Saturday, 19 August 2017

SIX DAYS OFF WHATSAPP

I was last on WhatsApp last Sunday and plan to not turn on the WiFi on the phone until tomorrow (Sunday) at least, if not later and without WiFi, the phone won't receive WhatsApp.

Life's great without WhatsApp.

IT.SCHEISS

Friday, 18 August 2017

54,103 GRADUATES UNEMPLOYED SIX MONTHS AFTER GRADUATION - WELCOME TO THE INFORMATION AND SERVICES ECONOMY!

The large number of unemployed university and college graduates has been a perennial problem in Malaysia and also worldwide, especially in the developed countries which hollowed out their manufacturing industries by outsourcing manufacturing work to lower wage countries, whilst paperback writers who sold many books and earned lots of money from speaking engagements which many bums in seats paid plenty to hear their 'words of wisdom' as if they were Moses, descendeth from the mountain, tablets in hand.

So the economic sun set on those countries from which 'sunset' industries departed, whilst the sun rises in those countries to which these 'sunset' industries went, just as when the sun is 'setting' somewhere on planet Earth, it is rising on the other side of our planet.

Well actually, the sun never sets on planet Earth. If it did, we'll all freeze to death.

The latest horror story is that Malaysia has 54,103 unemployed university and college graduates as per the first article below and the solution proposed by an Australian recruitment company in the second article following it is more or less for these graduates to keep running like hamsters on a treadmill, learning and re-learning stuff which will be obsolete in no time in order  to remain 'relevant' in our economy which aspires to be a 'knowledge-based, information economy' as we 'move up the value chain' above the 'lowly' agricultural and manufacturing industries which were solid foundations of the Malaysian economy and still are in fact.

I bumped into the former human resources manager at the company I used to work for a couple of months back and he told me that he now provides human resource consultancy to a rather obscure private university college nearby and I jovially told him - "So, you are working for a graduate factory" and he replied, "Yes, we are churning them out by the hundreds". No wonder there are so many unemployed graduates.

During my father's time, well even during my time, if one leaves school with a Senior Cambridge or a Malaysian Certificate of Education (SPM) they could get a job quite easily, whilst those who wanted to become lawyers, doctors, engineers, accountants, architects or some other profession continued to pursue their Higher Certificate of Education (Form 6) or STPM and then continued to university, if their parents could afford it. Others went into business and some are tycoons today or learned a trade or vocation.

However today, one needs a degree or diploma to be an office clerk, when back in my time, a Senior Cambridge or SPM would do fine thank you. What next - will one need a degree to be employed as a toilet cleaner in the future,

I guess edjucashun is big business, so I guess gotta keep students running like hamsters on a treadmill moving 'higher and higher up the value chain' in order to remain employable in a job WHICH a Senior Cambridge or SPM holder could do during my time. WELCOME TO THE INFORMATION AND SERVICES ECONOMY!

I got a friend who has a small company which packs and supplies latex and nitrile medical gloves to hospitals and clinics and he can't find enough workers.

Perhaps he could help relieve the situation by hiring a couple of unemployed graduates to pack gloves but dunno if they will regard such work 'beneath their dignity'.

Meanwhile, shares of rubber medical glove manufacturers Careplus, Comfort and Hartalega are on the uptrend again after a pull back, whilst Top Glove looks like it may begin an uptrend again soon.

Thankfully, Malaysia still has 'sunset' industries earning millions, mostly from exports, which bring in much foreign exchange or we will be in deep scheiss.

After all, we can't use cyber toilets or virtual toilets however much we 'move up the value chain', can we? Someone has to manufacture them, don't they?

Cheers

IT.SCHEISS

Over 54,000 grads jobless 6 months after completing studies Bernama
KUALA LUMPUR: A total of 54,103 graduates were unemployed six months after they completed their studies last year.

Higher Education Minister Idris Jusoh said the number was based on the Graduands Detection Survey System (SKPG), which recorded 238,187 finishing their studies last year.

He said courses with the highest number of unemployed graduates were business administration, applied sciences, human resource management, accounting, arts and social sciences.

“This number did not comprise graduates from the public universities only but also from private universities and colleges,” he said in reply to a question from Senator Ng Chiang Chin in the Dewan Negara today.

Idris said in tackling the issue of unemployed graduates, the higher education ministry had implemented a number of programmes, including the Integrated Cumulative Grade Point Average (iCGPA), Two Universities + Two Industries (2u2i) and the CEO Faculty.

“We created these programmes according to the national education blueprint.

“The rest of the world which does not have these (programmes) are watching us. This system will be able to produce graduates that are more holistic for the working world,” he said.

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2017/08/17/over-54000-grads-jobless-6-months-after-completing-studies/


AND THE PROPOSED SOLUTION




‘Fresh grads need to evolve with the market’
Nora Jasw | August 17, 2017

PETALING JAYA: An Australian recruitment company has urged today’s youth to constantly develop new skill sets to cater to the growing demand of industries.

The company, Seek Asia, told FMT that those from the younger generation need to learn new skills, even after they finish their tertiary education, to gain an edge in the job market.

“The cycle of skill sets is moving very quickly.

“Skill sets such as digital marketing and product management did not exist 10 years ago. But they have become some of the most sought-after skills in the market now,” chief commercial officer Martin Hayden said on the sidelines of the Jobstreet HR Networking 2017 event here today.

