I have worked for 4 family owned companies (in three of them I knew the families from outside of the work environment). Based on that I have discovered a pattern that I have talked over with others that have experience with multi-generation family owned companies. Generally, the first generation greatly values the employees because they recognize that the value of the company is the result of the people who work for them. Often, the second generation was partially raised by some of the employees of the company (Dad was busy running the company, but he brought Junior to work and had various employees supervise him), and sees them as family that the owner is responsible to look after. The third generation usually sees the whole company as a bunch of numbers to be added and subtracted to maximize the bottom line.
No sir, firing lawyers is NOT the solution. Try again, or build a bigger cannon.
Absolutely, he should have suggested firing AT the lawyers. Of course, this brings us back to gun control. It is necessary to have very good gun control if one is going to fire at lawyers. If there is inadequate gun control you might miss and that would be a tragedy.
So, the government has no problems with people building artillery as long as it has no firing pin, and you tell them first. Then it's legal to possess such a dangerous piece of weaponry which serves no practical purpose - and it's ok for your 11 year old kid to own it. America really is a backwards country.
See in America, the people are the government. I know that is hard to understand in most of the rest of the world where the people are subjects of the government. On the other hand, many Americans have been working very hard to change that, so perhaps before much longer that distinction will be gone and the American people will be subjects like so much of the rest of the world.
You do know that the state of West Virginia exists because the people of West Virginia sided with the Union against the Confederacy, don't you?
At the start of the Civil War, what is now West Virginia was just part of a larger Virginia. West Virginia was granted statehood when the people who lived there chose to remain part of the Union after Virginia seceded.
Also what's up with that measly fine? Given the poor economy it will probably take her a year to find another job, so she should receive one year's salary. (IMHO). Teach these corporations not to mistreat the citizens.
She has already found another job. She was only out of work for 6 months.
Thanks for spreading more FUD and making a 3rd party vendor's firmware issues look like Apple's fault...
I thought the whole argument for why Mac OS can only be used on Apple built computers was because that allowed Apple to control all of the hardware it ran on and avoid these types of problems?
You make a very good point. However, I suspect that many companies fail to realize that over-hyping a product costs you in sales in the long run. Here's how it works:
Company A has a product that they really want to sell well, they spend massive amounts of money developing a marketing plan with lots of glitzy ads that show all the best features of the product and leave the consumer with the impression that there are lots of other features just as cool that they didn't have time to include (movie and game trailers do this a lot, ads for other products do other things that have similar effect). Consumer A buys the product and discovers that while the product isn't bad, all the really neat stuff was in the ads and is therefore disappointed. For the first product this often works fairly well, however, when Company A does this time after time, the Consumer has less interest in each successive product, so Company A feels compelled to increase its marketing to get the consumer excited about the next product. Sometimes a better strategy would be to scale back the hype and let the quality of the product create the buzz.
I would also guess that an important reason for using Linux is that when they build a new one in 10/15/20 years, they will be able they will be able to install the same OS on it and not have to worry about licenses not being available, or having to rewrite basic parts of the software that haven't changed in all that time because the current version no longer supports the function calls that were used. The fact that MS was in the middle of an OS change when they were working on this probably influenced the decision as well.
While the spelling of the word as "defense" rather than "defence" is currently unique to America, it does not in my opinion truly qualify as an Americanism since according to the link you provided the American spelling has "greater antiquity".
My opinion is that an Americanism spelling would be one where the spelling was altered in America, as opposed to this case where it appears that the original spelling was retained in America and altered most(all?) other English speaking areas.
'Recognize that we are on deadline, which for most news journalists means posting the article within a couple of hours and for feature authors within a couple of days. If we ask for input, or a quote, or anything to which your project spokesperson (you do have one? yes? please say yes) might want to respond, it generally does mean, "Drop everything and answer us now." If the journalist doesn't give you a deadline ("I need to know by 2pm"), it's okay to ask how long you can take to reach the right developer in Poland, but err on the side of "emergency response." It's unreasonable, I know, but so are our deadlines.'"
And people in the news media wonder why they are losing their audience. Maybe it is because they are more concerned with getting a "story" (any story) out by deadline then they are with getting the facts right.
