This is the boilerplate explanation, but it's not real world. This isn't what happens.
First of all, the idea that "things are done for the shareholders" doesn't hold water. Most of the shares are usually in within the board and the management anyway.
Second, even if you accept the "for the shareholders" fallacy the actions don't match up with what you are saying. It seems so much more at a guttural, tribal level.
Also, if we are talking about Carly F., she has never been at a "startup".
Really... we need to get beyond B.S. explanations like this. Corporatists keep arguing it is a rational system and this only seems to be partially true.
"alternatives to protocols like AirPlay that are open, documented and patent-free for"...
Sorry, I know this is forthright, but this makes me giggle. This is asking much more than the simple sentence here indicates. This is a difference in corporate culture. Culture is the most difficult thing to change in every organization.
How are CEOs judged. Honestly.. I don't know. It seems to an outsider like me that names come up again and again even after they slam corporations to the ground.
Carly Fiorina came up as a candidate. Why? Everything she touches turns to shit and H.P. barely survived her.
There is a cult of personality around these people that need to be broken up.
I don't think I really care if it is anonymous or not. Anonymity is quite useless if you are buying real world goods. Even sending items to a 3rd Party P.O. box gives some hint as to identity.
How are the all the douchebags you remember from high school that are in love with the glamor shot photo going to feed themselves if we get rid of realtors?
It's not a big surprise that economics that were good for everyone in the 1940s and 1950s might not be good for everyone now.
The first action of any corporation when their historically affective business model starts to falter is to go screaming and whining to the various legislators. This is always after a period where they're whining about "too much regulation."
It wasn't put in public domain, it was deleted. I.E. taken out of print. Big difference.
People copy the hell out of KLF music and I don't think that Bill Drummond cares, though, which might be the reason someone is think it is in the public domain.
Where does this come from and why can't it ever be debunked once and for all?
When I was studying broadcast, one of the first things they teach when talking about copyright is that fair use is more complex than you can "use 30 seconds of this" or "300 words of that." It's another tricky legal concept defined by "we know it when we see it."
Unless the contract ends up hurting a corporation, and then they just really get thrown out. Ask people who have lost their pensions.
Seriously... anyone that doesn't understand the practicality of this is being a corporate sycophant. The way that the legal and legislative system is right now corporations wield a HUGE amount of power.
Re:Ballmer is evidence of the role of luck in life
on
Ballmer To Retire
·
· Score: 1
Going to Harvard ITSELF is evidence of luck in life.
You're either a legacy, you have money, or you're lucky to scholarship in. It's far cry from meritocracy.
Re:Ballmer made $20 billion for investors today
on
Ballmer To Retire
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Given the direction that MS has been in for 5 years and the fact they are in such a hard sealed corporate bubble, hiring Carly (and Carly's mouth) would not be a very big surprise. She's got the ego the size of Africa and she's never right about anything. It seems an appropriate substitute for Ballmer.
This was my point about the word "freedom" used in the headline...
How is one losing freedom? You're not losing any freedom to go anywhere. You are still determining the destination. It's different from public transport or being a passenger because you still going from point to point and through a route.
So what is the difference? You're losing the freedom to run someone off the road or get them into an accident. You will still be able to use your middle finger if you like..
Slashdot Mirror
Yes in the short term. Less truck drivers, less cab drivers...
No in the long term.
The real thing hurting the job pool is the dilution by H1-B.
I don't know why I am reply to this...
but, since you're a dolt, isn't even compatible with ANYONE at Apple means he couldn't go back to Apple, let alone Microsoft.
Sorry that you can't read and need that explained.
This is the boilerplate explanation, but it's not real world. This isn't what happens.
First of all, the idea that "things are done for the shareholders" doesn't hold water. Most of the shares are usually in within the board and the management anyway.
Second, even if you accept the "for the shareholders" fallacy the actions don't match up with what you are saying. It seems so much more at a guttural, tribal level.
Also, if we are talking about Carly F., she has never been at a "startup".
