So that means, that in the future, all a terrorist need do to get onto his plane unhindered, is to get his rating switched to green, or successfully impersonate someone who is?
Not PERCEIVED shareholder value. Which is what wins out in this market. When shareholders PERCEIVE that a company's shares are worth more than they really are - which happens quite often, then the officers make out like bandits as joe-average-investor jizzes all over the phone as he tries to get ahold of his broker.
So which do you think the officers are more likely to pursue? Sound business practices that yeild actual results? Or hype and blather to get joe-average-investor all worked up about the latest tip?
Until some of these bastards start going to jail for fraud, nothing's going to change. (and even then, perhaps nothing will change - since we've had our war on drugs now for, what, two decades? And people still risk prison to smoke a joint?)
It's not capitalism, per se, that's wrong here. It's our implementation of it. And the fact that humans are all basically evil. Your Econ 101 textbook explanation of Capitalism betrays a serious lack of the true reality of things.
No, Apple will NEVER price accordingly. Go back to the Cube, look at the mini iPod. Flatscreen iMac. Apple has some pretty reasonable price-performance at the mid to upper range, but their low end sucks ass as far as price-performance ratio. Steve Jobs seems to have a rule of thumb: Never price less than 25% above "affordable".
There are a lot of reasons why Apple's marketshare will never go above 5%. But this is the biggest one.
I'm the LAST person you'd expect to defend Hilarity Clinton, or Bill. Or any of the current crop of Dem Presidential hopelesses.
I'm a defender of truth and honesty, and freedom.
GW Bush has at least as bad a track record if not worse than any of these. As President. Never mind what an absolute shit he was as a governor, and as a private citizen, prior to daddy buying him into politics.
Personally, I hope that Coward Dean dies of a heart attack, and soon. He'd be better than Bush, but only marginally. You don't fight evil with evil.
One thing is - IBM's field service reps certainly can't afford to go to Linux. They have to do development and support customers who are using Windows. One of the practicalities.
I was near the recent California quake. If I had known it was going to be a 6.5, at that exact date and time, well, I would have packed up the family and spent the day in Santa Barbara. Probably would have taken all the pictures and valuables off the shelves, put them away safely, and had my car been up on jackstands (as it often is:(. ..) I would have put it back on the ground. Probably would have stocked up on batteries - maybe even splurged and bought a diesel generator. Bottled water too. Definately. (a few broken water mains around here - Paso Robles has a ruptured municipal water storage tank, so everybody there will have to cut back for a few months).
If I worked in a high-rise, I absolutely would not have gone to work that day.
On the other hand, if they can't give a precise time of the event, or magnitude, that's less useful. I mean, if it could have been a much stronger quake, I would definately have bought earthquake insurance.:) I would have taken down the shelving units in my garage, next to my car. (in addition to all the other stuff), and maybe even get some structural reinforcement done to my home.
But with a vague event time, I might have actually gone to work (assuming I worked in a high-rise) - so accuracy is a very important factor. If they gave like a two month window for the event, I could imagine something like that could be absolutely devestating, economically. Businesses would shut down. People would leave. Just on the possibility that it could be an 8.0 at any given time. If I wasn't convinced that a strong quake weren't unlikely, I don't think I'd stay here.
This 6.5 was "the big one" for the next 50 years or so. I'll trade that for Tornadoes any day.
THis is true especially for cases like, pictures of nebulae and gas clouds.
Very few people (amateurs) have imaged these objects with a telescope, and seen what they look like with their naked eye, unfiltered, unenhanced. They look like bluish-whitish wisps. A far, far, cry from what you see, with regard to the brilliant colors used in official images - which have made their way into science fiction cinema.
Most recently, the crew that created the imagery for Battlestar Galactica - went through great pains to make it as realistic looking as possible, but fell for the trap of using a brilliantly colored nebula. poor saps.
But when you have to build something that's 90+% fuel, (SSTO machines are something like 97%+ fuel, which is why nobody has built one), it has to be a fragile balloon full of fuel
Let me tell you something that will help illustrate this fact.
