Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Business

Linuxgruven Deorbits 102

Posted by timothy from the you-too-can-be-a-model dept.
An Anonymous Coward writes: "There's a story at Newsforge about some of the weirdness happening at Linuxgruven. Several ex-employees and students are telling what happened to them. It's not pretty." Considering the skeptical reports for months from readers about Linuxgruven's employment practices (and that we had a short story about those as well as one about the recent layoffs), this doesn't come as a complete surprise -- it's still a shame that employees are stuck with empty bank accounts because of management, though.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linuxgruven Disintegrates More

Linuxgruven Disintegrates

Comments Filter:
  • Great, but I've been asked *before even getting interviews* the following question: "Do you have any certifications?" At least some Linux certification from *some* school of some sort would look better than having to say "Well gee, no.. I don't have any" Job market is getting tougher by the day. Yes, certifications *do* help. In some way, they can set you aside from the dorks that think they're network gods because they got their Windows 98 box online through their Red Hat box.
  • *LINUX* certifications overrated?

    i'd say 99.99% of ANY computer-science-inspired certifications are overrated.

    the only exceptions i know of are the cisco CCIE and a *small* percentage of the targeted software-development tests that force you to solve a specific unpredictable problem requiring pragmatic skills under pressure.

    does anyone *really* think certifications that don't require field-work of some sort to prove yourself are worth anything? don't people take cues from the apprenticeships of the trade skills? it requires *YEARS* to get through their certification efforts.

    this stuff is for resume builders, nothing else. i actually count it against most people i'm interviewing if they have certifications that aren't of the "painful" variety.

    imho, certifications make sense when you're talking about relatively static crafts. for a highly unpredictable and dynamic craft, a certification carries much less weight.

    just my 0.02.

    i'm sure there are plenty that don't agree, and i'm sorry in advance.

    Peter

  • Well, there goes another warning about Linux certification. I've always Linux certifications were overrated.

    Firstly, your second sentence is lacking a verb.

    Clearly you haven't taken the RHCE exam. It's 7 hours long, with two 2.5 hour hands-on tests (one of which consists of no less than FOUR, randomly chosen, meltdown situations), and only a 1-hour multiple choice part. (the extra hour is a provided lunch :)

    There's a reason there are only 1200 RHCE's- The >80% failure rate. You're welcome to take a shot at it. Only then will you be qualified to talk about the value of Linux certifications.
  • For three years I've been building and running a mixed linux/nt/nw ethernet/token ring network. I just submitted my beautifully crafted resume. The response? You look brilliant, where's your certs? The next day I went & took A+ & network+ - they want paper, I'll give 'em paper. . .

  • Here's a clue... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    If your company name is ripped off from a 10 year old bumper sticker, you're fucked.
  • Just another bunch of crooks "training" eager, unsophisticated people for great jobs that don't really exist. Scams like this are so old, they used to be advertised on matchbook covers. The intended clientele was so stupid the postal service required that the notice "Do Not The Mail Matches" accompany the pitch. Can you say "FTC investigation?" Can you say "Class action suit?" Can you say "If something sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't?" Sure you can. I knew you could.

  • Classic Fraud (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This is one of the oldest scams in the book! It obeys the classic pattern:

    1) media hype gives people the impression of there being strong demand for a certain type of skilled labor.

    2) the perpetrator advertises an employement opportunity avaliable to individuals who are "successfully able to complete a training program".

    3) individuals familiar enough with the skill to be interested, but not familiar enough to immediatly see that the "training program" is of inferior quality, sign up and pay up.

    4) "successful completion" of the traning program is actually close to impossible, and is not dependant upon what is actually presented in training. In other words, if "successful completion" means passing a test, then the test contains many things that were not presented in class. This is done to keep the ratio of students to employees at a profitable level.

    5) individuals who do manage to complete the program, instead of being given the job they anticipated, are put right back into the classroom as teachers. Individuals who fail walk away simply thinking that they are inadiquate for the job.

    6) the supply of students (who are paying all the company's bills) begins to run dry, or people (including employees) start to become suspicous.

    7) the business suddenly shuts down, citing a bad business environment, market forces, too many expenses, bad management, etc. The owners present themselves as being in the same boat as the employees, and walk away with a little something in their pockets.

    I read about scams like this in a criminal psych class I audited, and this one could have come streight out of a text-book. Scams like this are particularly insidious because they exploit the hopes and ambitions of people who want to be successful and would be successful if they were given the right opportunity.

    The thing is that the instances I read about never involved IT or computers, but instead involved the "beauty industry/cosmotolgy" and sales-training. It's really quite interesting to see that the scams have changed their hook but that they still keep the essential pattern.

    It is not interesting, however that it looks like the guys are going to get away with it. It is quite reprehensible, in fact, that we sit here and complain about managers being evil etc., given that the proper action would be to encouage that a criminal investigation into their actions be conducted.
  • Before condemning the management team of Linuxgruven, did anyone ever consider getting the facts? For example, they were in those roles less than two months!!!! The CFO was in his position for two hours!!! They inherited the "train-to-hire" program and wanted to discontinue it, but due to the founders (one of which still served as President- the only position with true legal power), they could not do such. If I remember correctly, one of the executives had his own expense check for $15000 bounce. This does not appear to be the fault of these guys. If anything, they were set-up to take a fall. The founders built that company and the executives hired tried to fix it. However, by that time, there was little that could be done.

  • New poll (Score:5)

    by volsung ( 378 ) <stan@mtrr.org> on Monday March 19, 2001 @04:31AM (#354614)
    Rather than go through the same old arguments again, we should just take a poll and get on with life.

    Linuxgruven's business failure means:

    1. Linux sucks.
    2. Open source sucks.
    3. IT certifications sucks.
    4. Linuxgruven's management sucks.
    5. Dot-com startups suck.
    6. People who will pay an employer $2500 for a possible job suck.
    7. CowboyNeal sucks.

  • Posted by hardway:

    I am a working stiff and have been at that level all my life. I do have a college degree in management with a minor in electronics, but I have been more technical in my job. I have always thought that there were two points of view. One, management is her to give me what I need to do my job. Two, you take a care of the company and the company takes care of you. Most manager put the company first and do not take care of their employess. Its is a balance, but I believe the managers job is to take care of thier workers. Training, support, resources and expect what can be done and not always push for more. Favoratisium will ruin it all and there is always a choosen one, if you can't treat everyone the same because someone it smarter or better or there life is there job and they work to live, then the team starts to breakdown. Like Billy Jean said fair is fair, how in a society, where the first rule is it's all about me, can anyone really work together?
  • Posted by lazarus142:

    OT III
    [Operating Thetan Level 3]

    BODY THETANS

    by L. Ron Hubbard

    The head of the Galactic Federation (76 planets around larger stars visible from here) (founded 95,000,000 years ago, very space opera) solved overpopulation (250 billion or so per planet - 178 billion on average) by mass implanting..

    He caused people to be brought to Teegeeack (Earth) and put an H-Bomb on the principal volcanos (incident II) and then the Pacific area ones were taken - in boxes to Hawaii and the Atlantic area ones to Las Palmas and there "packaged".

    His name was Xenu. He used renegades. Various misleading data by means of circuits etc was placed in the unplants. When through with his crime loyal officers (to the people) captured him after six years of battle and put him in an electronic mountain trap where he still is. "They" are gone. The place (Confederation) has since been a desert.

