If corporations were not held accountable as an entity in being, then lawsuits like Enron could not proceed. Your only recourse would be to file individual lawsuits against each officer. The diluted impact would give the injured little recourse and limited effects.
On the topic, this opinion regards privacy with the highest of reverence and that any compromise, on behalf of cause, country or individual, is a price far too high to pay.
Security is not a measure of checks and balances, it is a result of action by the popular culture of those people who inhabit the society and government in which it is being measured. Whenever we lower that standard, we also welcome investigation by the pervasive- that is, those who would influence on behalf of their own recognized needs.
There is no need greater than that of the person. So therefore, it makes no sense why we are sacrificing our privacy on behalf of any government.
The largest problem in MOST MMORPG's is that they dwell on singular components and fundamental modules too much. What I mean is that the most successful are those that can create inter-cultural settings that make groups of people follow an pathways that are completely outside others. The excitement of the entire secular experience is when those paths cross and it's almost like discovering a new race and culture that was always there but you never knew existed.
The same goes for skills, weapon choice, and etc.
Most MMORPG's do this so poorly that you find yourself in a hamsterwheel spinning as fast as you can to level up to get to the top so that you can finally start to enjoy the game.
The entire point to the MMORPG is not the skill levels, but the social interactions that take place inside the game, and the introduction of those unique experiences in the correct amount of time- no matter how you play the game.
Beating WoW is not the objective, but a by-product of successful construction of a MMORPG. Take one look at the cookie-cutter and break that into several pieces. Then start from there by taking with you what pieces you like. THAT is how you win.
I miss the late 90's where there were some really original ideas out there in the hands of innovative minds. Where did all those crazy people go? They really had some moxie!
A few years ago I worked at a company that worked with Sony North America. I had a similar experience with an order of a Vaio where the call center representative told me "If you were to simply stop being such a *slur* and open your miserly wallet, then you wouldnt be in this mess. Stop buying junk and buy top of the line" then the line went dead.
I called back and got the manager of the call center on the phone and was told that I was more than welcome to refuse delivery of the computer and absorb the cost of shipping.
The real problem was that the online ordering process somehow went awry and several of my option requests were omitted and the rep told me to "live with it."
In the end, I opened up the book of people I know and I emailed them all. They never called me, however, their executive assistants each called me to personally apologize, and it was an Executive Vice President that made the call and expedited my PC to me as requested.
Why?
Because I knew the email addresses, and I knew how to make a buzz. Executive Assistants all each lunch togeather and talk constantly. They are the Sorority of the corporate world. If more than two of them talk about it, it will be across the company in 2 hours.
This is no different.
What dissapoints me most here is that you've apologized for being human. It's Jobs' company and if he isnt willing to work for you then why does he deserve your money? I expect Chief Executive Officers to go to the front lines anonymously and get things done. Two special companies I worked for that I wont name here had CEO's that would log into the call center and answer calls periodically. One of them went by "Bryan" and because I was the top Inside Sales person at the time "Bryan" would sometimes IM me for call assistance or ask to conference me in to help support.
Good for Jobs for stepping up and monitoring his customer base.
A majority of the print out there, including reference resources that I refuse to name, are known as "Pay for Play".
There are companies out there who are heralded, yet refuse to write a word unless you provide them with things such as references, guaranteed space on the website, or guarantees for future business (i.e. we pay them "consulting fees" where the reality is all we do is agrue about the crap they are writing).
The best sites are the ones where user opinion is at the forefront and mediated by a set (more than 1)of industry experts that represent two or more sides.
Magazines like these are on lifesupport, and the only way that they turn or clear ROI is to whore themselves to the top companies of their respected sector in industry.
I for one appreciate the former editors ethics and would think that it wont be long before he is hired somewhere else. From this perspective, his value just went up 2 fold, and the company that hires him will benefit greatly.
I had a 4.0 at my University, a 2.5 at the J.C. I transferred from. The problem with me was that I was an idiot for 2 years and didnt go to class. Then I cleaned up my act, went to school and kicked ass. The damage was so bad, though, I could only raise myself up to 2.8.