The problem isn't just news. If people know enough about Google's criteria to satisfy these news organizations, Google's search results will be less useful. There are a lot of people out there who would use knowledge of Google's page rank system to turn up in my searches even when they have nothing to do with what I am looking for. I already run into this when I can't remember the correct "industry"** term for what I am looking for.
**With "industry" meaning whatever industry is relevant to the particular search I am running at the time.
These are men who've chosen to use the implicit threat of violence against their political opponents.
As opposed to the members of the New Black Panther Party who stood outside a polling place and threatened violence against those they perceived as likely to vote against their preferred candidate?
As far as I know there was one guy carrying guns outside a town hall event (it's not quite clear to me from the reports, so there may have been others also carrying guns outside that event). However, he was not "brandishing" the guns, he was carrying them.
Yes, if when you say "boss", you mean "US Senate", where this bill was introduced.
In any case, supporting that sentiment that elected officials of opposing parties are not significantly distinguishable, note that this bill in its original form was a bipartisan bill, as one of the co-sponsors, Sen Snowe, Olympia J. [ME], is a member of the GOP.
Yes, that Olympia Snowe who voted with the Republican Party slightly less often then Arlen Specter did when he was a Republican.
Enough of this quoting the Fourth Amendment. This is not about searches when you are getting onto an airplane. This is about searches when you pass through Customs. The Supreme Court ruled a long time ago that the 4th Amendment does not apply. Searching laptops is an extension to modern technology of practices that were going on when the people who WROTE the Constitution were still running the country.
That doesn't mean that this is completely ok. It just means that it has ample precedent to not being un-constitutional.
My understanding was that this was about when someone goes through Customs. That happens when you arrive in the country, not when you are getting on a flight.
The total population of the United States in 1860 was a little over 31 million ( http://www.civilwarhome.com/population1860.htm ). This includes the states that would become the Confederate States.The population of the United States in 1910 was a little over 92 million. In 1912 the population of Germany was a little over 66 million, Russia was about 173 million, the population of the UK was around 20 million. So comparing raw numbers doesn't really tell us anything. By your own numbers the soldiers that fought in the American Civil War were 10% of the population. That means they were probably a pretty good cross section of the populace.
It makes a lot of sense. This idea of their being a golden age of people hand writing letters to each other is bullshit for the vast majority of the populace.
l.
There was such a golden age. It's just that no one is alive from that time anymore (nor has been in my lifetime). According to several historians, the armies that fought in the Civil War were the most literate armies in history up until sometime right around the year 2000, and possibly since (the show I watched discussing this was produced between 1996 and 2004--I don't remember more accurately than that).
Even in luxury goods you will make more money in the long run by treating your employees well then by treating them like crap. Why? Because they will do better work if you treat them well and therefore your product will be better, your customers will be treated better, there won't be as much pilferage/destruction of company goods, etc.
There are lots of people who think they are getting one over on people and making more money or paying less when in fact they are making less or paying more.
I didn't say he wasn't an exception. I was replying to the idea that the best way to make the most money is to crush the employees "beneath your booted heal". It isn't. The best way to make the most money is usually to treat your employees as a valuable asset. It is harder to do it that way, but it is by far the best way to make the most money.
"Additionally, I would like to know where you have seen anything saying that filtered water is basically the same as tap."
Look at the back of any aquifina bottle (and a few others). It says "from municipal water source" which is tap water.
That would be "bottled water" not "filtered water". See, if it doesn't say "filtered" it isn't filtered. Usually "filtered water" is actually run through a filter at the location where it is consumed, although some bottled water is also advertised as filtered.
Most filtered water is not better nor worse than tap water. A lot of the bottling facilities get their water from municipal water systems!
He didn't day that she was drinking bottled water, but filtered water. I don't know about the OP, but generally when people say filtered water they mean that they buy a filter and run the water through the filter themselves. If they mean water from a bottling facility they usually say "bottled water".
Additionally, I would like to know where you have seen anything saying that filtered water is basically the same as tap. I have seen lots of reports that bottled water is basically the same as tap (but then I knew that before they started doing all the reports).