It's about the Atlas booster system. It's basically a big, stainless steel beer-can. Once it's assembled, it's pressurized with, either Helium or Nitrogen. Because if it were not, it would collapse under it's own weight. The walls are that thin. It's then transported from the factory via air transport, to an assembly building, where more finishing work is done, then it's trucked a few miles to the launch complex and erected. All this time, it must be kept pressurized, or it will collapse.
Then at the launch complex, the upper stage and payload are assembled, etc. (there's a lot in that "etc") - and still, the booster is kept pressurized. There is constant monitoring of the pressure, 24x7 to make sure there are no leaks which would collapse the tank. Only when it's ready to launch is the tank purged and filled with fuel.
Granted, Atlas is a very old design. But it's also the basis for our latest and (IMO) greatest launch system. Atlas V.
True, a lot of progress has been made with solid-propellant systems. In fact, every modern launch system I can think of uses strap-on solids to assist the main booster. Yes, there are a lot of negatives to using solids. I don't think there's really any alternative for leaving the gravity well. It's the only technology we have with enough specific impulse for heavy lift. Once the vehicle gets into space though - there really is a need for alternative propulsion technologies. The last 10 years has seen some progress. Ion propulsion, and some research on more advanced versions like plasma.
Still, this is all dreaming, because it's just a cynical PR stunt by Bush to get reelected. No way in hell with our current budget state will we be able to afford this crap.
Right now, our $780 Million "robot" on Mars is immobilized because of a stuck balloon. If only a person were there to tuck that balloon back into it's place. . .
I think it's about time someone said this. In fact, I've heard damn few Americans say ANYTHING like this lately.
I would MUCH rather die in a terrorist attack, than live in a country that isn't free.
Osama bin Ladens suicide bombers and poisons don't scare me. It's his ability to terrorize my sheep countrymen, and make them beg to take away their freedom that scares me.
I don't like to see the US Govt. legislating corporate policies...but, I don't mind them giving them incentive to shape said policy towards thing beneficial to US citzens.
There is no "shaping". It's either legislating, or it isn't. (GWB's 'executive orders' aside).
" Kinda reminds me of what Marie Antoinette said when someone told her the people were without bread. Let them eat cake... For the most part, people with lots of money tend to forget what it's like being poor."
I wonder if I can use google to find instructions on how to build a homemade guillotine. . .
Why the hell would anyone want to learn a field, spend thousands of dollars to do so, and then no be able to make enough to pay the costs of the education?
That's because such educations are NOT for commoners such as yourself. They should be only for the children of the rich.
" So why do you think all this outsourcing is going on? Do you REALLY believe that the HP's of this world don't employ anyone with a better understanding of the basic economics of their companies than you? Come on. They are outsourcing because they can get the same work done for less money. Period."
I don't think that's even true. I think that perhaps it's cheaper, perhaps there are hidden costs and some CEO's aren't seeing them. I think that perhaps many CEO's *DO* see the hidden costs, and will outsource anyway.
here's why:
Because companies who outsource - will get a boost in stock price. Execs and Boards are compensated based on stock price. To a large extent. That's all that matters to these people. If, in the long term, outsourcing turns out to be a bad idea (and I'm convinced it IS), then the companies will just switch back, no harm no foul. But in the meantime, they made out like bandits because their company was in on the latest trend towards trimming corporate fat, and that trend, today, is laying off "overpaid American web-designers" and replacing them with hardworking, submissive, intelligent, foreigners, who will work for less than half the cost.
That's ALL there is to this outsourcing trend. It's just another pump-and-dump scheme. Just like IT was the scheme of the 90's.
well, I write good software for one reason, mainly: Because if I don't, I know I'll be stuck going in and fixing it in 12 months, long after I've forgotten why I wrote it to work that way. Measure twice, cut once.
The thing is - back when I was rewarded handsomely with stock options, I knew damn well that my performance seldom had any impact at all on the stock performance of my company, and it's other 4999 employees. There were days when we'd announce a good quarter, and our stock would go down, because our competitor had a bad quarter, and investors took this as a sign that our sector was in for a rough time.