Also at the event was Jobstreet Malaysia country manager Chook Yuh Yng, who spoke on the importance of higher education levels for job creation.

According to Chook, a society with a higher level of education will attract more investors to set up their businesses in the country, thus creating more jobs.

She added that gaining new skill sets would only benefit employees and help further their careers.

“When graduates finish their first degree, they shouldn’t stop there.

“Don’t stop there because the job market won’t wait for you. You have to evolve with the market,” she said.

It was recently reported that Malaysia had recorded a dismal number of job opportunities created in the last four years.

Since 2013, some 672,000 jobs were offered only in the low and lower-middle income range.

Earlier today, Higher Education Minister Idris Jusoh said a total of 54,103 graduates were unemployed for six months after they completed their studies last year.

This is on top of Bank Negara Malaysia’s annual report released in March which said the youth unemployment rate reached 10.7% in 2015.

This is more than three times the national unemployment rate of 3.1%.

Chook said this pattern of unemployment, especially for those within the range of 20-29 years old, was typical even on a global scale.

“Much like the cycle of the economy, it will gradually become better, more so when the education level of a country is improved,” she said.

According to data from the International Labour Organization (ILO), Spain recorded the worst youth unemployment rate in Europe in 2011, at 46.4%.

In Southeast Asia and the Pacific, meanwhile, the youth unemployment rate is expected to increase from 12.4% in 2015 to 13.6% in 2017.

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2017/08/17/fresh-grads-need-to-evolve-with-the-market/



Saturday, 12 August 2017

A SURE WAY DIS-ADVERTISE

A sure way to put people off the products or services on is advertising websites or on digital platforms such as tablets and smartphones it to have the advertisement pop up and obscure the view of what one wants to read or watch, often requiring the viewer or reader to click on some 'X' to close the advertisement.

This never happens with print advertising where the advertisement sits passively on a page or part of a page, allowing readers to read it if they so choose if it piques their interest or even to admire the pictures of pretty or handsome persons featured in the advertisement or to even admire its creativity or art.

On the other hand, these pop-up advertisements impose themselves on readers or viewers, some of whom may be doing research for a report, presentation or an article and are in a hurry to meet a deadline.

I for one, just click away such annoying advertisements and don't even remember what was being advertised and I have not bought anything which was advertised online, though I have bought some products or services advertised in print.

This really makes me wonder what idiots those who created such advertisements are by believing that they will endear such readers and viewers to the products or services being advertised by annoying them.

Sure, these idiots may have the technical knowledge and savvy to create such pop-up advertisements but lack the basic common sense to understand that readers and viewers don't like them.

As a result, a whole industry has arisen to develop advertisement blockers or pop-up blockers and their popularity is a testimony to how annoying readers and viewers of websites and digital content find such advertisements.

Following below, The Star's Tech News reports on such measures to combat pop-up advertisements on smartphones.

Dunno if this will get through the the thick skulls of the advertisers who continue to impose such annoying advertisements on us.

Yours trully

IT.SCHEISS




Tech News


Saturday, 12 August 2017 | MYT 3:00 PM

Say goodbye to pop-ups in your smartphone web browser


Aggressive advertising pop-ups that block the entire smartphone display are a nuisance. If one appears, you should never tap on it – and you should certainly not enter any personal data in the input fields.
Address collectors can be lurking behind pop-ups that promise fictitious winnings. Or they may be seeking to lure you into unwanted subscriptions that will show up later your mobile phone bill.

To prevent these unwanted intruders from showing up on your screen, you should activate a third-party lock with your service provider.

Alternatively, you can prevent most pop-ups by clearing your browser cache. On Android phones, you'll find this option under settings. You should also delete cookies, while at the same time making sure that no third-party cookies are accepted and all cookies are deleted once the browser is closed.

If the ads still appear, you might have to delete all browser data, returning the phone to more or less the factory state. If even that doesn't work, an app might be responsible for the pop-ups. In that case, you should uninstall recently installed apps until the problem is solved. — dpa

Read more at http://www.thestar.com.my/tech/tech-news/2017/08/12/say-goodbye-to-pop-ups-in-your-smartphone-web-browser/#aBZ5E3L5moUQLjlY.99

Saturday, 22 July 2017

FREE MARKETS TEND TO GRAVITATE TOWARDS MONOPOLY

I'm really glad I decided to check up on Nicholas Carr's blog Rough Type, after many years.

http://www.roughtype.com/

Nicholas Carr is no tech-Luddite but a veteran writer on the information technology scene, mostly in the United States and he is noted for having published several books, including The Big Switch, which is about teh rise of Web-based computing, or what is called "cloud computing",which he features on his more professional website at http://www.nicholascarr.com/?page_id=21.

What I like about Nicholas Carr is that he is not afraid to be an IT-contrarian, and expresses himself more bluntly (or you could say "unplugged') on his Rough Type blog, much as I do on my IT.Scheiss blog at http://itsheiss.blogspot.com.

Two of his recent blog posts caught my eye on Rough Type today.

