Greed and investing in the short-term go hand in hand and yes the housing market wouldn't have collapsed if banks actually looked at who they were giving loans to and thought about the fact that they can't pay for them and in the long-term taking on a ton of dead beats will drag them down. Instead they thought of the short-term and probably thought they could sell bad debt in the future forever.
You can do both. People already do both and all it takes is a good story and sensible spending on the project for the size of your expected market.
In fact if you think the second idea is dumb that is exactly what most video games publishers do. Aside from Nintendo most companies put out games aimed at very specific types (young boys) and that seems to work well.
There are companies that provide mapping data, translation services, etc for a cost and it actually makes more sense to pay someone who is going to keep their service around because it's their business rather than someone who provides something for free and may take it away at any time.
I don't care if I make my money back or not. I don't want to wake up one morning and find my work broken. Most customers wouldn't look favourably towards paying for something that just dies without warning.
The 3D we have now isn't 3D we had back in the 70's and quite frankly I am glad they keep it up because 3D keeps getting better and it will only get better and it will become the standard.
Like I want to build my software around an API that could disappear in 6 months to a year. Google is quite bad, imo, at dropping things out of the blue, facebook likes to break things and to be honest I'm not sure I'd want to trust their competitors either.
yeah because appealing to the lowest common denominator is a good thing. So let's have 2D movies that will be loved by children, women and men. Anything else is just wasting its time on a small share of the market.
That's not necessarily true. There are some good movies that aren't original and falling in an area where there is an equal split amongst fans and haters. I think he's right that it's quite expensive and they do allow people to ruin movies so a movie that you may consider becomes a no because it's not absolutely must see and you don't want to pay through the nose to sit near some snot nosed brat playing with his mobile.
It's a nice pay for the technical side but you are doing a lot of PA work too and you travel when he wants it and you need to speak to the public for him in some cases and demonstrate systems to others.. It is low pay but it's a job funded through the university. It is going to be acceptable pay but not the sort of pay you would get for doing the same in the private sector (if it were possible to find a similar job elsewhere). So yes you get something that looks cool on your CV but you are technically taking a bit of a hit for that financially. You're also taking on a job that isn't guaranteed to be there next year. It's a contract job that may not get funding in 12 months. Though admittedly since it is for Stephen Hawking I'm sure it's more secure than most contracts you could get through the university.
I'd almost consider it just because it would be cool but as a developer it potentially could be pointless for my career and as a pet owner the fact that some of that travel could be for weeks at a time means I can't consider it. But it could be fun.
I wouldn't be concerned about Apple or Google themselves misusing my card details. I'd be more concerned about someone else getting a hold of the details. I would trust the user ratings too if people put some effort into their reviews. I'm tired of seeing a bunch of reviews for Android apps that simply give an app 1 star because it won't run on their particular old handset or giving it 5 stars for an equally dumb reason. So again it's wasting my time to sift through all the reviews to see if most of them are of value which is more effort than I want to put forward for a $1 purchase.
I buy the coffee because the odds of me enjoying it are nearly 100% and the only damage that could come about is staining if I spill it on myself.
With a $1 app there is a high chance it could be shit and therefore no better than throwing $1 out the window which, while a small sum, is still waste, it may steal my data, it may cause problems with my device and I do have to entrust my credit card with someone else. So there is a risk of further hassle and or time wasted. My time is worth a lot to me so the time wastage factor is much more important than the cost in money.
A low price doesn't mean people are more likely to buy a turd.
If you want to follow the bible there is a load of things you shouldn't eat including things like seafood and pork. Of course that made sense ages ago when there was no refrigeration and the ability to cook things wasn't as good. Most meats *still* have some blood in them anyway. It's not like they can drain 100% of the blood.
Why would people eat animal's eggs or milk or flesh? I can't see how someone can think eating one part of the animal is acceptable by eating the blood is awful.
So many people hear how hard it is to get a job as a developer when they're an "ancient" 35-40 years old so everyone feels they must be constantly learning or moving up to increase their value.
That's why they want young 20 somethings who hopefully are new to the workforce and hopefully don't realise they're being shafted. But they do eventually find out and the company gets upset the person realises they're being bent over.
Slashdot Mirror
As do Microsoft and many other ESA members.
Greed and investing in the short-term go hand in hand and yes the housing market wouldn't have collapsed if banks actually looked at who they were giving loans to and thought about the fact that they can't pay for them and in the long-term taking on a ton of dead beats will drag them down. Instead they thought of the short-term and probably thought they could sell bad debt in the future forever.