    The length and brutality of it all was such that this Confederation never recovered. The implant is calculated to kill (by pneumonia etc) anyone who attempts to solve it. This liability has been dispensed with by my tech development. One can freewheel through the implant and die unless it is approached as precisely outlined. The "freewheel" (auto-running on and on) lasts too long, denies sleep etc and one dies. So be careful to do only Incidents I and II as given and not plow around and fail to complete one thetan at a time.

    In December 1967 1 know someone had to take the plunge. I did and emerged very knocked out, but alive. Probably the only one ever to do so in 75,000,000 years. I have all the data now, but only that given here is needful.

    One's body is a mass of individual thetans stuck to oneself or to the body.

    One has to clean them off by running incident II and Incident I. It is a long job, requiring care, patience and good auditing.

    You are running beings. They respond like any preclear. Some large, some small.

    Thetans believed they were one. This is the primary error.

    Good luck.

    For the purpose of clarity, by BODY THETAN is meant a thetan who is stuck to another thetan or body but is not in control.

    A THETAN is, of course, a Scientology word using the Greek theta which was the Greek symbol for thought or life. An individual being such as a man is a thetan, he is not a body and he does not think because he has a brain.

    A CLUSTER is a group of body thetans crushed or hold together by some mutual bad experience.

    Character of Body Thetans

    Body Thetans are just Thetans. When you get rid of one he goes off and possibly squares around, picks up a body or admires daisies. He is in fact a sort of cleared Being. He cannot fail to eventually, if not at once, regain many abilities. Many have been asleep for the last 75,000,000 years. A body Thetan responds to any process any Thetan responds to.

    Some body Thetans are suppressive. A suppressive is out of valence in R6. He is in valence in Incident I almost always.

    One can't run a human being on these two incidents since human beings are composites and would not be able to run the lot. Aside from that, non-clears are way below awareness required to even find these Incidents.

    Huge amounts of charge have already been removed from the case and the body thetans by Clearing and OT I and OT II to say nothing of engrams and lower grades.

    Awareness is proportional to the charge removed from the case.

    Although a human is a composite being there is only one I (that is you) who runs things.

    Body thetans just hold one back.

    You will continue to be you. You, inside, can of course separate out body thetans and so solo auditing is the answer. How good do you have to be to run body thetans off? Well, if you didn't skip your grades, Clearing and OT II particularly, you. should be able to'command body thetans easily.
  • Posted by HedgeCore:

    It's sad that the open-source spirit doesn't remain when it comes to business. Expensive certifications that essentially mean nothing take precedence over experience and knowhow... Damn the man.
  • I replied to the 45K a year job offer about 2 months ago. Called and got an interview the next day. I knew something was fishy the second I saw the application. There was a line for "Fees".

    Once I started talking to the guy and he asked me a few questions he started pushing all these classes and tests I have to take. Then gave me the stupid networking exam. "What does HTTP stand for?" and "What does FTP mean?"

    What's really sad, the guy interviewing me didn't even know what slashdot.org was.
  • Well, after reading the article this is one of the few moments I feel good about the german system. There is a mandatory unempoyment insurance for every employee. If your company declares bankruptcy you
    get all the money the company owns you, up to 3 salaries. If you get unemployed without fault you can get 60% of your last income for 6 months. And of course you will never lose your full health insurance (even if you live from welfare).
  • Very interesting thoughts. Almost as if they had come directly from the ex-CEO himself. Fortunately for the ex-CEO, he knew that he had no legal responsibility as CEO. Another interesting thing to note is that the CTO had no Linux experience. That would seem to make it difficult to make technology decisions regarding Linux.

    The management claims that they were trying to change the train-to-hire program, yet I have emails of them defending the train-to-hire program as recently as February 28. Even after they realized the money was not available to pay the employees, it took them several days to resign. I'm very curious to find out why that is, but they have been silent on that issue. (They've been rather vocal on other issues.)
  • Interesting theory, except for the fact that the person who made the statement (Kara) was not conned into giving up money to get hired -- she was hired because she already knew Linux. She was instead conned into thinking that the company was a legitimate Linux services company.

    I think the point she was making is that the owners were not intending to screw their employees, but were not terribly experienced at business, and have to suffer for their decisions, including the executive managers they chose.
  • The CFO was someone that the CEO had previously worked with. On Monday or Tuesday, he looked at the books and realized that there wasn't enough money to make payroll for the preceeding Friday.

    The CEO apparently tried to solve the problem (not clear on this part) and on Wednesday or Thursday sent an email to all the employees saying that the owners were going to step back and that some people had been promoted. (No mention of financial difficulties.) Then on Thursday night the management all resigned. It is unclear what happened between the email and the resignations, and nobody's talking.
  • Read what he said - you have to be owed three months back pay before you can get the "3 salaries" severance check. It's not a _extra_ three months pay. (The UK has a similar system).
    And yes, almost certainly the government have already thought of your "go bust every six months" scheme and made sure it won't work.

    --

  • Another warning against Linux certification (Score:5)

    by PizzaMan ( 6633 ) on Monday March 19, 2001 @03:22AM (#354624)
    Well, there goes another warning about Linux certification. I've always Linux certifications were overrated.

    The way I figure, if you want to learn Linux and networking, you can set up a 2 node network for under $200, if you look through the classifieds and garage sales. Another $100 for documentation and $20 for network cards and $50 for a printer, and you can learn more hands on with your small home network than you ever could in a classroom.

    If I were a hiring manager, any wannabee Linux administrator that did not have a network at home would get a big strike against them. If you can't spend a few hundred and some time at home to polish your skills, how are you going to stay current in the office?
  • Any company that promises people a ceretain mount of money for just passing a test is a stupid company. I seen people been hired who have said they are experts at something becuase they took a class in that subject. First thing be very wary of these people if they do not have proof that they applied the knowledge that they acquired.
    Back to this particular company. This company feed on the dreams these peole and suckered them out of their money. Yes they should have been wary but this guy needs to be brought up on criminal charges.
  • > Why can't employers just treat their employees fairly? Is there some built-in tendency of managers to be flaming a**holes? Must one be a flaming a**hole to
    > become a manager?
    >
    > Seriously, I'd like to know. I'm interested in becoming management.

    My two cents, based on the fact I've worked both for managers who were great & those who were fully toilet-paper compliant. And my impression is being an asshole is the easier way to do things.

    Think about it: the good managers -- the ones who not only deliver to both their bosses & to their subordinates -- but also are available at a moment's notice to put out fires are also the ones who put in the hours. They know the company depends on their doing a job, & do it.

    Meanwhile, the others feel that their job is nothing more than making sure that their subordinates do the work. And believe that failing to put their name on any successful project they are in the least connected with is a Career Limiting Move.

    This latter course can be more successful over the short run -- or if the person runs their own small business -- than the former. (Or if the manager works in a call center.) But eventually that kind of manager has to jump ship one step ahead of her/his karma catching up with her/him. (Or, then again, when it does.) And eventually, unless the asshole comes into a windfall & can retire, even this strategy of cut-&-running will be a sign to future employers.

    At least this is what I tell myself when I wonder what has become of former supervisors . . .

    Geoff
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • What is a computer-illiterate boss doing hiring technical staff?
  • Being in the real world, unfortunetly.