I went to a small university out here that features professors from Berkeley and Stanford. We use the same exact curriculum that they do, the professors teach part time there and part time at our university because it gives them more hours and a range of flexibility.
Google took one look at my overall GPA and said "sorry- you dont meet our academic requirements." I tried tot ell them that my undergraduate GPA at the University was 4.0, but they wouldnt have it.
I am a top person in my field, working at companies like Oracle, and have never been less than #1 on my team since graduating college.
Companies with these unreal ideas in their head tend to do themselves in. I am the 4th person I know who have had this happen to them after being approached by Google.
They came to me- not the other way around. They have some really dumb hiring practices over there. The academics they hire arent necessarily the best employees out there.
I'm tired of this kind of rhetoric. It's an illogical arguement because the innocent always find the means to defend themselves unless there is some reason to fear in guilt. Let's just remember that MOST people dont exude an alias that says "I'm a junkie who is probable to be in possession of illegal substances."
You are who they are, in that you are who you associate with. This is a classic example of past history + current company creating a situation where it was determined to be prudent to search this person.
In all cases such as these, an officer would not field test a soap unless there was other indicators of suspicion. Remember, we dont have the full context of the situation unless we are there. A verbal or written testimony often leaves out those suspicion indicators such as "the guy was twitching and wouldnt look me in the eye when I asked him what was in the bottle".
Of course I'm going to go down in flames for this commentary, but the reality is that irregardless of political correctness, profiling is a common component in ALL cases of criminality. I.E, why a red Ferrari will be pulled over more often than that sputtering Honda for going 8 over the speed limit. Why the idiots with red and green bandana's in their pockets hanging out of the pants hanging off the back of their asses are always getting lined up on the wall.
"That sound you hear- well thats a feature of that model year. No no, dontch worry bout that- the bumper is SUPPOSED to fall off in the event that you bump up against it- that way you can put it back on and it will still look good"
Pay them what they are worth, not what they think they are worth. If you do the latter they will start dictating the needs of the company according to themselves rather than what is right for the company.
Honest people are typically viewed as jerks. So yes, I think the best managers are jerks. They tell you when your S does stink, they fear nothing your insecure outburst might tell us, and they often dont bend on principle until a logical alternative that is conducive to the overall goal appears.
More than this, they lack the consideration for politically correct conversations that serve only to soothe your damaged ego. You suck- face it. You either work harder, get smarter (study) or get the hell out.
A manager is looking for winners. And winners are not whiners. It's uncomfortable, unfair, not right, you aren't speaking to me in a 'happy tone', etc. Too bad. shut up and win- thats all you are paid to do- win.
A manager with several different personalities on their team can hedge against favoritism because no one is looking over their shoulder comparing themsleves to the other. They are all saying "that poor sucker" and are more likely to 'help' each other and work collaboratively.
In the end, people only respect two things about their manager: 1) did I get my MBO/Bonus at 100% because he made it possible for my potential to meet that need? 2) Can I get my 4 weeks off as planned?
Other than that, people really dont need a manager. They need a freaking babysitter because most people are innately lazy and what differs from person to person is their own unique ability to disguise this.
Honestly- I dont care if I hurt your feelings, earn your base and enjoy your bonus. Have a nice trip and have your game face on after your vacation. Now get the F*** out of my office before I call security.
Can you imagine how painful every cavity you get will be with all that vibrating going on in your mouth?
And can you imagine the deductible charge on your molar if you swallow the device? I mean I already have a problem with dropping my cell in the urinal when I forget to shift my phone to the back of my waste band- 3 phones at $50 a pop, and now I'm allowed no more...
Also- wont this make diagnosing schizophrenics harder? I mean I could be walking down the street talking to myself and no one would know the difference.
"Honey! Hey Honey! I got Mom on the phone here. What? NO! Shes on my Molar! yeah, she said the casserole last night was crap- she's insisting that you never, EVER, do that again."