There has GOT to be a better way of measuring an employee's performance than stock options. Of course I'm happy that I made a frickin metric buttload of money on options back in the 1990's. WAY more than I would ever have earned by simply working for it. But it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth, because I didn't earn it. Nobody earned it. It just magically appeared because investors were stupid. The sums I gave to charity helped. Giving $30,000 to my brother to adopt a baby REALLY helped.
The point here is; there probably are much better and more accurate ways of measuring, and rewarding employee performance. Both for Execs and bottom-line workers. The problem is - very few businesspeople are intelligent to implement such metrics properly. And they're probably considered "too expensive" by the bean counters anyway, who'd rather be compensated via stock options in the hope that they can bamboozle the market just long enough to buy a boat.
" I've found that the pay for the jobs out there hasn't decreased it's simply the number of jobs available has gone down the toilet."
no - it's definately both. I'm seeing job postings offering about half of what was being offered 5 years ago.
I recently saw a job posting asking for a college grad with experience programming assembler, and also with knowledge of automotive technologies - basically, someone to program FI computers on cars. $20/hr part time. I wouldn't be suprised if they got innundated with resumes, because after all, that's better than not working at all, right?
"We're starting to see more and more software that won't allow you to do "X" because someone thinks it's naughty. We stand at the beginning of a new age as products become "smarter""
What about an OS that refuses to allow you to update certain DLLs (WFP) or edit certain configuration files (HKey_Classes_Root, HKEY_user)
Slashdot Mirror
So that means, that in the future, all a terrorist need do to get onto his plane unhindered, is to get his rating switched to green, or successfully impersonate someone who is?
Sounds LESS SAFE to me.
Or better still:
It's better to die on your feet, than to live on your knees.
No.
You're talking about ACTUAL shareholder value.
Not PERCEIVED shareholder value. Which is what wins out in this market. When shareholders PERCEIVE that a company's shares are worth more than they really are - which happens quite often, then the officers make out like bandits as joe-average-investor jizzes all over the phone as he tries to get ahold of his broker.
So which do you think the officers are more likely to pursue?
Sound business practices that yeild actual results?
Or hype and blather to get joe-average-investor all worked up about the latest tip?
Until some of these bastards start going to jail for fraud, nothing's going to change. (and even then, perhaps nothing will change - since we've had our war on drugs now for, what, two decades? And people still risk prison to smoke a joint?)
It's not capitalism, per se, that's wrong here. It's our implementation of it. And the fact that humans are all basically evil. Your Econ 101 textbook explanation of Capitalism betrays a serious lack of the true reality of things.
No, Apple will NEVER price accordingly. Go back to the Cube, look at the mini iPod. Flatscreen iMac. Apple has some pretty reasonable price-performance at the mid to upper range, but their low end sucks ass as far as price-performance ratio. Steve Jobs seems to have a rule of thumb: Never price less than 25% above "affordable".
There are a lot of reasons why Apple's marketshare will never go above 5%. But this is the biggest one.
RS/6000 is ASS.
I certainly hope IBM does something different for a Linux desktop.
How about this?
I'm the LAST person you'd expect to defend Hilarity Clinton, or Bill. Or any of the current crop of Dem Presidential hopelesses.
I'm a defender of truth and honesty, and freedom.
GW Bush has at least as bad a track record if not worse than any of these. As President. Never mind what an absolute shit he was as a governor, and as a private citizen, prior to daddy buying him into politics.
Personally, I hope that Coward Dean dies of a heart attack, and soon. He'd be better than Bush, but only marginally. You don't fight evil with evil.
One thing is - IBM's field service reps certainly can't afford to go to Linux. They have to do development and support customers who are using Windows. One of the practicalities.
I was near the recent California quake. If I had known it was going to be a 6.5, at that exact date and time, well, I would have packed up the family and spent the day in Santa Barbara. Probably would have taken all the pictures and valuables off the shelves, put them away safely, and had my car been up on jackstands (as it often is :(. . .) I would have put it back on the ground.