    I'm not happy about it, but it is common to have non-computer-literate bosses hiring IT/other tech folks (IT is what I know, so I'll talk mostly about it, but I don't doubt that similar issues happen throughout all of techdom)

    Sometimes this is because someone got promoted to their level of incompetance, but sometimes it's just because you've got a small business that needs IT (not just tech businesses, these days) but the person who runs it is a business person, *not* a tech. The company does need people with business heads, and they aren't yet big enough to have more than one tech, hence technically-unclued (yet well meaning and otherwise intelligent) folks end up having to hire techs (or a tech, at least).

    It's just life.

  • .. to give them a bit of money now, and you'll get rich in the near future, be *extremely* skeptical. This looks like a standard con-man pyramid-scheme thing to me. Give us your 2.5k$, and you'll get it all back after having been employed for a year, oh yeah, and you'll earn $45k a year too. oh yeah, and scantily clad females will start flocking to your doorstep, begging you to go out with them.

    Seriously. If someone presents you with an "employment opportunity" which has the sligth drawback that you need to give them a bit of their money, whereafter youll get filthy rich in a hurry has a 99% chanse of being a scam. Just sad to see that the conmen has arrived in Linux-country too. Walk carefully friends !

  • I've been doing Linux at home since 1992 and at work since 1994. I've set up hundreds of Linux machines, and dozens of BSD and Solaris machines, and networked them together with Cisco routers I've set up. So my basic reaction is....

    fuck certification!

    I've had maybe a couple times where recruiters have asked me if I had any certification. My response has been "why would I need that?". Their counter-reponse has been "well, with your experience, I guess you don't".

    Unfortunately, people trying to enter into the job market aren't in a position to bargain with experience. And nearly all recruiters and a large number of managers have no ability to figure out how smart (and thus how quickly they can learn on the job) a candidate is. Certification is just a cheap way to evaluate someone.

    Consider the MCSE. For someone with zero experience, it's virtually worthless, anyway. For someone with 5 or more years experience it's virtually worthless, anyway. For people in between, where experience might not mean they have done everything enough, yet, it might mean something, but you can be sure management will not pay extra for it. If you have some experience and get an MCSE or other certification, about the best you can hope to get is more recruiters calling you, and potentially a better job offer from somewhere else.

    I've had a chance to actually talk with a couple recruiters openly about this, and even they agree that certification generally affects salary only for people around 1 to 4 years experience, and they end up getting about what someone with 1 more year experience would get, and then only in fewer than half the jobs.

    Goto paragraph 2.

  • Good to see the moderators are in full swing!

    Seriously the parent comment is anything but redundant!

  • Nope, I don't feel sorry for them. If you knew me, you'd know the tone I'd say this in. Such a tone is difficult to relay in text quotes ;-) Add a bit of dry sarcasm, and perhaps you'll hear it.

    Essentially, it's just business, and as co-founders they have to take responsibility for their actions, such as appointing the management. I don't feel sorry for that. As for the -- comment, that's a jab at the resigning management. At least 3 of whom (CEO, CTO, COO) were employees already in similar roles for months (and in one case, a year) and were fully aware of the business plan. I don't feel sorry for them either. They made their own decisions, just like the co-founders. Only difference between the two in this situation is, the execs got to resign and relinquish their responsibility to the situation back to the co-founders and start over (announce a new plan).
  • Please. Don't degrade computer science by saying these are 'computer science-related' certifications. They have nothing at all to do with computer science.

    Certifications are, in some cases, reasonable to expect on a resume. You might expect your DBA to be certified on Oracle, if that's what he has to run.

    It's doubtful that a serious company would ditch an applicant with several years of real experience simply because they don't have the certification. In fact, a serious company would actually say 'we'll hire you, but you have to agree to get your certification once hired. We'll pay for it'
  • I'm not sure what you mean.

    Do you mean you quizz them on certifications they have to see if they know anything, or that you require certifications even if they claim to have experience?
  • Because CS isn't about networking, or the technology, it's about algorithms and programming.

    CS has basically nothing to do with network admin. It's ignorance on the part of many cmopanies that they require CS degrees for every type of technical job.

    Or to boot, most good adminst I've met with degrees have degrees in non-computer related fields. One had a masters in Archaeology, the other had a degree in pharmaceutical chemistry, and yet another had a degree in biology.

  • Well.. I'm sorry.. but... (Score:3)

    by mindstrm ( 20013 ) on Monday March 19, 2001 @03:37AM (#354637)
    People have to take some blame for this. Not every employer can be trusted; not every business model is sound. Did anyone signing on with them ask about their funding? Stability? Did anyone check otu the qualifications of the managemetn? CFO?

    It strikes nobody as odd that you should have to pay thousands of dollars to qualify to apply for the job?

    And if it were me, I'd be out the door the second a single check bounced, based on past experience. With proper accounting, a company will NEVER, EVER bounce checks. I'd rather they didn't pay me on time than bounce a check.
  • Well, count yourself lucky because you dont want to have such an employer. If they make hiring decisions like that they wont be making other decisions very well either.

    Most certifications are worthless as a measure of knowledge. I could cram-train a reasonably bright 10 year old or a semi active grandma with no computer experience until they can take an MCSE in a week, because you dont have to know anything about operating systems to pass those tests. You just need to know how to answer the questions.

    The smarter employers use their technical staff to hold a technical employment interview with applicants, because while certifications are worthless someone in the field can usually cut through the BS pretty fast and get an accurate picture of the potential new employees skills and experience.
  • Oh, my god, you're right! And looking around, you'll see those web developers using NT going down all around too! Oh, and CNet and Motorola, and KPMG, and aaaa, Compaq canning 5000!

    Oh, and look at those proprietary office suite developers on Windows! Not to mention the filemanager developers and um... well, pretty much everyone. Its not the opensource, its computers! Computers cannot be a viable buisness model! We must stop this madness before more people start thinking that a successful buisness model can involve computers!

    Or, umm... maybe most the lows can be ascribed to market slowdown, and exceptions like Linuxgruven... well, when you can put your buisness plan in front of a hundred people and fifty of them will say 'Pyramid scheme', maybe its time to think again... or start spamming Make Money Fast.

    Anyone thinking they can sell opensource software and have a company based around that is an idiot. But so is anyone trying to base a company around selling proprietary mass consumer software (except for wear-out software like games), because they'll face unbeatable competition in price from opensource software and unbeatable competition in marketing from Microsoft.

    Most Linux related companies realize this, and their buisness models do not include actually selling software.

    Being competetive in other markets through easily adaptable low cost opensource software works (VA, most embedded systems developers, etc). But you still have to beat your competition, which means it just gives you an edge, and slacking aint gonna work.

    Building a buisness around what any interested person can do in their spare time isnt going to work either. That means, dont base your buisness model around making a distribution (several distribution vendors would fall under that. Others dont; RedHat isnt in the _buisness_ of making a distribtion, Redhat uses its distribution to attain other goals). It also has some bearing for those web companies...

    Services can work, but services are services. You have a good sales force/hype machine, you provide something people want, and you do it cheaper and better. Then you have a chance. Otherwise you make a small profit when times are good and you're gone when the market slows down.

    Commercial viability has nothing to do with free software. Commerical viability is about having a buisness plan and free software having the right place in that buisness plan. Not as a moneymaker, but as a costsaver and a competetive platform.
  • Cisco is fairly good too, with a lot of practical experience needed. But the useful certifications are easily counted, I think.