One more thing- I wonder how conference calls would work? And how do you put that on mute?
Fact is one part reference point, one part perception, and one part moral position [Politics, religion, culture, etc.]
I think these news outlets like to pick on Wikipedia because they dont control the message any longer so long as it can be successful. They are nothing more than Information Clearing Stores.
Bias media is nothing new, and in ancient history if your society got tooled, it got erased or modified. History books were burneed, statues of your heroes destroyed, and anyone citing history not in line with the new government was elminated.
I'm not comparing Wikipedia's problems to ancient history, but what I will say is this:
Detractors of Wikipedia want to hold them to a hard line of proof and reference. They are concealing desire for control with the call for credibility. Okay, it makes sense to me, so then lets do the same thing for Viacom, CNN, Infiniti, PRN, and anyone else that is responsible for distributing factual accounting and reference.
Lets all agree that "according to our sources" is no longer a disclaimer that can be considered acceptable when presenting fact. In your agreement, I will then proceed to dust off the first 2 weeks of media coverage from 9/11.
Lets see how many print retractions were made for inaccurate information, how many peopel were fired for simply making things up, and how many opinions were presented as validated proof in existences.
I would say that Wikipedia has one over on all of them in that it is far closer to a truth similar to fact that the horsecrap I read on a daily basis in any media contribution.
The Truth Be Known
History is a part perception, part politics, and part fiction.
I dont care what people write as a factual account, there are 360 degrees of visual perception alone from a linear standpoint in experience. That point of reference and the input being recieved is filled in by variables.
Literature is no different and these media outlets [notice that I call them outlets because to me they are no different than a discount clothing clearing house for the news]. They just dont like the fact that they no longer control the bull-shite and will do anything they can to discredit the source of competition.
Why not hold yourself to the same unbending credible line that you are attempting to hold Wikipedia to? I'd like to dust off some 9/11 coverage that I saw, heard and read, and ask : "How reliable can you possibly be- or is it that you can cover yourself with the disclaimer 'according to our sources' which happens to by your imagination?"
I dont know about all of you, but I burn through some serious wattage on both my phone and my iPOD. This in itself makes me fearful of consolidating them both.
My ability to communicate could be diminshed by my need to play my iPOD in the background of my life from 6am until 5pm each day. I hate tethering myself to the charger unless absolutely necessary because the longer you are docked, the more diminished the battery life becomes.
Anyone else feel this way? Or are we suddenly predicting a 20-30% improvement in battery capabilities?
Also- Content is a challenge in writing this genre. Basically, you take the humanity off a planet and put it into space. Then you have to come up with a reason why this would be more interesting, and back that with a challenge to the lead characters.
Then what you are left with is "why the hell is this happening in space rather than on Earth. Wouldnt it be cheaper for production to film this in Toronto?"
They bought Peoplesoft, Siebel, and now Hyperion. They bought Retek They bought- hell I wont go through this. They have spent several billion in the last 4 years doing what you just said they dont do.
I can disect their practice to a T and the problems they face are rooted in the fact that they dont have a clear integration pathway.
Slashdot Mirror
If corporations were not held accountable as an entity in being, then lawsuits like Enron could not proceed. Your only recourse would be to file individual lawsuits against each officer. The diluted impact would give the injured little recourse and limited effects.
On the topic, this opinion regards privacy with the highest of reverence and that any compromise, on behalf of cause, country or individual, is a price far too high to pay.
Security is not a measure of checks and balances, it is a result of action by the popular culture of those people who inhabit the society and government in which it is being measured. Whenever we lower that standard, we also welcome investigation by the pervasive- that is, those who would influence on behalf of their own recognized needs.
There is no need greater than that of the person. So therefore, it makes no sense why we are sacrificing our privacy on behalf of any government.
The largest problem in MOST MMORPG's is that they dwell on singular components and fundamental modules too much.