The first is "The digital-industrial complex" which describes how the consumer IT industry and the Internet has become dominated by a handful of giant corporations and how the Web has proven to be a centralising force, which has increasingly consolidated wealth and market power into the hands of a handful of large corporations, rather than a "decentralising force" which Cyberutopians in the 1990s claimed would "empower" a myriad of small players in a competitive free market online and enable them to "compete on a level playing field" with large corporations and even "undermine" them.

I don't know what these Cyberutopians were smoking but if they had bothered to look back at the other industries which came before IT and Internet-based industries, they would have seen how they all began comprised of a myriad of small players competing with each other and providing consumers with plenty of choices, but thanks to the very same free market forces at work within capitalist free markets which they so love and adore, the weaker players were gradually driven out of the market through bankruptcies, mergers, acquisitions and so forth, with the industry eventually consolidating down to a handful of corporate giants - i.e. an oligopoly, and the process continues until a giant monopoly player remains. Sometimes governments will break up the monopoly into smaller large players but they will eventually gravitate towards a monopoly again.

Today, Windows of all versions has 91.35% of the desktop operating system market, followed far behind by Mac OS X with 6.29% and Linux with 2.36% and that is despite there being a choice of 3,000 or more different Linux distributions, most of which are free of charge.

https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0

Amongst desktop search engines, Google has 79.45% market share, Bing 7.31%, Baidu 7.06%, Yahoo! - Global 4.91%, Ask - Global 0.14%, AOL - Global 0.05%, Excite - Global 0.01% and others combined 1.06%.

https://www.netmarketshare.com/search-engine-market-share.aspx?qprid=4&qpcustomd=0

Simply put, it is a dialectical-materialist reality that if left on their own unregulated, free markets will tend towards monopoly. However, any form of market regulation is anathema to the Libertarian ethos of most Cyberutopians who hate monopolies but at the same time want minimal or zero government regulation of markets, even when regulation is required to forestall the formation of monopolies.

At the end of the day, a monopoly belonging to the people and democratically governed by and answerable to them would be better than  having even a myriad of options in which you have no say, just like the number of You Tubers whose suddenly found their videos being demonetised by You Tube because the "almighty" advertisers do not want their advertisements to be associated with some of their videos which are deemed controversial.

This move by Google (which owns You Tube), has resulted in some content creators who post their videos on You Tube, no longer being able to rely from advertising from You Tube for a living, and there's nothing they can do, not even sue Google, since they have no rights on You Tube, since Google has no contractual or legal obligations to them. So all they can do is to post a video either complaining about Google's stricter enforcement of its old You Tube policies, pleading with Google to be nice to them or lecturing Google that it would serve the company better to revert to the earlier situation.

Well, Google owns You Tube and there's nothing you can do buddy, so forget this entitlement mentality, which is also so anathema to the Libertarian ethos, and get a real job, however shitty, where you at least have some protection under whatever "uggh!!!" labour laws, which Libertarians have so much despised, ranted and raved against so much, however weak they may be in today's Neo-liberal economic environment, thanks to Von Hayekist, Chicago School, Von Misesist policies, which dominate today. 

In his other article "Big Internet", Nicholas Carr describes how some people are beginning to tire of Big Internet centred around giants like Google and Facebook and Twitter and Amazon and Apple and are returning to more personal platforms such as blogs.

Well, I'm glad to say that I gave up Facebook and Twitter, though I still use Google for e-mail and blogs and less frequently, WhatsApp.

Nicholas Carr's two articles follow below.

(If you cannot see the embedded images below, please enable viewing images in your e-mail program)

IT.Scheiss



The digital-industrial complex

Exactly fifty years after the hippies gathered in San Francisco, another summer of love seems set to blossom. This time it’s not the flower children who are holding hands and sharing beds. It’s the titans of Big Internet.

Just this week, at its Build conference, Microsoft gave a hug to former adversaries Apple and Alphabet. “Windows PCs heart iOS and Android devices” was one of the big themes of the event — yes, the heart symbol was on display — and Microsoft announced that Apple’s iTunes app is coming to the Windows Store. Microsoft also formed a partnership with Facebook to incorporate an ad-tracking tool into Excel. Meanwhile, Apple and Amazon were engaged in their own public display of affection. They let word leak out that Amazon’s Prime Video app would soon be available on Apple TV. The once fierce rivals appear to have “reached a truce,” reported Recode.

Thanks to their technical and marketing prowess, combined with the winner-take-all dynamics of the internet, Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft have emerged as the dominant companies of the consumer net (Farhad Manjoo dubs them the “frightful five”), with a combined market cap of a zillion dollars, give or take. Each now operates something of a perpetual-motion money-printing machine powered by the dollars and data that flow in such massive quantities through the net. The companies still face threats, of course, but, even as they sow disruption in other industries, their own market positions now look pretty stable and secure. They’re the winners.

While the boundaryless nature of online business means that each of the five companies competes with each of the others on many fronts, there is also now a symbiosis among them — and that symbiosis is getting stronger. Each of the five makes its profits in different ways, with Apple focusing on hardware, Google on web ads, Facebook on social-media ads, Amazon on retailing, and Microsoft on software sales and subscriptions. Their businesses overlap, but they are also complementary. And, as is often true with complementary products and services, gains by one company often help rather than hurt the businesses of the others. Each of the five is focused on expanding consumers’ dependency on the net, and as the net pie expands so does each of the five slices. At this point, being friends rather than enemies makes sense.