    We almost always conduct technical interviews separate from the HR interviews. With unskilled people it helps decide if they're easily trainable and able to study on their own without having a babysitter for 6 months (when hiring untrained people we want someone with deep and genuine interest in the field), and with the experienced ones it helps to decide what work to steer onto them when they join the company. Or even to suggest they apply for a job at some other department in the company, where we know they need people (when I got hired I actually had representatives from 3 departments at my interview).

  • Welcome to the real world! (Score:4)

    by Rocketboy ( 32971 ) on Monday March 19, 2001 @06:32AM (#354641)
    "It's just James' and Mike's dumb luck that as co-founders, they're the ones left responsible for their business decisions and results -- including those of the executives that they appointed -- and they can't just resign and announce a new plan."

    For me, this sentence neatly sums up all of the inspired entertainment the entire ".com" phenomenon has provided over the past two years. Honestly: Linuxgruven comes up with a business model straight out of "The Carpetbaggers", innocent 20-somethings fall for it in droves, then the wounded themselves feel sorry for the con artists who started the whole thing because the poor babies had to suffer the consequences of their own decisions and actions. The indignity of it all! Friends, geeks, fellow cynics: this is an innocence to be cherished! This is a naievete to be wrapped in silk and put away for special occasions down the road! This is a Kodak moment! :)

  • News for your mindless brain: Every IT-stock nowadays is on an all-time low. This is hardly Linux' fault.

    Well, the fact that every IT stock is low right now isn't Linux's fault but there's a huge difference between the value crashes, to be fair. One year ago, IBM was at 115, now it is at 90. A year ago, Microsoft was at 100, now it is at 55. A year ago, Red Hat was at 60, now it is at under 6! VA Linux is down from 90 to 3! Clearly, the Linux / Open Source stocks have come down *WAY* more than the closed source IBM and Microsoft. Even Sun that has struggled is "only" down from 45 to 18 from one year ago. For some of the less known companies on the OTC list, there's Bluepoint Linux software down from 15 to 0.56 and Linux Wizardy Systems down from 2.5 to 0.06.

  • I think that this situation is pretty much the same as the fate of the dot-bombs. First some people start doing something useful and innovative (web, Linux). Then they start getting media attention, followed soon after by droves of worthless money-chasers who believe they can make a quick buck off the "new thing."

    I saw one reference to "carpetbaggers." I think that is right on point. These folks are trying to turn Linux into a get-rich-quick scheme -- they are not part of the Linux community, and we should be careful not to describe them as such.

    I don't have anything against companies making money from Free Software, but then I am not particularly for them either. Hopefully the whole shake-out (both in the dot-com sector, and the Linux sector) will soon be over. I don't think the shakeout is particularly important, since those who actually care about doing something new and useful are free to still spend their time doing it -- that is what Linux is about.

    This does not hurt the Linux community, because these carpetbaggers have nothing to do with the Linux community (never mind what the media tells you). The Linux community is not about stock options.

    Steve

  • That's why a system like that would never work here in the US. People in the US only think for themselves and how they can rip off the government. "take away their money and give it to me" is the mantra of the american. Everybody hates government waste except when those tax dollars end up in their pockets.

    Ask any farmer or rancher what they think of welfare and they'll tell you how those lazy asses should gett off their butt and get a job, ask them to give up subsidies and they'll shoot you where you stand.

    Funny how different the europeans seem to be then us. It always surprises me.
  • > I don't know whether that's just coincidence or not -- most people don't live long enough to run enough companies to draw statistically valid conclusions

    Depends on just how good they are at ruining companies. Apparently, these guys just needed slightly over a year. With only a year needed to wreck a company, you can wreck lots of them in a career...

  • Here unemployment only takes effect AFTER you are "offically" laid off. As of yet there are no "official" layoffs. And unemployment is typically 1/2 or less of what you made. Sometimes keeps you off the streets, and the electricity turned on.
    If the company bankrupts you're fscked. Forget any back salary. The corp BK's and the management runs off to the next corporation to rape and pilfer.
  • Uh, it actually sound pretty normal. What's up with the legal battle? What went wrong?

    Later,
    ErikZ
  • When I passed my RHCE exam the other week I asked how many there were. I was number 2,406.

    Good exam though...
  • As a computer-illiterate boss,

    You should find another line of work. You are the problem, not the solution.

    --
  • I must congratulate you with a nice written piece of troll. Let me just refute you point by point :-)

    "How long is this insanity going to continue? How many lives and careers are going to be destroyed or derailed? It's time to realize that Linux is not commercially viable."

    Insanity, _lives_?? :*) What on earth are you talking about? Did you know that 50% of _all_ startups fail statistically?

    "Technically, Linux is perfectly usable and in many areas quite good. While personally I prefer FreeBSD, I can respect anyone's decision to use Linux. On the other hand, I cannot respect someone's decision to try to make money off of Linux."

    Why not? If it is perfectly good, why not use Linux to do the job? Or FreeBSD for that matter..

    "Company after company is going down in flames, yet mindless drones continually parrot the virtues of open source as a business model. Stop the FUD! Open source methodologies may contribute to the quality of software, but the have been proven unreliable as a way to get bacon on the table."

    Watching TV is mindless. Discussions are only mindless if repetitive. This is usually not the case, except for trolls like you. And btw, stopping the FUD you can do yourself :-)

    If there is a market for Linux, it will thrive. However, you are right that people shouldn't jump on the next over-hyped bandwagon.

    "VALinux's stock is at an all-time low, SUSE was forced to close North American operations, now Linuxgruven is falling to pieces. Real people work at these companies; real people who have real needs and expenses. It was wrong to sell them a lie and fool them into investing in careers in open source."

    News for your mindless brain: Every IT-stock nowadays is on an all-time low. This is hardly Linux' fault. Also, investors decide what to buy. That is their job, and a reason they can sell stocks for profit or loss. This is how the stockmarket is *supposed* to work. Nothing wrong in that.

    "I'm sorry if I sound angry or heated, but I am infuriated by the treatment that many poor programmers have received from open source companies."

    Within this statement lies the secret hint that you are truly a troll: poor programmers. Even without that, people decide where they belong. I see no problem in believing in a higher good of sharing source code, even for companies. In fact, there are many benefits for companies to share code.

    How about a more objective study between open source companies and ordinary IT-companies? Alas, you cannot compare freedom with money. And you shouldn't rely on a crappy businessplan or follow CEOs into the blazing fire. If you do, do it with a smile.

    - Steeltoe

  • Aye (Score:1)

    by Steeltoe ( 98226 )
    Yes, I see your point. I believe it is easily explainable though, and that it has nothing to do with Linux as an operating system or "open source". Those who jumped on that bandwagon _knew_ what they did (or should have), and I bet most of them has alot of fun (and many of them still do). So basically, this is not good enough for an argument against Linux in business since you might as well argument against anything "new"! The industry took a big impact, that's all. Naturally the newer and more experimental stocks will be bloodily cut into tiny shreds of their previous overblown values. I'm actually glad people are beginning to sober up after their ventures onto the stockmarket.

    - Steeltoe
  • It's not quite a pyramid scheme, but it definitely smells of a scheme. In BC, the 'legitimate' places that 'hire' extras for the movie industry are not allowed to charge for the process. The expectation is that they'll get the money from their percentage of your paycheque.

