most industries. This is because of the nature of the technology and implications for customer privacy and national security. The concern about financial responsibility is that anyone who has financial problems might be susceptible to blackmail or inclined to engage in criminal activity in order to obtain financial gain. Similar background checks are given to those seeking to obtain security clearance in the DOE complex. Even unpaid traffic or parking tickets can lead to revocation of clearance and suspension or loss of job.When I changed jobs in 2005 I had to agree to a background check, not only did they ask if you had ever been convicted of a felony (acceptable) they asked if you had ever been arrested of even a misdemeanor and NOT been convicted (unacceptable in my opinion), I mean if you're not convicted, you're probably innocent, right? I had to agree to a credit check (what, if I am late paying a few bills I can't do my job?) and of course had to submit to drug screening within 24 hours (they also had you sign an agreement that if after you're hired they find out that you lied about doing drugs or had a poor credit history you would be fired immediately.
Ouch! Talk about signing one's life away. The previous company where I worked had a similar but less restrictive agreement. Basically, one is restricted for 6 months from soliciting clients with whom one has worked or been materially involved for the preceeding 12 months - which is reasonable. We've had a lawyer look at it and it seems to be enforcible. I don't if a 10-yr restriction is valid, unless they argue that one accepted 'in consideration' for employment. Consideration is key in contract law - as in employment contract.The only right I had was to forbid them to contact my current employer. In my job it's highly competitive and there is intellectual property and luckliy my prior employer had failed to have me sign intellectual property or a non-compete. At my new company I had to sign both. Basically it says that I cannot work for another company in this industry for 10 years. I think I can fight that in court, maybe.
I'm not concerned, I'm just amused. And it wasn't just a one-time visit either.Um.... [Dana Carvey's voice] could it be.... via GOOGLE [on some topic you blogged about]?
And if google finds it, then so might the wayback machine at archive.org [which sometimes has a good memory (http://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.physicsforums.com/")]
(On a side note, from its description, this is an interesting program: http://www.cs.odu.edu/~fmccown/research/lazy/warrick.html )
If you are concerned about all of this, then this might help [a little]
It's a condition of employment. If you don't sign, you don't get hired.I don't think I would have signed that.
That won't prevent them from reading the material and forming opinions, and that's where the harm lies.One can still copyright material, removing it from public domain, thus making it illegal to copy, print or redistribute it, depending on what license one uses. If you get fired and the employer uses prints for evidence, sue him :tongue:
:surprised I should be able to view any deleted posts, but they just aren't there anymore.I just noticed that posts 33, 34, and 35 are missing, and #31 and #32 have some weird border (looks like columns) on the left side.
I had responded to Evo's comments about background checks. Oh, oh!! :uhh:
They weren't deleted, they just disappeared - perhaps a corrupted file or db entry.:surprised I should be able to view any deleted posts, but they just aren't there anymore.
I suspect those columns are posts 33, 34 and 35! Well, it may not be obvious, but I'm sure they're hidden in there somewhere...maybe it helps if you know how to read between the lines.I just noticed that posts 33, 34, and 35 are missing, and #31 and #32 have some weird border (looks like columns) on the left side.
Wow that's really quite quantum, how can we be sure that the state we have observed reflects the true nature of the other posts?I suspect those columns are posts 33, 34 and 35! Well, it may not be obvious, but I'm sure they're hidden in there somewhere...maybe it helps if you know how to read between the lines.
:rofl:I suspect those columns are posts 33, 34 and 35! Well, it may not be obvious, but I'm sure they're hidden in there somewhere...maybe it helps if you know how to read between the lines.
No. Zz is #33, and part of it is there surrounding #32.:rofl:
Astronuc, I couldn't have made post #33 because I wasn't online during that time period.