What I mean is that the most successful are those that can create inter-cultural settings that make groups of people follow an pathways that are completely outside others. The excitement of the entire secular experience is when those paths cross and it's almost like discovering a new race and culture that was always there but you never knew existed.
The same goes for skills, weapon choice, and etc.
Most MMORPG's do this so poorly that you find yourself in a hamsterwheel spinning as fast as you can to level up to get to the top so that you can finally start to enjoy the game.
The entire point to the MMORPG is not the skill levels, but the social interactions that take place inside the game, and the introduction of those unique experiences in the correct amount of time- no matter how you play the game.
Beating WoW is not the objective, but a by-product of successful construction of a MMORPG.
Take one look at the cookie-cutter and break that into several pieces. Then start from there by taking with you what pieces you like. THAT is how you win.
I miss the late 90's where there were some really original ideas out there in the hands of innovative minds.
Where did all those crazy people go? They really had some moxie!
A few years ago I worked at a company that worked with Sony North America. I had a similar experience with an order of a Vaio where the call center representative told me "If you were to simply stop being such a *slur* and open your miserly wallet, then you wouldnt be in this mess. Stop buying junk and buy top of the line" then the line went dead.
I called back and got the manager of the call center on the phone and was told that I was more than welcome to refuse delivery of the computer and absorb the cost of shipping.
The real problem was that the online ordering process somehow went awry and several of my option requests were omitted and the rep told me to "live with it."
In the end, I opened up the book of people I know and I emailed them all. They never called me, however, their executive assistants each called me to personally apologize, and it was an Executive Vice President that made the call and expedited my PC to me as requested.
Why?
Because I knew the email addresses, and I knew how to make a buzz. Executive Assistants all each lunch togeather and talk constantly. They are the Sorority of the corporate world. If more than two of them talk about it, it will be across the company in 2 hours.
This is no different.
What dissapoints me most here is that you've apologized for being human. It's Jobs' company and if he isnt willing to work for you then why does he deserve your money? I expect Chief Executive Officers to go to the front lines anonymously and get things done. Two special companies I worked for that I wont name here had CEO's that would log into the call center and answer calls periodically. One of them went by "Bryan" and because I was the top Inside Sales person at the time "Bryan" would sometimes IM me for call assistance or ask to conference me in to help support.
Good for Jobs for stepping up and monitoring his customer base.
I dont know who ditched this post to -1 but it is entirely accurate.
My post is similar to this one and it is absolutely truthyful
Listen-
A majority of the print out there, including reference resources that I refuse to name, are known as "Pay for Play".
There are companies out there who are heralded, yet refuse to write a word unless you provide them with things such as references, guaranteed space on the website, or guarantees for future business (i.e. we pay them "consulting fees" where the reality is all we do is agrue about the crap they are writing).
The best sites are the ones where user opinion is at the forefront and mediated by a set (more than 1)of industry experts that represent two or more sides.
Magazines like these are on lifesupport, and the only way that they turn or clear ROI is to whore themselves to the top companies of their respected sector in industry.
I for one appreciate the former editors ethics and would think that it wont be long before he is hired somewhere else. From this perspective, his value just went up 2 fold, and the company that hires him will benefit greatly.
Typo- Where I say 2.8, I meant 2.5. And that is in reference to my GPA from the Junior College. I did 3 years at the University with a 4.0
Whatever- I know a Naval Academy Graduate that got turned down with a 3.5, and he was never the idiot I was.
They start with GPA and work from there.
I had a 4.0 at my University, a 2.5 at the J.C. I transferred from. The problem with me was that I was an idiot for 2 years and didnt go to class. Then I cleaned up my act, went to school and kicked ass. The damage was so bad, though, I could only raise myself up to 2.8.
I went to a small university out here that features professors from Berkeley and Stanford. We use the same exact curriculum that they do, the professors teach part time there and part time at our university because it gives them more hours and a range of flexibility.
Google took one look at my overall GPA and said "sorry- you dont meet our academic requirements." I tried tot ell them that my undergraduate GPA at the University was 4.0, but they wouldnt have it.