When it comes to business, in other words, the net is a centralizing force, not a decentralizing one as once assumed. The frightful five together form a digital-industrial complex, a nascent oligopoly set to skim the lion’s share of the profits from the consumer web for the foreseeable future. Five big pieces, loosely joined.

On Monday, the venture capitalist Jeremy Philips wrote a column intended as a rejoinder to Manjoo’s warnings about the power of the titans. Philips argued against the idea that, as he put it, “the five leading tech behemoths have turned into dangerous monopolies that stifle innovation and harm consumers.” Their businesses, he wrote, are “all converging — therefore competing — with one another.” His timing was unfortunate, as immediately after the column appeared we got the news of the new partnerships among the companies.

Philips’s argument would have sounded compelling just a few years ago. Back then, the five’s positions were not as well-established as they are now, and their relationships were defined by their skirmishes. That’s no longer the case. Yes, the businesses of the five have converged, but it’s now becoming clear that their interests have converged as well. For Big Internet, this is the dawning of the Age of Aquarius.

Image: Actors portraying hippies in “Hair.”

http://www.roughtype.com/?p=7866

Nicholas Carr posted a picture of hippies (actually actors portraying hippies) at the top of his blog. I suppose this is because, like me, he too believes that this Cyberutopian nonsense is influenced by some of the social and countercultural ideals of the hippies in the late 1960s.

They were noble ideals of peace, love, mutual understanding between different races, personal liberty, alternative modes of living, environmentally sustainable living and so forth - which some believed would being about a peaceful world, in which all people are family, but alas, it was just that - a nice ideal which did not come to pass nor bring about a better world 40 or so years later, as is pretty evident from the state of our world today , with growing hatreds, intolerance and wars.

He also mentioned "the dawning of the Age of Aquarius" at the end of his post. Well, below is a video clip of the song "Aquarius" performed in the movie version of the Broadway musical "Hair", released in 1979, though "Hair" was first performed on Broadway, New York in the late 1960s or the early 1970s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhbxI5eVnM4

Well today the big Internet corporations dominate global Cyberspace, less than 30 years after the Internet went mass market, thanks to the legions of content creators who supplied the content which attracted the eyeballs, hence the advertisements which made these companies so fabulously rich.


Also, many publications, both print and online worldwide are being crushed by the Internet giants, which are drawing away the advertising which enabled these publications to survive and thrive, and provide decent employment opportunities for many. (Graphic courtesy of Carpe Diem blog, with figures courtesy the Newspaper Association of America)

I would never recommend a school leaver venture into journalism today, since they could be out of work in their 40s, as the trend which is happening in the US as shown in the graph above, is gradually making its way around the world, especially in countries where broadband penetration is high enough for enough people to forsake print media and even their online or digital versions. Already, Malaysian media is suffering from the competition for advertisements from these non publication media giants, whilst in the U.S. combined print, online and digital newspaper revenue in 2014 was below what it was way back in in 1950. Well, that is the cruel reality.

Whilst each physical village can support only a handful of small businesses, at least the 3.9 million villages worldwide (according to an unofficial estimate) each provide dispersed business opportunities which together add up to a lot.

However, the one global village in Cyberspace provides only a handful of opportunities, which the Internet giants have come to dominate. They have already cornered their market respective spaces and it will be nearly impossible for a newcomer to challenge them in their market space.

In 2011, a venture capital provider advised Internet startups not to develop an application, platform or service already provided by three or more players in Cyberspace, since it will be almost impossible to challenge the incumbents and for the startup to grow.

As Nicholas Carr pointed out, each of the "frightful five" provide different applications and services which can complement each other, and as we saw from the Netmarketshare figures above, the dominant player is usually far ahead of the nearest competitor in their respective product sector.  

Next, Nicholas Carr's post on Big Internet follows below.

Big Internet lost

We talk about Big Oil and Big Pharma and Big Ag. Maybe it’s time we started talking about Big Internet.

That thought crossed my mind after reading a couple of recent posts. One was Scott Rosenberg’s piece about a renaissance in the ancient art of blogging. I hadn’t even realized that blogs were a thing again, but Rosenberg delivers the evidence. Jason Kottke, too, says that blogging is once again the geist in our zeit. Welcome back, world.

The other piece was Alan Jacobs’s goodbye to Twitter. Jacobs writes of a growing sense of disillusionment and disappointment with the ubiquitous microblogging platform:

As long as I’ve been on Twitter (I started in March 2007) people have been complaining about Twitter. But recently things have changed. The complaints have increased in frequency and intensity, and now are coming more often from especially thoughtful and constructive users of the platform. There is an air of defeat about these complaints now, an almost palpable giving-up. For many of the really smart people on Twitter, it’s over. Not in the sense that they’ll quit using it altogether; but some of what was best about Twitter — primarily the experience of discovery — is now pretty clearly a thing of the past.


“Big Twitter was great — for a while,” says Jacobs. “But now it’s over, and it’s time to move on.”

These trends, if they are actually trends, seem related. I sense that they both stem from a sense of exhaustion with what I’m calling Big Internet. By Big Internet, I mean the platform- and plantation-based internet, the one centered around giants like Google and Facebook and Twitter and Amazon and Apple. Maybe these companies were insurgents at one point, but now they’re fat and bland and obsessed with expanding or defending their empires. They’ve become the Henry VIIIs of the web. And it’s starting to feel a little gross to be in their presence.