    If they're not going to be getting enough from your paycheque to cover the employee startup expenses, then chances are that you're not going to be getting much work.

    I'd say much the same thing about their startup scheme. If they're not going to be getting enough work out of you to cover a $2,500 course, chances are that they're not getting work.

    This thing smells of scam from day one. Had I seen that setup, I would have walked away on principle. The latest incident (new exec comes in, followed by mass resignations), sounds like a legal smokescreen (now who are you going to sue?).

    My suggestion s to start talking to your favorite lawyer, and keep dibs on the executive (both old and new). I would expect that most of the money is traveling with the old exec.

    As for the founder being a good meaning guy who just got blindsided by some nasty management, he was in on the design of the company and it's business plan, he whould have helped hire the initial exec and management. He had (or should have had) a general, or even a specific understanding of what was being promised to studends and how that coincided (didn't) with the 'real' contracts that they were getting.

    Now, it's possible that the founders and exec were really well-meaning, and didn't have the slightest idea as to how bad things were and how their trainees were gonna get hosed -- if that was so, then I would talk about them being extremely stupid and/or culpably negligent. In either case, they should not only be left holding the bag, they should have it stuck over their heads before they're hung out to dry.
    --

  • Apart from the fact that you should not be managing technical people let alone interviewing them, if you are Technically Illiterate, why do you assume a Certificate shows that a candidate knows what they are doing? All it shows is that the candidate could sit through a course and get the questions right at the end of it. That sort of learning is usually of the parrot type, I.E, listen, store but not understand, reiterate.

    If you want proof of someones knowledge, ask them questions about their supposed area of knowledge. If you are technically illiterate, have someone who does know their stuff to ask the questions. Get them to evaluate the answers. The very best way is to set them theoritical situations and ask them what their course of action would be. Whatever you do though, don't look at a pretty peice of paper and think they know what's what.

    For someone with some very good ideas, take a look at Joel on Software [editthispage.com]
  • I first learned Unix on BSD and Linux several years ago. I am grateful for Linux because it helped me get into the sysadmin field. But I have never worked with Linux on the job, just IRIX, HP-UX and Solaris.

    The professional Unixes is where the $$$ is at. You don't need certifications, in fact they are frowned upon. A decent Solaris admin in California can make at least $70/hr contracting even in this bad economy. I am sure there are some Linux gurus making buttloads more, but they are the exception.

  • "We're currently taking inventory of our current resources, assets and equipment," they wrote.

    Translation: We are running like hell for the Mexican border

    "As soon as we get a clearer picture of what we have, we'll know when you can expect to get your money."

    Translation: We are counting the cash as we go, you can expect to see your money when the Pope gets that sex change operation and shacks up with a black man named Fred.

    "We are doing everything we can to get you your money as quickly as possible"

    Translation: We are now spending your money as quickly as we can... my my, what $10 will get you with an underage girl in Tijuana!


  • Hey! That's unfair.. I'm 22.
  • I'm just going to randomly and for no reason mention the name of a mainframe manufacturer and then a scripting language for C programs.

    Pyramid.
    Scheme.

    I should probably also mention something that's purportedly born every minute and a verb used to describe a sheep getting shorn...

  • If you used a loan to pay for this... (Score:3)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Monday March 19, 2001 @06:42AM (#354658) Homepage
    If you received Federally-backed financial assistance funds to pay for private career school training, you also can call the Department of Education to report your problem. The toll-free number is (800) MIS-USED, or in the Washington, D.C. area, call 202-205-5770.
    (from the FTC website)
  • Look, I really don't think it helps to blame "management" all the time...

    If you want a way to sweep the "management problem" out of the way, there's one in Philip Greenspun's writings (e.g. in Philip and Alex's Guide to Web Design (or the like)... etc.)

    In short, it's based on autonomous "Gangs of 5" - each with an area of specialisation; project management changes hands with the project.

    In Swedish, the term for Employer is which - to me - looks like "work giver"

    For the "Groups of 5" (my term for Greenspun's project teams), the market seemed to be (at the time, at least) favoring the seller of services.

    Now that things have changed, maybe it's not as clearly the employer's doing alone...

    What I'm saying, however, is that one is free to form such a group & take responsibility for one's (group's) own management issue.

    Sales & marketing might be the more challenging, at least in some markets.

  • I feel sorry for the people who aren't getting jobs, and for Linuxgruven for having to try and get something new going in an economic downturn, but that's the breaks.

    Personally, it looks like they were offering to employ people who gave them cash...that's unconscienable, if not outright illegal.

    Note on the webpage that several "exec types" are no longer employed by linuxgruven.

    I really. really like Linux. I hope that Linux can succeed, and these people fess up if "bribes" were taken.

  • This shows an important lesson I was taught while working with my university's career center. When you are applying/interviewing for a job, you should be sure to know as much as you can about the company. It is not only impressive during the interview, but it is important for deciding if you are a proper match for the company.

    When you look to take a job at a company, you should understand their business model. A company that gets most of its revenue from prospective employees is much like a pyramid scheme. The growth and references continue to expand the employee base, and new employees fund existing employees salaries. But if there is no additional revenue stream, in this case, no clients EVER during the life of the company, then the pyramid will crash like a deck of cards under its own weight.

    It is not easy to see that your job is going to last, provide promotions, etc. But it is easy to see the jobs that are near certain dead ends. And like many slashdot readers, I could see this one from months away.
  • I don't know... I've heard some mighty strange things about Germany. Like, you need a permit for just about everything; imagine the almost laughable set of permits you need to do anything in Berkeley, CA, and then imagine many, many more.

    Your "start a consulting business and go broke in six months" scam probably wouldn't work, but not because they'd be wise to you and not give you money at the end. Instead, it would probably take you far longer than six months to get the nescessary permits in the first place.

    Of course, my information could be all wrong. But in general, the ancedotes I hear describe a Germany where the government strictly regulates far more of the average citizens everyday life than would be imaginable here in the States.
  • From Linux Magazine, December 2000 , page 65:

    Linuxgruven. Global Linux Support. Anywhere. Anytime

    888-443-9080

  • And a college degree would have stopped this happening how? Or how does having a college degree automatically give you a broader range of skills than someone who has spent 3 or 4 years doing actual IT work? Not having a degree has never been a disadvantage to me, except that I can never work in the USA or Switzerland - something I don't particularly care about anyway.

  • These folks are trying to turn Linux into a get-rich-quick scheme -- they are not part of the Linux community, and we should be careful not to describe them as such.

    For the record, LG's former CEO, Mathew Porter is the chair of the St. Louis Linux Users Group [stllinux.org]. From what I've been told, he does this voluntarily and did it before he was associated with LG. I'm not sure if that makes matters better or worse. Since I run a network admin type business in St. Louis and I only recently began to attend my local LUG meetings, this affects me indirectly. Right now I'm just sitting back and waiting for all precincts to report before I decide how I feel about all of this.

  • "
    I think the main problem with a lot of managers simply stems from the fact that they were promoted into that position from being a normal worker. This means they have no experience or education in the field of management.
    "

    ...and the problem with the other half is they have no experience of being a normal worker.

  • I think the main problem with a lot of managers simply stems from the fact that they were promoted into that position from being a normal worker. This means they have no experience or education in the field of management.