I am a top person in my field, working at companies like Oracle, and have never been less than #1 on my team since graduating college.
Companies with these unreal ideas in their head tend to do themselves in. I am the 4th person I know who have had this happen to them after being approached by Google.
They came to me- not the other way around. They have some really dumb hiring practices over there. The academics they hire arent necessarily the best employees out there.
oh yeah?
Does this mean I can offshore my websurfing to someone else?
I agree but am dissappointed that more people dont recall their 6th grade science courses that determined the differences in scientific statements.
There are hypothesis
There are theory
There are fact
Then there are people like the cell phone reporter.
I read it on the internet, so it must be fact as well as truth.
I'm tired of this kind of rhetoric. It's an illogical arguement because the innocent always find the means to defend themselves unless there is some reason to fear in guilt. Let's just remember that MOST people dont exude an alias that says "I'm a junkie who is probable to be in possession of illegal substances."
You are who they are, in that you are who you associate with. This is a classic example of past history + current company creating a situation where it was determined to be prudent to search this person.
In all cases such as these, an officer would not field test a soap unless there was other indicators of suspicion. Remember, we dont have the full context of the situation unless we are there. A verbal or written testimony often leaves out those suspicion indicators such as "the guy was twitching and wouldnt look me in the eye when I asked him what was in the bottle".
Of course I'm going to go down in flames for this commentary, but the reality is that irregardless of political correctness, profiling is a common component in ALL cases of criminality. I.E, why a red Ferrari will be pulled over more often than that sputtering Honda for going 8 over the speed limit. Why the idiots with red and green bandana's in their pockets hanging out of the pants hanging off the back of their asses are always getting lined up on the wall.
Its probably just like all the MS Word crashes.
Just a feature (see the other post on MS Word)
Yeah- I heard this once:
"That sound you hear- well thats a feature of that model year. No no, dontch worry bout that- the bumper is SUPPOSED to fall off in the event that you bump up against it- that way you can put it back on and it will still look good"
Whatever.
I agree- and its a small part of what I said "get smarter" that includes using my time, your peers time, and etc.
Pay them what they are worth, not what they think they are worth. If you do the latter they will start dictating the needs of the company according to themselves rather than what is right for the company.
Honest people are typically viewed as jerks. So yes, I think the best managers are jerks. They tell you when your S does stink, they fear nothing your insecure outburst might tell us, and they often dont bend on principle until a logical alternative that is conducive to the overall goal appears.
More than this, they lack the consideration for politically correct conversations that serve only to soothe your damaged ego. You suck- face it. You either work harder, get smarter (study) or get the hell out.
A manager is looking for winners. And winners are not whiners. It's uncomfortable, unfair, not right, you aren't speaking to me in a 'happy tone', etc. Too bad. shut up and win- thats all you are paid to do- win.
A manager with several different personalities on their team can hedge against favoritism because no one is looking over their shoulder comparing themsleves to the other. They are all saying "that poor sucker" and are more likely to 'help' each other and work collaboratively.
In the end, people only respect two things about their manager: 1) did I get my MBO/Bonus at 100% because he made it possible for my potential to meet that need? 2) Can I get my 4 weeks off as planned?
Other than that, people really dont need a manager. They need a freaking babysitter because most people are innately lazy and what differs from person to person is their own unique ability to disguise this.
Honestly- I dont care if I hurt your feelings, earn your base and enjoy your bonus. Have a nice trip and have your game face on after your vacation. Now get the F*** out of my office before I call security.
I live out here- people are going nuts about this and I think its a joke.
Not only is Pontiac a POS, but the entire car is made up of that crappy brittle plastic that was tacky even back in the day.
Add David HelmettHairHoff with the members only leather jacket and the shouldermuhpads, and you gto one big giant can of cheeze whiz.
Yeah-
Can you imagine how painful every cavity you get will be with all that vibrating going on in your mouth?
And can you imagine the deductible charge on your molar if you swallow the device?
