Make it a foldable bike. Oh wait - I already got one. It is how I go to work each day. And you know what? Foldable bikes are so common here that you can take them with you in the train without paying extra. My bike folds up smaller, looks by far safer to me, and, no, it is not electric. I mean, it's a bike. Come on.
While I agree that a dragging take-over procedure can be very bad as well, I merely wanted to say that there are more factors that make a take-over unsuccessful. I have been in two companies that bled completely dry in a few months because of a takeover.
In one company, even upper management was not involved in the sale and learned only afterwards from it. The owner had done it completely by surprise.
In another company, the new owner was a competitor that merely wanted to get rid of a competing firm. We called our company "The Big Brother House". because every week somebody was leaving.
I worked (as a temp) at Fokker when the announcement was made that it would be sold to DASA and I cannot say I saw even one happy reaction. My contract ended before the take-over really took place though.
When a company is taken over, the corporate "feel" usually suffers. I have seen a few companies that were taken over from the inside (I experienced the take-over itself in one occasion), and the employers were never happy with it. And as always, the best people have the best chances, so they leave first...
Forgive for being stupid, but exactly how could a patent help free software? A patent is by its very definition an "unfreedom": a restriction imposed by the holder. If I patent (part of) my software, I cannot call it free software without "disabling" that patent. And then again, I am only putting an unfreedom for somebody else to patent the same idea.
Slashdot Mirror
Make it a foldable bike. Oh wait - I already got one. It is how I go to work each day.
And you know what? Foldable bikes are so common here that you can take them with you in the train without paying extra.
My bike folds up smaller, looks by far safer to me, and, no, it is not electric. I mean, it's a bike. Come on.
While I agree that a dragging take-over procedure can be very bad as well, I merely wanted to say that there are more factors that make a take-over unsuccessful. I have been in two companies that bled completely dry in a few months because of a takeover.
In one company, even upper management was not involved in the sale and learned only afterwards from it. The owner had done it completely by surprise.
In another company, the new owner was a competitor that merely wanted to get rid of a competing firm. We called our company "The Big Brother House". because every week somebody was leaving.
I worked (as a temp) at Fokker when the announcement was made that it would be sold to DASA and I cannot say I saw even one happy reaction. My contract ended before the take-over really took place though.
When a company is taken over, the corporate "feel" usually suffers. I have seen a few companies that were taken over from the inside (I experienced the take-over itself in one occasion), and the employers were never happy with it. And as always, the best people have the best chances, so they leave first...
Forgive for being stupid, but exactly how could a patent help free software? A patent is by its very definition an "unfreedom": a restriction imposed by the holder. If I patent (part of) my software, I cannot call it free software without "disabling" that patent. And then again, I am only putting an unfreedom for somebody else to patent the same idea.