    I'm certainly not a professional in the field by any means, but I took a course in Organizational Behaviour myself, and I can tell you for certain that it is a complex subject that every manager (potential and current) should stay current on. It will stop a lot of this "he's an asshole -- wait, no he is" kind of bickering. That type of argument doesn't work, and you'll notice that if you apply Organizational Behaviour concepts well you should be able to use virtually anyone's skills in some job (most people who bother to apply for jobs do want to work, really, just some aren't being motivated properly / are misplaced in the current job).

    This book [amazon.com] seems like a good place to start (sorry, I don't remember the exact title of the book I used in College)...
  • What I want to know is, why do people fall for stuff like this? You would think that having to pay money to apply for a job would set off some warning bells for some. It's like gambling at the track, except that it costs more and takes months to find out that you have lost.

    It think the whole affair was a scam.

  • Did you know that the CEO, CTO, and one of the VPs were in those positions less than two months? They inherited the "train-to-hire" program that was part of Linuxgruven from the beginning. The CFO worked for the company less than two hours. It is pretty safe to assume that these people were set-up.

    Very possibly. That's why I said I want to see what they do next.
    Who hired the CFO? Was it the founders alone, or did the CEO help.
  • Could someone please post the names of the the CTO, COO and CFO of Linuxgruven? I'd like to see where they go next. It's been a little hobby of mine for about a decade or so. It seems to me that the public has a pretty short memory or else an awful lot of tolerance for screwups at the executive level. It seems that some executives destroy company after company after company. I don't know whether that's just coincidence or not -- most people don't live long enough to run enough companies to draw statistically valid conclusions without a *lot* of data, which I haven't gathered yet. Anyway -- this information doesn't seem to exist on their web site (not even in google's cache) and I can't find any mention of these people in newsgroups or on the web...

  • Re:Arent there any mandatory insurances in the US? (Score:5)

    by peccary ( 161168 ) on Monday March 19, 2001 @05:19AM (#354671)
    That would be so great! I could live on 60% of my income for 6 months, no problem. Plus a "3 salaries" severance check -- I could go to Jamaica, hang out on the beach for a couple of months, smoke pot every day, get a great tan, then go back to work.
    In fact, I could set up a company, hire my buddies, work for six months, go bankrupt, then six months later, one of them could set up a contracting company, hire me for six months, go bankrupt, then one of my other budz could set up the company... Man! we could do that for ages!
    Where can I sign up? Oh, do we have to speak German?
  • Reminds me of a nasty experience I suffered at a careers fair in the UK last year.

    At this fair around a dozen comapnies were hiring. One of them was a current user of the OS I had 10 years experience with. They refused my application, even though I knew the system inside-out, because I didn't have an MSCE, even though the position didn't involve Microsoft software.

    It was the closest I had ever come to punching someone!

  • The current employer is the only one that I've seen that gives tests to all prospective employees.

    I've atteneded a number of interviews in the past where it has been obvious that the interviewer had little (if any) technical knowledge. Some were just laughable - the one on RAID was particularly hillarious, with the interviewer knowing nothing more about RAID than what it stood for.

    I've also suffered at a previous workplace by not being involved in the hiring process myself when new staff were required. Two or three times we ended up hiring people who were utterly hopeless, and it later transpired that only HR were involved in the interview.

    As for certifications, I had one that did count, Certified Banyan Engineer, a certification that required a lot of study and practical expreience to pass. Unfortunatly Banyan is virtually no more, and my certification lapsed around a year ago.

  • Probably the same computer illiterate management responsible for installing Windows NT, back in the days of version 3.5x.
  • Yeah, maybe under "Other Qualifications" people should start listing their slashdot user number.
  • I beg to differ with this. Certificates, and sometimes even diplomas, don't mean squat. I know someone with a degree in the computer field who can't do a darn thing that he claims to know how to do. Me, with world experience and self-taught (in the computer area at least) am much more competent this this guy. And then he bitches when he isn't allowed to do certain tasks..he's not very competent and we all know it. He shows no inclination to learn anything on his own, either. While I have a library of books and reference manuals to help myself, he wants it all given to him on a platter. I admit, when I have exhausted my book and online resources, I ask the sys admin, but he doesn't even *try* to learn anything on his own. It's very frustrating. I am tired of getting blamed by him for being competent and having more 'privileges' when I work my butt to get the knowledge I have. Luckily, my boss knows the real value of self-taught people, and recognizes someone who is willing to do what it takes to get the knowledge they need to get the job done, and rewards for that.
  • It sounds like the classic case of what happens when people are organizationally impaired.

    I know of a similar company here in the North East USA whose primary executives, including people like the Dean of the school are not programming types at all, but are sales executives. Literally, some are former used car salesmen.

    It's a mess, or as one person described it, "a dog's breakfast".

    In my opinion, it is very easy to see how this sort of thing happened at Linuxgruven. Speculation only, of course, but quite believable, and easy enough to connect the dots.

  • > Literally, some are former used car salesmen.

    So8unds like a place I worked for... And yes, the one doing it was a used-car salesman. Worked there for a grand total of 1.5 months.

    Point was, I was hired to add to their programming crew. They even had someone ivn for a test on Monday... and on Wednesday, they told everyone that the programming was being closed down...

    Next year, when the V.A.T. was raised, they took two and a half months before noticing that their billing software still used the old value. So, they re-employed a former employee (who I still talked to) to fix this. It took him quite a while - the V.A.T. had been hard-coded into the source - and he made much more money than he would have if he had continued working. And no, they didn't have him change it so that the V.A.T. was drawn from a file or database. So, a year later with the next change in V.A.T. - another programmer hired.

    And shortly after that, the firm was bought by its biggest local competitor (whose name had been anathema when I worked there...). And the used-car-salesman was on the streets. I can't remember anyone crying over this.


    --
  • Heh, bullshit. You spend your four years in college spreading yourself thin, while the rest of us spend those four years teaching ourselves stuff that interests us.

    --SARCASM MODE ON--

    Yes, the people in college study things that they have no interest in.

    --SARCASM MODE OFF--

    See, thats the major diference between college nerds, and real geeks. College kids learn stuff because they have to, to get through college. Geeks learn stuff because they want to. A geek will usually go much deeper into a subject than a college nerd, who will tend to do the bare minimum to get through the course.

    That is quite a broad generalization. You're right that some people that go to college waste their time, and barely scrape by. Many people don't take advantage of the experience. But you are deluding yourself if you think that no one does.

    Even so, it is true that many times a bacheloreate education does not provide the depth that individual study might provide, but that is the whole point of it. You are spread thinner because it makes your knowledge more complete, which makes you not only a better communicator, but also gives you the tools to learn things in depth with little trouble.

    So in the time it's taken you to get through college, with your broad but limited "knowledge base" and no real world experience, I've taught myself C, C++, OS theory, Linux, software design, software development lifecycles, software testing, and plenty more besides, all because I wanted too, and with indepth knowledge. All that time i've been working and making money, and have a four year head start in the job market over you.

    Well, I don't want to get into a pissing contest, because that is really not the point of my message. But lets compare just for the heck of it. In my 2 years of college so far, I've learned: advanced mathematics up to differential equations and graph theory, algorithm analysis, C, C++, Perl, Lisp, MATLAB, Electronic Circuits, Logic Design, Programming Language and compiler design, O/S theory, Artificial Intelligence methods (neural networks, decision trees, A* search, etc), Embedded Systems, and Philosophy of mathematics and epistemology.