:)
Probably would have stocked up on batteries - maybe even splurged and bought a diesel generator. Bottled water too. Definately. (a few broken water mains around here - Paso Robles has a ruptured municipal water storage tank, so everybody there will have to cut back for a few months).
If I worked in a high-rise, I absolutely would not have gone to work that day.
On the other hand, if they can't give a precise time of the event, or magnitude, that's less useful. I mean, if it could have been a much stronger quake, I would definately have bought earthquake insurance.
I would have taken down the shelving units in my garage, next to my car. (in addition to all the other stuff), and maybe even get some structural reinforcement done to my home.
But with a vague event time, I might have actually gone to work (assuming I worked in a high-rise) -
so accuracy is a very important factor. If they gave like a two month window for the event, I could imagine something like that could be absolutely devestating, economically. Businesses would shut down. People would leave. Just on the possibility that it could be an 8.0 at any given time. If I wasn't convinced that a strong quake weren't unlikely, I don't think I'd stay here.
This 6.5 was "the big one" for the next 50 years or so. I'll trade that for Tornadoes any day.
That is why I pay taxes - so I can have a FAIR and UNBIASED bunch of law enforcement.
I'd ask for your money back if I were you. There's no magical fairy dust in a government paycheck that automatically makes a person fair and unbiased.
examples:
LAPD and various racial incidents (no, I'm not talking about beating up a drunk/high driver who happened to be black).
Seattle and Miami anti Globalization protests.
The criteria used by police to select people for speed enforcement. (cute girl, teenager driving a red sports car, black man, etc).
THis is true especially for cases like, pictures of nebulae and gas clouds.
Very few people (amateurs) have imaged these objects with a telescope, and seen what they look like with their naked eye, unfiltered, unenhanced. They look like bluish-whitish wisps. A far, far, cry from what you see, with regard to the brilliant colors used in official images - which have made their way into science fiction cinema.
Most recently, the crew that created the imagery for Battlestar Galactica - went through great pains to make it as realistic looking as possible, but fell for the trap of using a brilliantly colored nebula. poor saps.
Then perhaps this comparison should also have included empirical measurements of comparative mathematical accuracy.
But when you have to build something that's 90+% fuel, (SSTO machines are something like 97%+ fuel, which is why nobody has built one), it has to be a fragile balloon full of fuel
Let me tell you something that will help illustrate this fact.
It's about the Atlas booster system.
It's basically a big, stainless steel beer-can. Once it's assembled, it's pressurized with, either Helium or Nitrogen. Because if it were not, it would collapse under it's own weight. The walls are that thin.
It's then transported from the factory via air transport, to an assembly building, where more finishing work is done, then it's trucked a few miles to the launch complex and erected. All this time, it must be kept pressurized, or it will collapse.
Then at the launch complex, the upper stage and payload are assembled, etc. (there's a lot in that "etc") - and still, the booster is kept pressurized. There is constant monitoring of the pressure, 24x7 to make sure there are no leaks which would collapse the tank.
Only when it's ready to launch is the tank purged and filled with fuel.
Granted, Atlas is a very old design. But it's also the basis for our latest and (IMO) greatest launch system. Atlas V.
True, a lot of progress has been made with solid-propellant systems. In fact, every modern launch system I can think of uses strap-on solids to assist the main booster. Yes, there are a lot of negatives to using solids.
I don't think there's really any alternative for leaving the gravity well. It's the only technology we have with enough specific impulse for heavy lift.
Once the vehicle gets into space though - there really is a need for alternative propulsion technologies. The last 10 years has seen some progress. Ion propulsion, and some research on more advanced versions like plasma.
Still, this is all dreaming, because it's just a cynical PR stunt by Bush to get reelected. No way in hell with our current budget state will we be able to afford this crap.
Right now, our $780 Million "robot" on Mars is immobilized because of a stuck balloon. If only a person were there to tuck that balloon back into it's place. . .
. . . 9/11 . . .
I think it's about time someone said this.
In fact, I've heard damn few Americans say ANYTHING like this lately.
I would MUCH rather die in a terrorist attack, than live in a country that isn't free.