I mean I already have a problem with dropping my cell in the urinal when I forget to shift my phone to the back of my waste band- 3 phones at $50 a pop, and now I'm allowed no more...
Also- wont this make diagnosing schizophrenics harder? I mean I could be walking down the street talking to myself and no one would know the difference.
"Honey! Hey Honey! I got Mom on the phone here. What? NO! Shes on my Molar! yeah, she said the casserole last night was crap- she's insisting that you never, EVER, do that again."
One more thing- I wonder how conference calls would work? And how do you put that on mute?
My first thought was a bunch of anti-american semi-totalitarian countries sitting around the large table at the U.N. laughing.
Truth Be Known
Fact is one part reference point, one part perception, and one part moral position [Politics, religion, culture, etc.]
I think these news outlets like to pick on Wikipedia because they dont control the message any longer so long as it can be successful. They are nothing more than Information Clearing Stores.
Bias media is nothing new, and in ancient history if your society got tooled, it got erased or modified. History books were burneed, statues of your heroes destroyed, and anyone citing history not in line with the new government was elminated.
I'm not comparing Wikipedia's problems to ancient history, but what I will say is this:
Detractors of Wikipedia want to hold them to a hard line of proof and reference. They are concealing desire for control with the call for credibility. Okay, it makes sense to me, so then lets do the same thing for Viacom, CNN, Infiniti, PRN, and anyone else that is responsible for distributing factual accounting and reference.
Lets all agree that "according to our sources" is no longer a disclaimer that can be considered acceptable when presenting fact. In your agreement, I will then proceed to dust off the first 2 weeks of media coverage from 9/11.
Lets see how many print retractions were made for inaccurate information, how many peopel were fired for simply making things up, and how many opinions were presented as validated proof in existences.
I would say that Wikipedia has one over on all of them in that it is far closer to a truth similar to fact that the horsecrap I read on a daily basis in any media contribution.
The Truth Be Known History is a part perception, part politics, and part fiction. I dont care what people write as a factual account, there are 360 degrees of visual perception alone from a linear standpoint in experience. That point of reference and the input being recieved is filled in by variables. Literature is no different and these media outlets [notice that I call them outlets because to me they are no different than a discount clothing clearing house for the news]. They just dont like the fact that they no longer control the bull-shite and will do anything they can to discredit the source of competition. Why not hold yourself to the same unbending credible line that you are attempting to hold Wikipedia to? I'd like to dust off some 9/11 coverage that I saw, heard and read, and ask : "How reliable can you possibly be- or is it that you can cover yourself with the disclaimer 'according to our sources' which happens to by your imagination?"
I dont know about all of you, but I burn through some serious wattage on both my phone and my iPOD. This in itself makes me fearful of consolidating them both.
My ability to communicate could be diminshed by my need to play my iPOD in the background of my life from 6am until 5pm each day. I hate tethering myself to the charger unless absolutely necessary because the longer you are docked, the more diminished the battery life becomes.
Anyone else feel this way? Or are we suddenly predicting a 20-30% improvement in battery capabilities?
never work- in the US we tried this with illegal aliens and it just didnt work out.
Agreed.
Also- Content is a challenge in writing this genre. Basically, you take the humanity off a planet and put it into space. Then you have to come up with a reason why this would be more interesting, and back that with a challenge to the lead characters.
Then what you are left with is "why the hell is this happening in space rather than on Earth. Wouldnt it be cheaper for production to film this in Toronto?"
I have been to more tha 20 of these stores and they are usually ransacked shelves with filthy floors and that piss poor Seattles Best coffee in them.
This isnt a big deal at all- In fact it may actually help Amazon because now they can guarantee a higher quality of service.
They bought Peoplesoft, Siebel, and now Hyperion.
They bought Retek
They bought- hell I wont go through this. They have spent several billion in the last 4 years doing what you just said they dont do.
I can disect their practice to a T and the problems they face are rooted in the fact that they dont have a clear integration pathway.