    I may be a rare exception, but I'd like to think that there are many people that get the same if not more out of their own education. Plus, I still have another 2 years. This summer, I am doing research and getting a part time job developing a front end in Perl for IBM. The following years, I am looking into doing some research at an engineering facility in the area.

    If we both went for the same job, I have no doubt i would score over you on knowledge and experience. So remind me again why college is so important?

    I hope that some of my message has reminded you of the value of a college education, but if not, I will go on.

    A person with a college education has a piece of paper the proves that he is a person with broad knowledge. He has also proven that he can get through the thing, which means alot to an employer.

    A person with a college education is typically eligible for higher paying positions within most companies. Companies like to see the formal education when the decide to promote people, and likewise when they cut people, people without college are typically the first to go. Whether this is fair or not, it is the way of the world.

    Typically, a person with a college education is more effective at communicating than someone without.

    All of this is nice, but its really not my main point. My point was that many people are lured out to the field because the IT field is (was?) dying for people to fill positions, regardless of their experience. If this slowdown continues, these 'emergency' people are going to go away. The job market sees people without college as manual, expendible labor, correct or not. This is why many of you tend to get dicked around by companies when you really don't deserve it.

  • Hmm.. (Score:3)

    by fantom_winter ( 194762 ) on Monday March 19, 2001 @03:55AM (#354680)
    I hate to say this, and most people here may hate me for it, but this is why you get a college education. Sure, you can still get screwed, but it allows you the breadth to have something to fall back on.

    I have a friend that is doing quite well now, without one, but he went through a pretty nasty legal battle with the company he worked for to get where he was today. They had him work for them for 2 years, building their network, and then fired him and hired the person he was training into the same position he was filling.

    Apparently, he was too expensive. At any rate, this is how the business world works. They chew you up and spit you out, if you let them.. Today they will pay you 100k/year to code in Delphi, tomorrow, you are unemployed. The only defense to this is to have a broad knowledge base, which may be possible to get without going to college, but it sure helps.

  • Unethical business practice should not go unpunished.

    And it is not going unpunished. Unfortunately the people being punished (financially) are not those who made the business decisions leading to that punishment

    If anything, the students and employees are being punished for their lack of forsight, and/or belief in something that may have been "too good to be be true".

    But what gets me is when people who work for the company make statements like (paraphrased) "Its not the founders fault that they made bad business decisions"

  • while it sounds like some of these folks got the short end of the stick, they really should know a little about the company they're getting into bed with. if i'm expecting to give a company at least 40 a week, and expecting them to put food on the table (which is inside the house), then there's gotta be a pretty good 2 way trust there, eh? if there's problems, then RUN, RUN. There's lenty of other opportunities out there.
  • I like Delphi.

    With Regards,
    Phillip H. Blanton

  • Actually you get less than you pay for as in Canada the system actually runs a large "profit" which the government subtly moves over to other departments. Of course when a downturn comes they talk about how the system is in peril (ignoring the billions they moved out of the system) and how they'll have to make cutbacks, etc.

  • Get real, your training, and thus your career is your responsibility, so you better take care of it yourself.

  • Why do employees always (usually) believe that managers are assholes? For the same reason that managers always (usually) think that employees are lazy. It's inherent in the relationship.

    The entire reason for management's existence is to increase the productivity of workers. Productivity can be increased in only two ways -- by inducing workers to work harder or by forcing workers to work harder.

    We in the IT industry generally have it pretty good -- inducement is far more pleasurable than domination. But domination always comes into play at some point, somewhere. Furthermore, the threat of domination is omni-present. And that puts great strain on the relationship.

  • Actually, anyone who works professionally in Linux should be in favor of certifications. The entire point of certifications (and professional organizations) is to reduce the number of "qualified" applicants so that those who have the certifications can charge more for their services.

    This isn't to say that certification procedures aren't crap and aren't meaningless -- but to focus upon that piece of the puzzle is to miss to point of what certifictions are really about.
  • Ah, our all-knowing big father already thought of that ..
    Aren't they wise ?
  • And another interesting thing to me at least, is that they started "hiring", what a year ago? So I'l bet they would start having to remberse those 100 employees soon. Going out of buisness is a neat way of avoiding that nightmare.
  • Why can't employers just treat their employees fairly? Is there some built-in tendency of managers to be flaming a**holes? Must one be a flaming a**hole to become a manager?

    Seriously, I'd like to know. I'm interested in becoming management.
  • Ahh, college. So instead of paying $2.5k for training, you spen $10k+ per semester for four years.
  • Duh....

    Why do I say Duh? Because with tech stocks falling across the board it was bound to effect new industries hardest with only the strongest surviving this climate.

    I'd rather look at the companies business plans rather than Linux; Linux is just a free OS, not a business plan unto itself.

    Look at VA, how many things did they venture into? Exactly, they spread themselves across a wide board trying to cover everything.

    Most distro's were made up of geek's, rather than business people who knew where they could make the money, hence you now see many more press releases stating new business people onboard.

    I happen to make a living with Open Source and know others who do and I find your comments laughable and grossly inaccurate.

    What happened with Linuxgruven is nothing to do with Linux or Open Source, how did you draw that paralell?

    StarTux
  • "...its "Train for Hire" program asked students -- many of whom were unemployed and financially threadbare -- to plop down at least $2,500 and take a risk.

    And it was a risk, because there was no guarantee that once the training program was completed, the students would be able to pass the examinations that would qualify them for SAIR certification -- something Linuxgruven said candidates must have in order to get the $45k dream job. One particularly juicy carrot on Linuxgruven's stick was the contract clause that stated students would receive a full refund of course fees after one year of employment."

    Sadly this is the commonest thing in Indian Training Institutes. And it is growing unabated even though more and more students are losing their parents hard earned money.

  • If a Company won't join you in the investment of time and money, you may as well be independent and not an employee as it's YOUR ASS when something doesn't fly.
    I picked up the book for LPI.org certification, and after the first few chapters on finding and reading documentation (man pages, info, how-to's) I haven't picked the book back up. Seems like whatever I try to do, there is the 'README' walking me through the process.
    beyond the readme, there is the source itself, and good programs have great source, where not even being a programmer, comments show you what's going on, and leave a trail of clues to find your solution. I'd like a "paper" saying how good I am at using Linux, and at some point, if I go job hunting I'll shell out the cash and take the LPI.org test to get that certificate to wave around, but for using Linux in my home network and installing/configuring software, I can always rely on the 'MAN'.
    for those who wonder how hard these tests are, go over to ExamCram [examcram.com] and take the practice tests. The LPI test seems focused on Linux, the RedHat test was asking questions about Windows Commands, which has some value if you're looking to use Linux in a Win environment. Personally I don't want to waste and brain space on that "Other" Operating system.
    if you have to pay to get a Job, it's not a money making oportunity, it's Money Draining.
    Employers who won't put their neck on the line for you (invest in training you for example) don't have much confidence in your abilities to learn or don't feel that the training will pay off.
  • Folks, if you want a slightly formal linux certification, then look at brainbench [brainbench.com] . I know all this self-certification thing is a little tough to believe in, but some of the questions that thing asks about linux you just can't answer unless you know your stuff - you just can't look it up in a book. I even ticked the box that said "send me the certs", and d'ya know what ? They got here (UK) a couple of weeks ago. Try it (and tell 'em I sent ya!!).
  • It seems that some executives destroy company after company after company.