Really... we need to get beyond B.S. explanations like this. Corporatists keep arguing it is a rational system and this only seems to be partially true.
"alternatives to protocols like AirPlay that are open, documented and patent-free for"...
Sorry, I know this is forthright, but this makes me giggle. This is asking much more than the simple sentence here indicates. This is a difference in corporate culture. Culture is the most difficult thing to change in every organization.
Not that I don't agree with you...
How are CEOs judged. Honestly.. I don't know. It seems to an outsider like me that names come up again and again even after they slam corporations to the ground.
Carly Fiorina came up as a candidate. Why? Everything she touches turns to shit and H.P. barely survived her.
There is a cult of personality around these people that need to be broken up.
I think that would be the equivalent of taking a 18 wheeler going at 80mph and slamming it into reverse.
Face it, Steve's vision of what technology should be isn't even compatible with ANYONE at Apple anymore.
I don't think I really care if it is anonymous or not. Anonymity is quite useless if you are buying real world goods. Even sending items to a 3rd Party P.O. box gives some hint as to identity.
I wish there was a wall between Texas and the rest of the country so Texas wouldn't affect US.
Generating home power isn't a all or nothing situation. There are levels you can get into that have lower prices for entry.
I have never bothered to look up his past, but Eric Cantor looks and acts EXACTLY like my mental schema of "used car salesman."
How are the all the douchebags you remember from high school that are in love with the glamor shot photo going to feed themselves if we get rid of realtors?
It's not a big surprise that economics that were good for everyone in the 1940s and 1950s might not be good for everyone now.
The first action of any corporation when their historically affective business model starts to falter is to go screaming and whining to the various legislators. This is always after a period where they're whining about "too much regulation."
And you know who is the biggest advocate of those dealer laws: Texas.
Yes, folks, just maybe people screaming "free market" and "no regulation" are trying to scam you.
do ettttttt
if only for the lolz that the personal injury trial will generate.
No! The US is still alive and kicking.
yeah, go ahead, -1
Grumpy Cat would have been perfect for this story...
ok.. thanks for that. I always thought deletion was simply not selling it anymore.
It wasn't put in public domain, it was deleted. I.E. taken out of print. Big difference.
People copy the hell out of KLF music and I don't think that Bill Drummond cares, though, which might be the reason someone is think it is in the public domain.
Where does this come from and why can't it ever be debunked once and for all?
When I was studying broadcast, one of the first things they teach when talking about copyright is that fair use is more complex than you can "use 30 seconds of this" or "300 words of that." It's another tricky legal concept defined by "we know it when we see it."
The "300 words" misconception is mentioned directly on the Fair Use wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#Common_misunderstandings
And here is a good article about the non-existent 30-second rule (which probably comes directly from someone morphing the 300 words rule) http://studentpressblogs.org/nspa/the-non-existent-30-second-rule/
Unless the contract ends up hurting a corporation, and then they just really get thrown out. Ask people who have lost their pensions.
Seriously... anyone that doesn't understand the practicality of this is being a corporate sycophant. The way that the legal and legislative system is right now corporations wield a HUGE amount of power.
Going to Harvard ITSELF is evidence of luck in life.
You're either a legacy, you have money, or you're lucky to scholarship in. It's far cry from meritocracy.
Given the direction that MS has been in for 5 years and the fact they are in such a hard sealed corporate bubble, hiring Carly (and Carly's mouth) would not be a very big surprise. She's got the ego the size of Africa and she's never right about anything. It seems an appropriate substitute for Ballmer.
He could also talk about how bad the pinkos and commies are while he's standing in line.
That's the level of our average American at the moment. It'll get worse as we phase out education.
...entire religion....
I think I found the flaw in your argument. It takes just ONE case for this not to be true.
This was my point about the word "freedom" used in the headline...
How is one losing freedom? You're not losing any freedom to go anywhere. You are still determining the destination. It's different from public transport or being a passenger because you still going from point to point and through a route.
So what is the difference? You're losing the freedom to run someone off the road or get them into an accident. You will still be able to use your middle finger if you like..