So, yeah, I’m down with this retro movement. Bring back personal blogs. Bring back RSS. Bring back the fun. Screw Big Internet.

But, please, don’t bring back the term “blogosphere.”

Image: still from Lost.

http://www.roughtype.com/?p=5010





Sunday, 9 July 2017

TYRANNY IN CYBERSPACE - "IF YOU ARE NOT WITH US, YOU ARE AGAINST US"

Back when the Internet became available to the public in a significant way back in the mid-1990s, Cyberutopians touted it as a platform which enabled unfettered freedom of speech and expression which would "liberate" mankind.

But now that the majority of people have access to Cyberspace, especially through Web 2.0 platforms such as social media sites, those with independent opinions are either bullied into submission or silence and if they hold out, are ostracised, as the article below, translated from the Chinese language newspaper the Oriental Daily points out.



malaysianchinesenews.com

Social Media is the populists’ paradise



Facebook and other social media is a social platform used by many people in this modern era. However, its popularity does not really reflects speech freedom. It is in fact a place easily infested with lies and the worst kind of populism.

If you only post at Facebook or other social media about food, pets, highlights of your life, or selfie, you would not know of any problem with the social media. But if you post some controversial topics such as political, social or religious   issues, you will face with the worst kind of populist bullies trying to silence all opposition voices.

In Malaysia, if you post any complaints against certain political parties, their members or blind supporters would swarm you with attack trying to force the suspension or closure of your Facebook account. If the Facebook management is unfair or dealt with it technically, which means they depend on the number of people reporting the complaint and thus directly suspend the user’s account, denying any opportunity for the user to make his or her defence. Or they just delete the post straightaway. Isn’t this an encroachment of freedom of speech?

In religion, there are people who accuse certain outsiders of interference into their religious affairs and want to stop such interference from encroaching into the interest of their followers. However, even how solid the evidence presented by others proving otherwise, their view, even how righteous it may be, would be silenced when they face the collective sanction of an organized group like this. This then allows absurdities to rule and people continue their bullying way on the social media to poison the ordinary people.

The social media helps the bullying power. It is a manifestation of human nature and it happens everywhere. In Taiwan political arena, some made criticism on Tsai Ing-wen and Democratic Progressive Party leaders. Because they hold a different view, they have been overwhelmingly sanctioned by organized groups and eventually caused their accounts to be suspended.

Debate will uncover the truth. But direct sanction takes no exception whether the targets are political or social activists or even media people. The Facebook sanctioning mechanism requires no proof. As long as you have enough people, you can turn a non-issue into an issue and use it as an excuse to suspend an account. They can even trace back record of old postings to find someone guilty.

No constraints on Admin

At the social media platform and forum, why is populist easily appears and suppress the views of the minority, or for a minority to silence the views of the majority?

President James Madison, father of the US Constitution, said in the “Federalist Papers” that without external constraints, any individual or group would tend to bully others. May I ask who supervise the Admin of the social media? And who restraints him? The answer is none! Any unfair action to silence others will not be dealt with fairly. Furthermore, the Admins tend to protect each other.

Although there is speech freedom in social media, it may not be a place that represents fairness. Even speech freedom can be treated differently. For sure, the emergence of a massive sanctioning group is due to the existence of malcontents with malice. They could not tolerate people with different views.

On the other hand, those with positive mindset will not press for sanction even if they had been humiliated. Or maybe they do not have resources to organize a sanction. Therefore, when the social media management system is faulty, it would result in the emergence of a fools’ paradise for the populists and eventually the good would be shooed off by the bad elements.

http://www.malaysianchinesenews.com/2017/07/social-media-is-the-populists-paradise/

So much for the hype, hoohah, bullshit and ballyhoo of Cyberutopians.

IT.SCHEISS

Sunday, 2 July 2017

UP TO 640,000 IT AND BPO SERVICES JOBS COULD LOST IN INDIA OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS.

Following on from my blog post - RETRENCHMENTS ARE BEGINNING TO HIT INDIA'S IT AND BPO INDUSTRY, it looks like the future could be even worse for India's information technology (IT) and business services outsourcing (BPO) services workers in India, with predictions that over 600.000 workers in these areas would lose their jobs in the next three years.

A Press Trust of India report carried by India's Economic Times of 14 May 2017 quoted executive search form Head Hunters India founder-chairman and managing director K Lakshmikanth saying that up to 600,000 of India's IT and BPO workers could lose their job over the next three years.

According to McKinsey & Company, up to half (50%) of the workforce of India's IT services firms will become "irrelevant" in the next three to four years, whilst McKinsey India managing director Noshir Kaka said that the bigger challenge facing India's IT industry is to retrain between 50 to 60% of their workforce as there will be significant shifts in technology. India currently has 3.9 million IT workers and the majority of them will need to be retrained in these new technologies but between 30 to 40% will not be able to be retrained. Assuming that half of them will be able to continue working with their old skills, the other half will become redundant.

Meanwhile Lakshmikanth pointed out that with the growth in new digital technologies such as cloud computing happening at a much faster pace, the worst affected IT workers will be those aged 35 or above who cannot find new jobs.