    Sadly, this is very true. There seem to be quite a few individuals who run amock, going to a company, "reorganizing" it, changing the "infrastructure", and watching the whole thing self-destruct. It is definitely true among smaller companies. The real problem is that most of this happens through very legal channels, so there is little that can be done about it.

    It gets quite frustrating when the higher-ups become almost untouchable to the point that their failures are overlooked as they take the next job. Really makes me wonder.

  • "People have to take some blame for this. Not every employer can be trusted; not every business model is sound. Did anyone signing on with them ask about their funding? Stability? Did anyone check otu the qualifications of the managemetn? CFO?"

    One of my points that got flamed repeatedly by the rash of consecutive new ./ account number Linuxgruven drones in the early ./ artice was this one: If it sound like it's too good to be true it IS!

    I agree that people should have steered clear. Forking over $2,500 for "training" to get a $45K job isn't a smart thing to do. Especially when SAIR, the organization that administers the SAIR Linux Certification exams strongly disapproved of the training methods.

    However, this does NOT excuse the unethical, and possibly CRIMINAL behavior of Linuxgruven's CEO and management.

    Lat time I checked, it's criminal to commit fraud (charging people for something you don't deliver), and to steal (having employees do work you don't pay them for). Unless somehow that was made legal by the DMCA...


  • I knew nothing about Linuxgruven until the recent /. story about SAIR's disapproval of their training practices. At that time I posted that I thought that the people who thought that they could get a $45K job for just passing a test were setting themselves up, because a company that does that will never make it, and unfortunately, I was right. And you never do want to be right about something like that.

    In my opinion, there needs to be a SWIFT and immediate criminal investigation of Linuxgruven's CEO Matthew Porter and their management. I believe that they were running a ponsi scheme, paying employees out of the money they were getting for "training" new people. Linuxgruven obviously never legitimately did the business they claimed to be doing. If it's not a ponsi scheme, it's close... The article suggests that new employees who jsut passed the tests were then given the job of training new victims... Which is why this smells of a ponsi scheme.

    Now people who forked over a considerable amount of money for questionable education are left holding an empty bag. And employees are screwed amd left with bounced checks and bills.

    Bouncing paychecks is a serious crime in some locales. I say that Linuxgruven's CEO and management need to see the inside of a jail cell.

    In the Newsforge article, these bozos are planning to start a "competing" business. I'd advice everyone to stay the hell away from whatever business that is.

    Unethical business practice should not go unpunished.

  • I'm not a professional in the field either, but there is an interesting aspect in the psychological side of being in power.
    There was an interesting article in the "Spiegel" news magazine about how people in charge tend to consider themselves as smarter than their employees/team members.
    I've seen this myself in a former colleague: from the time he went from "normal" team member to team leader, he also became increasingly arrogant.
    In many cases, the newly promoted bosses also act more agressively. An extreme example is described in
    The Stanford Prison Experiment [prisonexp.org].
    In this experiment, a group of 24 students was split at random into guards and prisoners. The guards soon turned into HUGE assholes...
  • Craig, why does it make a difference if they chose to resign the minute they found out about the financial situation of the company, or waited a few days?

    The bounced checks still wouldn't clear, the last two weeks that we put in would still have not been paid, and the students would still have no classes to attend. Nothing would have changed.

    It doesn't really matter why -- they could have been playing Solitaire or chewing their fingernails, and it still wouldn't make a difference to the outcome.

    Does management bear some responsibility for the outcome? Certainly, if for no other reason than it appears they weren't inquisitive enough about the company's finances earlier in the game. But if they had gotten hold of the books weeks or months earlier, would it have made that much of a difference? I'm not sure it would.

    LG had a lot more than money problems, as you are no doubt aware. Disorganization was rampant -- there was no clear chain of command.

    Our educational system was a sham. You know the state of our training materials -- you admitted that you didn't want to associate your name with them.

    I wasn't in management, and I wasn't in St. Louis. I have no clue who was responsible for what. In fact, it seemed to us in Kansas City that no one at the Home Office was responsible for anything. We had thirty people vying for 25 chairs that last week, and the only reason we got anything done was because several employees were kind enough to donate their own computers, office supplies and personal credit to keep things going.

    In conclusion, I don't care why Porter and company resigned later than sooner. It doesn't matter. In a phrase, LG was dead long before it breathed its last. It was conceived poorly, planned poorly and managed poorly. It wasn't the first company to go down in flames and it won't be the last, especially in this economic environment.

  • I hope more people read your comment. I hate to say it but you might just be close to right dude. I love Linux in everyway, and since I have become a UNIX admin over lots of HP and Sun stuff I have really seen it is not viable for certain things. J
  • "In my opinion, there needs to be a SWIFT and immediate criminal investigation of Linuxgruven's CEO Matthew Porter and their management. I believe that they were running a ponsi scheme, paying employees out of the money they were getting for 'training' new people."

    I'm not defending Matt Porter per se, but I have to set the record straight on a couple of points. I'm just continuously amazed by all the misinformation on the Internet that's presented without all the facts or one shred of evidence.

    Matt Porter seems to be one of the victims in all this.

    He may not be totally blameless. He may be guilty of being in over his head in a position for which he was not qualified, trying to do a job for which he was ill equipped. And he may be guilty of an ill-advised legal maneuver to attempt to take a company away from its owners. I don't know.

    But I'm pretty sure that he is out salary, expense money and bounced checks worth more than most of us.

    The money for another company is coming from a venture capitalist that he was introduced to by Jim Hibbits, who was supposed to be putting money into Linuxgruven. As I understand it, this individual didn't want his money in a company that was being run by Hibbits and Lebb. That's what ultimately led to the executives leaving the company.

    They saw that the company was being run as a "pyramid scheme" or "ponzi scheme," and wanted to stabilize the operation and put systems in place to handle the growth, and grow the client base, before expanding into other cities. (Again, this is all based on second-hand information, and is only accurate as near as I can speculate. I am not privvy to lots of insider information.) Hibbits and Lebb, apparently, just had dollar signs in their eyes and couldn't wait to open those 7 additional offices so they could party on.

    Again, I'm not defending Matt Porter so much as I am accuracy and fairness. And I give him credit for taking the high road in all of this. I saw him speak briefly at the St. Louis UNIX/Linux Users Group meeting last week. He cautioned us that the collapse of Linuxgruven is bad for the Linux community as a whole, regardless of what happened and who else was hurt.

    He may be guilty of many things, but I don't believe he's guilty of deliberate criminal actions. But, I could be wrong.
  • Not redundant.


    As a computer-illiterate boss, one wants to know that ones staff know what they are doing. A certificate shows this - your word doesn't.

  • If it's anything like Canada it's 60% up to a maximum. There's a cap on it somewhere, so out-of-work CEOs don't bleed the system dry. And remember, the unemployment insurance (or 'employment insurance' as it euphamisically called in Canada) comes out of your paycheck. You get what you pay for.
    -----------------
  • Actually, I was talking on a personal level. I've paid in a lot more than I could ever take out, while my brother managed to live quite comfortably on it for 9 months or so, because the UI period in B.C. is much longer than Ontario, and the waiting period was shorter. So "you get what you pay for" doesn't really hold; some get a lot more, some get a lot less.
    -----------------

Slashdot Top Deals

Reality must take precedence over public relations, for Mother Nature cannot be fooled. -- R.P. Feynman

Close