I agree, she showed herself to be an idiot, like every other tea party candidate.
You can do both. People already do both and all it takes is a good story and sensible spending on the project for the size of your expected market.
In fact if you think the second idea is dumb that is exactly what most video games publishers do. Aside from Nintendo most companies put out games aimed at very specific types (young boys) and that seems to work well.
There are companies that provide mapping data, translation services, etc for a cost and it actually makes more sense to pay someone who is going to keep their service around because it's their business rather than someone who provides something for free and may take it away at any time.
People thinking in the short term is why the economy has gone tits up for the past few years.
No, I'm not going to develop for Facebook, Google+ , etc.
I have the distinct feeling you're going to be suffering severe depression after Nov. 2012.
Yeah because their approval ratings are stellar at the moment and Bachmann is just steam rolling the other candidates.
I don't care if I make my money back or not. I don't want to wake up one morning and find my work broken. Most customers wouldn't look favourably towards paying for something that just dies without warning.
The 3D we have now isn't 3D we had back in the 70's and quite frankly I am glad they keep it up because 3D keeps getting better and it will only get better and it will become the standard.
Same with colour and some people did complain about colour TV but who would do that now?
They win the elections where no one shows up. When they start winning elections during the presidential cycles then they might get some credibility.
Like I want to build my software around an API that could disappear in 6 months to a year. Google is quite bad, imo, at dropping things out of the blue, facebook likes to break things and to be honest I'm not sure I'd want to trust their competitors either.
In your opinion which is something the world isn't governed by.
yeah because appealing to the lowest common denominator is a good thing. So let's have 2D movies that will be loved by children, women and men. Anything else is just wasting its time on a small share of the market.
That's not necessarily true. There are some good movies that aren't original and falling in an area where there is an equal split amongst fans and haters. I think he's right that it's quite expensive and they do allow people to ruin movies so a movie that you may consider becomes a no because it's not absolutely must see and you don't want to pay through the nose to sit near some snot nosed brat playing with his mobile.
It's a nice pay for the technical side but you are doing a lot of PA work too and you travel when he wants it and you need to speak to the public for him in some cases and demonstrate systems to others.. It is low pay but it's a job funded through the university. It is going to be acceptable pay but not the sort of pay you would get for doing the same in the private sector (if it were possible to find a similar job elsewhere). So yes you get something that looks cool on your CV but you are technically taking a bit of a hit for that financially. You're also taking on a job that isn't guaranteed to be there next year. It's a contract job that may not get funding in 12 months. Though admittedly since it is for Stephen Hawking I'm sure it's more secure than most contracts you could get through the university.
I'd almost consider it just because it would be cool but as a developer it potentially could be pointless for my career and as a pet owner the fact that some of that travel could be for weeks at a time means I can't consider it. But it could be fun.
I wouldn't be concerned about Apple or Google themselves misusing my card details. I'd be more concerned about someone else getting a hold of the details. I would trust the user ratings too if people put some effort into their reviews. I'm tired of seeing a bunch of reviews for Android apps that simply give an app 1 star because it won't run on their particular old handset or giving it 5 stars for an equally dumb reason. So again it's wasting my time to sift through all the reviews to see if most of them are of value which is more effort than I want to put forward for a $1 purchase.
I buy the coffee because the odds of me enjoying it are nearly 100% and the only damage that could come about is staining if I spill it on myself.
With a $1 app there is a high chance it could be shit and therefore no better than throwing $1 out the window which, while a small sum, is still waste, it may steal my data, it may cause problems with my device and I do have to entrust my credit card with someone else. So there is a risk of further hassle and or time wasted. My time is worth a lot to me so the time wastage factor is much more important than the cost in money.
A low price doesn't mean people are more likely to buy a turd.
A good sign you can't win the argument is when you can only come back with a "you're retarded". Thanks for admitting I'm right.
If you want to follow the bible there is a load of things you shouldn't eat including things like seafood and pork. Of course that made sense ages ago when there was no refrigeration and the ability to cook things wasn't as good. Most meats *still* have some blood in them anyway. It's not like they can drain 100% of the blood.
Why would people eat animal's eggs or milk or flesh? I can't see how someone can think eating one part of the animal is acceptable by eating the blood is awful.
So many people hear how hard it is to get a job as a developer when they're an "ancient" 35-40 years old so everyone feels they must be constantly learning or moving up to increase their value.
That's why they want young 20 somethings who hopefully are new to the workforce and hopefully don't realise they're being shafted. But they do eventually find out and the company gets upset the person realises they're being bent over.
If not, how did they pay for someone to write it?