Meanwhile You Tuber Abhiroop B says more or less the same things in his video entitled Soon There will not be any New IT industry jobs anymore in India, well actually slightly worse, in that up to 640,000 IT workers could lose their jobs over the next three years.

He mentions new technologies which IT workers will have to retrain in to continue to be employable the IT industry but the skills required by these technologies are radically different from IT and BPO services skills. Abhiroop B said he has cautioned many not to go into the IT and BPO services industries, since he knew that their days are numbered.

Readers who have been following my posts on IT.Scheiss for long enough will know that have been very sceptical with the much touted mantra that Malaysian workers must reskill themselves to "move up the value chain" to remain employable, as jobs "lower down the value chain" move out of Malaysia to neighbouring countries where wages are lower, whilst Malaysia heads towards becoming a "high income, knowledge based, developed economy by the year 2020". Well, that's now been pushed farther back to 2050 when those of my generation won't be around to witness.

Anyway, it's interesting that those countries to which these "sunset" industries have moved to are experiencing a sunrise, whilst those countries where "sunrise" industries remain are experiencing a sunset.

The forecast by McKinsey confirm what I have long believed that many will be unable to successfully reskill themselves several times throughout their working years, especially when they are burdened by family and other commitments especially in their 40s.

Some of the new skills required are as radically different from the old skills; as the chemistry skills required in the making of photo-sensitive silver iodide emulsion film are from the electronic engineering skills required in the making of photo-sensitive charge-coupled device (CCD) and complementary metal-oxide silicon (CMOS) most commonly used in digital cameras today. Most of those chemists who lost their jobs would not have been able to reskill themselves to become electronic engineers. Besides that, with the exception of the  respective cameras optics, other technologies and skills required in the design and manufacture of film and digital cameras are radically different. 

Also, as I have previously said, even if most can successfully reskill themselves and "move up the value chain" to perform higher skilled levels of work, will there be enough work opportunities the higher one rises up that value chain. I have often likened this to there being less living space for people the higher one goes up a mountain.

As is shown by the McKinsey report and Abhiroop B's video, the IT industry is replacing lower skilled IT and BPO jobs with automation. For example, when you activate your copy of Windows by phone, you now will be interacting with an interactive voice response (IVR) system, rather than a human help desk agent, just as most banking today is conducted either online or through self-service machines such as ATM, cash and cheque deposit machines, whilst there are much fewer human bank tellers and customer service staff in banking halls today.

Unlike with distributed computing power, as in the 1980s, 90s and perhaps also the early 2000s, the greater use of cloud computing today, with computing power highly centralised on physical or virtual servers in data centres, which are accessed remotely over the Internet; has reduced the industry's demand for computing professionals required to develop, operate and maintain the system.

For example, anyone with a Gmail account can now use the cloud based services Google Docs, Google Sheets and Google Slides over the Internet  to create and edit Word documents, Excel Spreadsheets and PowerPoint presentations, without having to install Microsoft Office on their PC, which for most large offices, would have required one or more IT employees to maintain and manage.

All this raises questions as to whether it is worth pursuing a qualification in IT when, one's skills acquired will likely become obsolete by the time one is in their late 30s or 40s, much like the career span of a fashion model, whose good looks, fine skin, slender and sleek bodies of youth fades by middle age, or a sports professional whose youthful strength, speed and agility decline with age.

Younger IT workers may be able to reskill themselves a couple of times earlier in their career to remain relevant, like hamsters running on a treadmill, but for how long can they keep on running just to stay in one place before they tire and fall back, get off or are thrown off?

Is it no surprise then that many Malaysian parents now discourage their children from pursuing courses in IT?

Just as King Canute could not command the sea tide not to come in, IT continues to evolve at an unrelenting pace.

And, whilst the required skills, tools, technologies and techniques used in all trades and professions inevitably change, however, some change incrementally and slowly enough for one to remain relevant throughout one's working years, much like accountants, medical doctors,pharmacists, lawyers, , civil engineers, mechanical engineers, electrical engineers, chemical engineers, architects architects, chefs, writers, economists and so forth, so is it no wonder then that parents would prefer that children pursue qualifications in these trades and professions than IT, especially now with news of expected loss of over 15% of jobs in India's IT industry over the next three years.

Yours trully

IT.Scheiss
http://itsheiss.blogspot.my/

Friday, 30 June 2017

NEW YORK TIMES RETRENCHING STAFF - WELCOME TO THE INFORMATION AND SERVICES ECONOMY

It was not too long ago that we were bombarded with visions of a "glorious future" for journalists and content creators in cyberspace,  as readership and viewership transition from print and broadcast to online, but now we can see the real world results of  the transition and they are not pretty; where like the Titanic, long established media organisations or perhaps even media "institutions", are gradually taking in water and are gradually settling lower and lower in the water, conscious that they are heading into the twilight, whilst unsuccessfully struggling to turn around, grasping at straws along the way.

Sure, there are many sources of free news and opinion online on sites such as You Tube and so forth but many of these content creators have had to turn for financial support from readers through e-begging sites such as Patreon and others, especially since You Tube had begun demonetising certain videos posted by some of those content creators on You Tube, so it is pretty obvious that having personal media channels on You Tube or other social media platforms does not provide enough remuneration for many to cover their living expenses.