Slashdot Mirror
I have worked for 4 family owned companies (in three of them I knew the families from outside of the work environment). Based on that I have discovered a pattern that I have talked over with others that have experience with multi-generation family owned companies. Generally, the first generation greatly values the employees because they recognize that the value of the company is the result of the people who work for them. Often, the second generation was partially raised by some of the employees of the company (Dad was busy running the company, but he brought Junior to work and had various employees supervise him), and sees them as family that the owner is responsible to look after. The third generation usually sees the whole company as a bunch of numbers to be added and subtracted to maximize the bottom line.
No sir, firing lawyers is NOT the solution. Try again, or build a bigger cannon.
Absolutely, he should have suggested firing AT the lawyers. Of course, this brings us back to gun control. It is necessary to have very good gun control if one is going to fire at lawyers. If there is inadequate gun control you might miss and that would be a tragedy.
So, the government has no problems with people building artillery as long as it has no firing pin, and you tell them first. Then it's legal to possess such a dangerous piece of weaponry which serves no practical purpose - and it's ok for your 11 year old kid to own it. America really is a backwards country.
See in America, the people are the government. I know that is hard to understand in most of the rest of the world where the people are subjects of the government. On the other hand, many Americans have been working very hard to change that, so perhaps before much longer that distinction will be gone and the American people will be subjects like so much of the rest of the world.
You do know that the state of West Virginia exists because the people of West Virginia sided with the Union against the Confederacy, don't you?
At the start of the Civil War, what is now West Virginia was just part of a larger Virginia. West Virginia was granted statehood when the people who lived there chose to remain part of the Union after Virginia seceded.
Also what's up with that measly fine? Given the poor economy it will probably take her a year to find another job, so she should receive one year's salary. (IMHO). Teach these corporations not to mistreat the citizens.
She has already found another job. She was only out of work for 6 months.
Thanks for spreading more FUD and making a 3rd party vendor's firmware issues look like Apple's fault...
I thought the whole argument for why Mac OS can only be used on Apple built computers was because that allowed Apple to control all of the hardware it ran on and avoid these types of problems?
You make a very good point. However, I suspect that many companies fail to realize that over-hyping a product costs you in sales in the long run. Here's how it works:
Company A has a product that they really want to sell well, they spend massive amounts of money developing a marketing plan with lots of glitzy ads that show all the best features of the product and leave the consumer with the impression that there are lots of other features just as cool that they didn't have time to include (movie and game trailers do this a lot, ads for other products do other things that have similar effect). Consumer A buys the product and discovers that while the product isn't bad, all the really neat stuff was in the ads and is therefore disappointed. For the first product this often works fairly well, however, when Company A does this time after time, the Consumer has less interest in each successive product, so Company A feels compelled to increase its marketing to get the consumer excited about the next product. Sometimes a better strategy would be to scale back the hype and let the quality of the product create the buzz.
I would also guess that an important reason for using Linux is that when they build a new one in 10/15/20 years, they will be able they will be able to install the same OS on it and not have to worry about licenses not being available, or having to rewrite basic parts of the software that haven't changed in all that time because the current version no longer supports the function calls that were used. The fact that MS was in the middle of an OS change when they were working on this probably influenced the decision as well.
While the spelling of the word as "defense" rather than "defence" is currently unique to America, it does not in my opinion truly qualify as an Americanism since according to the link you provided the American spelling has "greater antiquity".
My opinion is that an Americanism spelling would be one where the spelling was altered in America, as opposed to this case where it appears that the original spelling was retained in America and altered most(all?) other English speaking areas.
Dagnabit, all I needed was "will implement in the cloud" for Bingo.
'Recognize that we are on deadline, which for most news journalists means posting the article within a couple of hours and for feature authors within a couple of days. If we ask for input, or a quote, or anything to which your project spokesperson (you do have one? yes? please say yes) might want to respond, it generally does mean, "Drop everything and answer us now." If the journalist doesn't give you a deadline ("I need to know by 2pm"), it's okay to ask how long you can take to reach the right developer in Poland, but err on the side of "emergency response." It's unreasonable, I know, but so are our deadlines.'"
And people in the news media wonder why they are losing their audience. Maybe it is because they are more concerned with getting a "story" (any story) out by deadline then they are with getting the facts right.