Osama bin Ladens suicide bombers and poisons don't scare me. It's his ability to terrorize my sheep countrymen, and make them beg to take away their freedom that scares me.
In the case of pr0n. . .
WarFapping.
I don't like to see the US Govt. legislating corporate policies...but, I don't mind them giving them incentive to shape said policy towards thing beneficial to US citzens.
There is no "shaping". It's either legislating, or it isn't. (GWB's 'executive orders' aside).
" Kinda reminds me of what Marie Antoinette said when someone told her the people were without bread. Let them eat cake... For the most part, people with lots of money tend to forget what it's like being poor."
I wonder if I can use google to find instructions on how to build a homemade guillotine. . .
Why the hell would anyone want to learn a field, spend thousands of dollars to do so, and then no be able to make enough to pay the costs of the education?
That's because such educations are NOT for commoners such as yourself. They should be only for the children of the rich.
" So why do you think all this outsourcing is going on? Do you REALLY believe that the HP's of this world don't employ anyone with a better understanding of the basic economics of their companies than you? Come on. They are outsourcing because they can get the same work done for less money. Period."
I don't think that's even true.
I think that perhaps it's cheaper, perhaps there are hidden costs and some CEO's aren't seeing them. I think that perhaps many CEO's *DO* see the hidden costs, and will outsource anyway.
here's why:
Because companies who outsource - will get a boost in stock price. Execs and Boards are compensated based on stock price. To a large extent. That's all that matters to these people.
If, in the long term, outsourcing turns out to be a bad idea (and I'm convinced it IS), then the companies will just switch back, no harm no foul. But in the meantime, they made out like bandits because their company was in on the latest trend towards trimming corporate fat, and that trend, today, is laying off "overpaid American web-designers" and replacing them with hardworking, submissive, intelligent, foreigners, who will work for less than half the cost.
That's ALL there is to this outsourcing trend. It's just another pump-and-dump scheme. Just like IT was the scheme of the 90's.
well, I write good software for one reason, mainly:
Because if I don't, I know I'll be stuck going in and fixing it in 12 months, long after I've forgotten why I wrote it to work that way. Measure twice, cut once.
The thing is - back when I was rewarded handsomely with stock options, I knew damn well that my performance seldom had any impact at all on the stock performance of my company, and it's other 4999 employees. There were days when we'd announce a good quarter, and our stock would go down, because our competitor had a bad quarter, and investors took this as a sign that our sector was in for a rough time.
There has GOT to be a better way of measuring an employee's performance than stock options. Of course I'm happy that I made a frickin metric buttload of money on options back in the 1990's. WAY more than I would ever have earned by simply working for it. But it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth, because I didn't earn it. Nobody earned it. It just magically appeared because investors were stupid. The sums I gave to charity helped. Giving $30,000 to my brother to adopt a baby REALLY helped.
The point here is; there probably are much better and more accurate ways of measuring, and rewarding employee performance. Both for Execs and bottom-line workers. The problem is - very few businesspeople are intelligent to implement such metrics properly. And they're probably considered "too expensive" by the bean counters anyway, who'd rather be compensated via stock options in the hope that they can bamboozle the market just long enough to buy a boat.
" I've found that the pay for the jobs out there hasn't decreased it's simply the number of jobs available has gone down the toilet."
no - it's definately both. I'm seeing job postings offering about half of what was being offered 5 years ago.
I recently saw a job posting asking for a college grad with experience programming assembler, and also with knowledge of automotive technologies - basically, someone to program FI computers on cars. $20/hr part time. I wouldn't be suprised if they got innundated with resumes, because after all, that's better than not working at all, right?
"We're starting to see more and more software that won't allow you to do "X" because someone thinks it's naughty. We stand at the beginning of a new age as products become "smarter""
What about an OS that refuses to allow you to update certain DLLs (WFP) or edit certain configuration files (HKey_Classes_Root, HKEY_user)
" Maybe the government requested it?"
obviously, in return for raising the H-1B visa cap. . .
The question is:
will this make it any easier for the DOJ to prosecute Ken Lay?
(doubtful)