For example, a You Tuber who calls himself "Jason Unruhe" and who has had a You Tube channel called "Maoist Rebel News" now complains about You Tube's recent demonetisation policy. He also has an account on e-begging site Patreon. Just beware some the expletives he comes out with at times.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhi0kpk317E

Whilst I agree with Jason that capitalist profit motives generally reward producers of trash content which goes down well with dumbed down consumers who comprise the majority in capitalist society; over producers of quality and intellectually stimulating content; still it amazes me that Jason seems to expect that capitalist-owned You Tube would have been different.

On the right-libertarian side of the political spectrum is an author who goes by the name "Styxhexenhammer666" and here he explains quite frankly why he has set up an account on the e-begging site Patreon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMQR7_zBhXk

In this more recent video, Styx speaks about the problems of video demonetisation by You Tube and how Patreon pays more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6TLSsEr9SU

However, Styx also writes books on the occult, so he has other income streams to rely on, whilst he lives rather economically in what I believe is the Vermont countryside.

You Tube describes its demonetisation policy of certain videos or conversely, its monetisation policy related to putting advertisements on some videos as follows:-.

Advertiser-friendly content guidelines YouTube is where the world chooses to watch video. With the most current, comprehensive, and compelling video library on the web uploaded by a diverse set of creators from around the world, YouTube is also where thousands of brands come to connect with their audiences.

All videos uploaded to YouTube must comply with YouTube’s Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. To be eligible for advertising, videos must comply with the AdSense Program Policies. YouTube also reserves the right, at its discretion, to not show ads on videos and watch pages—including ads from certain advertisers or certain formats. This article provides some guidance about our policies and best practices to ensure your videos are eligible for advertising.

We aren’t telling you what to create—each and every creator on YouTube is unique and contributes to the vibrancy of YouTube. However, advertisers also have a choice about where to show their ads. As with everything related to YouTube, use your common sense, don’t abuse the site, and be respectful of others.

Content not eligible for advertising

YouTube uses technology and policy enforcement processes to determine if a video is eligible for advertising. We continually work hard to make our algorithms as accurate as possible and to understand nuances, including for categories like music, gaming, and news. Our intention is to treat each video based on context, including content that is clearly comedic, educational, or satirical in nature.

If the following describes any portion of your video or video metadata, including the title, thumbnail or tags, then the video may not be eligible for advertising under the AdSense Program Policies. In some cases, YouTube may also choose not to show ads from all advertisers or all ad formats.
  • Controversial issues and sensitive events: Video content that features or focuses on sensitive topics or events including, but not limited to, war, political conflicts, terrorism or extremism, death and tragedies, sexual abuse, even if graphic imagery is not shown, is generally not eligible for ads. For example, videos about recent tragedies, even if presented for news or documentary purposes, may not be eligible for advertising given the subject matter.
  • Drugs and dangerous products or substances: Video content that promotes or features the sale, use, or abuse of illegal drugs, regulated drugs or substances, or other dangerous products is not eligible for advertising. Videos discussing drugs or dangerous substances for educational, documentary, and artistic purposes are generally eligible for advertising, so long as drug use or substance abuse is not graphic or glorified.
  • Harmful or dangerous acts: Video content that promotes harmful or dangerous acts that result in serious physical, emotional, or psychological injury is not eligible for advertising. Some examples include videos depicting painful or invasive surgical or cosmetic procedures, or pranks involving sexual harassment or humiliation.
  • Hateful content: Video content that promotes discrimination or disparages or humiliates an individual or group of people on the basis of the individual’s or group’s race, ethnicity or ethnic origin, nationality, religion, disability, age, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or other characteristic that is associated with systemic discrimination or marginalization is not eligible for advertising. Content that is satire or comedy may be exempt; however, simply stating your comedic intent is not sufficient and that content may still not be eligible for advertising.
  • Inappropriate language: Video content that contains frequent uses of strong profanity or vulgarity throughout the video may not be eligible for advertising. Occasional use of profanity won’t necessarily result in your video being ineligible for advertising, but context matters.
  • Inappropriate use of family entertainment characters: Videos depicting family entertainment characters or content, whether animated or live action, engaged in violent, sexual, vile, or otherwise inappropriate behavior, even if done for comedic or satirical purposes, are not eligible for advertising.
  • Incendiary and demeaning: Video content that is gratuitously incendiary, inflammatory, or demeaning may not be eligible for advertising. For example, video content that shames or insults an individual or group may not be eligible for advertising.
  • Sexually suggestive content: Video content that features highly sexualized content, such as video content where the focal point is nudity, body parts, or sexual simulations, is not eligible for advertising. Content that features sex toys, sexual devices, or explicit conversation about sex may also not be eligible for advertising, with limited exceptions for non-graphic sexual education videos.
  • Violence: Video content where the focal point is on blood, violence, or injury, when presented without additional context, is not eligible for advertising. Violence in the normal course of video gameplay is generally acceptable for advertising, but montages where gratuitous violence is the focal point is not. If you're showing violent content in a news, educational, artistic, or documentary context, that additional context is important.
We  also offer a number of content and audience targeting tools that advertisers can use to control where their ads appear on YouTube.

If you think we've disabled ads on your video in error, learn how to appeal videos marked “not advertiser friendly.”