The problem isn't just news. If people know enough about Google's criteria to satisfy these news organizations, Google's search results will be less useful. There are a lot of people out there who would use knowledge of Google's page rank system to turn up in my searches even when they have nothing to do with what I am looking for. I already run into this when I can't remember the correct "industry"** term for what I am looking for.
**With "industry" meaning whatever industry is relevant to the particular search I am running at the time.
These are men who've chosen to use the implicit threat of violence against their political opponents.
As opposed to the members of the New Black Panther Party who stood outside a polling place and threatened violence against those they perceived as likely to vote against their preferred candidate?
As far as I know there was one guy carrying guns outside a town hall event (it's not quite clear to me from the reports, so there may have been others also carrying guns outside that event). However, he was not "brandishing" the guns, he was carrying them.
Yes, if when you say "boss", you mean "US Senate", where this bill was introduced.
In any case, supporting that sentiment that elected officials of opposing parties are not significantly distinguishable, note that this bill in its original form was a bipartisan bill, as one of the co-sponsors, Sen Snowe, Olympia J. [ME], is a member of the GOP.
Yes, that Olympia Snowe who voted with the Republican Party slightly less often then Arlen Specter did when he was a Republican.
And what evidence do you have that the current Administration would have a problem with that?
It doesn't happen on outbound flights. You don't go through Customs when you LEAVE the country. You go through Customs when you arrive in a country.
Enough of this quoting the Fourth Amendment. This is not about searches when you are getting onto an airplane. This is about searches when you pass through Customs. The Supreme Court ruled a long time ago that the 4th Amendment does not apply. Searching laptops is an extension to modern technology of practices that were going on when the people who WROTE the Constitution were still running the country.
That doesn't mean that this is completely ok. It just means that it has ample precedent to not being un-constitutional.
My understanding was that this was about when someone goes through Customs. That happens when you arrive in the country, not when you are getting on a flight.
The total population of the United States in 1860 was a little over 31 million ( http://www.civilwarhome.com/population1860.htm ). This includes the states that would become the Confederate States.The population of the United States in 1910 was a little over 92 million. In 1912 the population of Germany was a little over 66 million, Russia was about 173 million, the population of the UK was around 20 million. So comparing raw numbers doesn't really tell us anything. By your own numbers the soldiers that fought in the American Civil War were 10% of the population. That means they were probably a pretty good cross section of the populace.
I
It makes a lot of sense. This idea of their being a golden age of people hand writing letters to each other is bullshit for the vast majority of the populace.
l.
There was such a golden age. It's just that no one is alive from that time anymore (nor has been in my lifetime). According to several historians, the armies that fought in the Civil War were the most literate armies in history up until sometime right around the year 2000, and possibly since (the show I watched discussing this was produced between 1996 and 2004--I don't remember more accurately than that).
Even in luxury goods you will make more money in the long run by treating your employees well then by treating them like crap. Why? Because they will do better work if you treat them well and therefore your product will be better, your customers will be treated better, there won't be as much pilferage/destruction of company goods, etc.
There are lots of people who think they are getting one over on people and making more money or paying less when in fact they are making less or paying more.
I didn't say he wasn't an exception. I was replying to the idea that the best way to make the most money is to crush the employees "beneath your booted heal". It isn't. The best way to make the most money is usually to treat your employees as a valuable asset. It is harder to do it that way, but it is by far the best way to make the most money.
"Additionally, I would like to know where you have seen anything saying that filtered water is basically the same as tap." Look at the back of any aquifina bottle (and a few others). It says "from municipal water source" which is tap water.
That would be "bottled water" not "filtered water". See, if it doesn't say "filtered" it isn't filtered. Usually "filtered water" is actually run through a filter at the location where it is consumed, although some bottled water is also advertised as filtered.
Most filtered water is not better nor worse than tap water. A lot of the bottling facilities get their water from municipal water systems!
He didn't day that she was drinking bottled water, but filtered water. I don't know about the OP, but generally when people say filtered water they mean that they buy a filter and run the water through the filter themselves. If they mean water from a bottling facility they usually say "bottled water".
Additionally, I would like to know where you have seen anything saying that filtered water is basically the same as tap. I have seen lots of reports that bottled water is basically the same as tap (but then I knew that before they started doing all the reports).