Best practices for creating advertiser-friendly content

In addition to the policies and guidelines above, here are some tips to help ensure that your content is appropriate for advertising:
  • Do be respectful of others, including your viewers and the people or groups that you may feature in your video. 
  • Do use accurate thumbnails and metadata. Regardless of the content of your video, if the title or thumbnail does not comply with these guidelines, the video may not be eligible for advertising.
  • Don't embed your own ads in your video since it violates our ad policies. Learn more about paid product placement policy.

Context is key. If your video contains potentially controversial or offensive content, give your viewers enough information to help them understand what they're seeing. You can also help us understand if your content is suitable for advertising by providing additional context.

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6162278?hl=en

Well Google owns You Tube, which is going mainstream, and it can call the shots at any time or even implement them arbitrarily, and there is nothing which content creators hosted on You Tube for free can do if You Tube decides to not to place advertisements to their videos or perhaps in the future, even to dump those content creators not bringing in the moolah, to save on storage space and Internet capacity ("bandwidth") demands.

On the other hand, other You Tubers criticise their fellows who have complained or who thought that they could make a career out of of posting videos on You Tube.

This young You Tuber who goes by the humble name of "Mediocre Editor" rants against such You Tubers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbygb3RqDMA

You Tuber "Alanah Pearce" describes how You Tube cut her income by 75% and how she has turned to e-begging site Patreon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7gmHmaF-fU

The YouTuber by the name of "TheSillyOldDude" slams big You Tubers who have complained about You Tube enforcing its policies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nc0Ym8NZ6zM

You Tuber Futon Squad tells You Tubers to stop complaining.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gQ3Bj9uOLA

In a more sober tone, You Tuber Damien who apparently also has a day job tells You Tubers not to count on You Tube for a career.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUqnk8lWaFI

This You Tuber with the "Buzz Worthy TV" provides a more sober and balanced perspective on the issue. She sees You Tube as a stepping stone to a more stable career.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEVDJHsifGg

I have never donated any money to content creators through Patreon, not even solo music composers whose work I greatly appreciate, though I have occasionally bought their music online through sites like Bandcamp, to support them instead.

Two such solo music composers of epic and new age style music whose work I greatly appreciate are:-

Adrian von Ziegler - Switzerland - https://www.youtube.com/user/AdrianvonZiegler

Brunuhville - Portugal - https://www.youtube.com/user/BrunuhVille

Both Adrian and Brunuhville sell their music via Bandcamp, Apple iTunes store and on physical CDs.

My friend's son Yusef Kifah - Bandar Sri Damansara, Malaysia, produces mostly techno music https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRxtqaKPuoNYCiv7S0b0Dmw and sells his music through the Apple iTunes store. He's also a disk jockey (DJ) at realspace ((not virtualspace) venues.

Another friend's son who goes by the nickname "J-Boi" is a guitarist in the band Shadow Puppet Theatre - Kuala Lumpur - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiPwvMoGLJsrv31x2HPrQng and whilst they have produced a CD, they don't appear to have either a Bandcamp or iTunes presence just yet. However, these guys have day jobs and music is like kind of a hobby.

I've haven't read, seen or heard much from those new media boosters or self-styled new media CON-sultants for a while now; and it kind of looks like they have vanished into the woodwork, now that the proverbial scheiss (shit) has hit the fan.

The Telesur TV article on the retrenchments at the New Your Times follows below.



telesurtv.net

Angry New York Times' Staffers Walk Out over Planned Layoffs | News




Hundreds of journalists — many of them copy editors at the New York Times — walked out from their offices Thursday and staged a protest in front of the newspaper's office in response to management talk of cutting the copy editing department in half.

RELATED:
ESPN to Lay Off 100 On-Air Talent: Source


"Top managers sat stone-faced at desks as staffers gathered about them and then walked out via the stairways," Poynter, a journalism training website, reported.

"New York Times editors, reporters, and staff will come together to leave the newsroom and their offices in protest of management’s elimination of copy editors," said a statement by the NewsGuild of New York.

Calling the expected layoffs a "humiliating process," NewsGuild President Grant Glickson, wrote in an open letter, "Cutting us down to 50 to 55 editors from more than 100, and expecting the same level of quality in the report, is dumbfoundingly unrealistic."

On Wednesday afternoon, nearly two dozen editors also wrote a letter to Executive Editor Dean Baquet and Managing Editor Joe Kahn expressing their outrage over the cuts and demanding they reconsider the move.

Banquet said in a statement, that the newspaper has a higher ratio of editors to reporters than its competitors.

"After a year and a half of uncertainty about their futures, New York Times editors and staff have expressed feelings of betrayal by management. The staff has been offered buyouts and if a certain number of buyouts is not reached, layoffs will ensue for the editorial staff and potentially reporters as well," Glickson wrote.

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Angry-New-York-Times-Staffers-Walk-Out-over-Planned-Layoffs-20170629-0033.html

Welcome to the Information and services economy, where your future is certain to be uncertain.

Don't be surprised if the Internet industry hires spin doctors and compliant media to promote the "hip, hype and happening" notion - "Insecure jobs - COOL!, secure jobs UNCOOL!"

Yours trully



IT.SCHEISS
http://itsheiss.blogspot.my