His actual title appears to be "Executive Director, Commercial". They all seem to be phrased that way, presumably so the "Executive Director", "Group Director" etc bits of the title are all up front, rather than being buried at the end of lengthy domains like "Human Resources, Safety and Sustainability".
As such it's really "Commercial Executive Director", which isn't so bad.
That brings up a somewhat interesting question. Personally I prefer an independent research institute who'll licence their patent to anyone for a reasonable fee than a company who'll use a patent to create a monopoly for their own product offerings.
And even then I suspect most Australian tax payers would like CSIRO to fund itself to the degree it can and would think it reasonable that the actual users of a technology would pay where that is feasable.
It was also the first time the research organization had seen a surplus in its financial reporting
Er, the article you linked to says it's the biggest ever and twice the size of last years, not the first surplus ever.
The interesting (to me) figure in the article is that they have increased the number of scientists employed by 6% over the last 5 years, bringing it to a total of 1837.
We hear a lot about the "brain drain" so it's nice to see growth in scientific support.
Sounds like they are going for a more nuanced approach (and should be applauded for doing so).
If they were going to cut it off a simple email would be explanation enough.
It only accomplishes nothing else if you dismiss it out of hand.
If it gives people pause to realise that they owe their way of life (and probably their actual life) to the actions of someone so persecuted it may give them pause to consider their own attitudes towards others today.
Societal attitudes rarely change greatly due to any one thing but through the slow action of good people pointing out injustice and trying to ensure it doesn't happen again.
He said "Aside from enthusiasts who just like following the stuff".
I might have a passing interest in the progress of processor technology but I'm actually specifically interested at the moment because I'm on the look out for a new laptop. For me that means looking at a Toshiba, a Lenovo (and Dell, Fujitsu etc) and trying to make a judgment about what advantages and disadvantages each has and comparing them to see what makes the most sense for me.
I've found Intel's processor designations mind boggling. They do have a pretty good comparison tool though, which can help clear things up once you've narrowed it down to a few options.
Mostly I was amazed that the window broke so thoroughly. I'd have thought that it would have some film on it or other treatment that would make it somewhat resistant to such an attack.
For all intents and purposes it is a tax, however the way it is raised is important.
Here in Australia we have a similar institution. However rather than being funded by a specific fee it's income is provided from general taxation revenue.
This can pose a threat to it's independence by making it more beholden to the government of the day for it's revenue stream.
It was a sidenote in a motherboard preview claiming that Intel removed it after it showed no meaningful performance advantage in real use, unlike an SSD.
I'd have thought that without OS support whatever things braidwood magically decided to cache would also be cached by the OS. Looking at my desktop here it has almost a gig of memory used a cache. If I had a 2 gig Braidwood then half of it would presumably be wasted if it wasn't intentionally caching things the OS wasn't. I suppose you might get a one off improvement on boot but then again the boot process is probably going to hit a lot of files that aren't used thereafter and so won't be in the cache any more.
I mean, in what sense aren't the shareholders suing themselves, thereby achieving little more than moving a portion of the money into some lawyers pockets?
However 'small' that email server may be it'll still require some resources that could be better spent doing whatever it is that the business actually earns it's money from.
Why would you want to use your own resources or pay someone else to fix your server when you can simply get on with doing something else that's productive for your business for an hour or two and have Google fix it in the meantime?
Googles spam handling and not having to maintain your own server would make it a clear winner for most small businesses I'd expect. I'd think it's bigger business which are more likely to have their own economies of scale and internal intelligence that would be less obvious customers for Google.
Slashdot Mirror
Now we can say that all those stories about high altitude camera stealing gremlins probably aren't true..
His actual title appears to be "Executive Director, Commercial". They all seem to be phrased that way, presumably so the "Executive Director", "Group Director" etc bits of the title are all up front, rather than being buried at the end of lengthy domains like "Human Resources, Safety and Sustainability". As such it's really "Commercial Executive Director", which isn't so bad.
Given how long "N" took to reach standardisation I'd be surprised if any alternative happened "soon".
That brings up a somewhat interesting question. Personally I prefer an independent research institute who'll licence their patent to anyone for a reasonable fee than a company who'll use a patent to create a monopoly for their own product offerings.
This details precisely what CSIRO is supposed to do. Note that 8a refers to Australia rather a lot.
And even then I suspect most Australian tax payers would like CSIRO to fund itself to the degree it can and would think it reasonable that the actual users of a technology would pay where that is feasable.
Er, according to this article:
What "savaging" are you talking about?
Cisco aren't on the list because they already have a licence for the tech for which they pay royalties.
Er, the article you linked to says it's the biggest ever and twice the size of last years, not the first surplus ever.
The interesting (to me) figure in the article is that they have increased the number of scientists employed by 6% over the last 5 years, bringing it to a total of 1837. We hear a lot about the "brain drain" so it's nice to see growth in scientific support.
here.
Application denied!
That isn't the only use case for such a laptop. I don't often need to use my laptop "on the go" but I do need to bring my work home with me.
Sounds like they are going for a more nuanced approach (and should be applauded for doing so). If they were going to cut it off a simple email would be explanation enough.
All I know is that my head hurts.
Indeed. Magna Carta, Constitution for the United States of America. Worthless bollocks the lot of em!
It only accomplishes nothing else if you dismiss it out of hand.
If it gives people pause to realise that they owe their way of life (and probably their actual life) to the actions of someone so persecuted it may give them pause to consider their own attitudes towards others today.
Societal attitudes rarely change greatly due to any one thing but through the slow action of good people pointing out injustice and trying to ensure it doesn't happen again.
Thargoid Mary
She always kicked my ass.
He said "Aside from enthusiasts who just like following the stuff".
I might have a passing interest in the progress of processor technology but I'm actually specifically interested at the moment because I'm on the look out for a new laptop. For me that means looking at a Toshiba, a Lenovo (and Dell, Fujitsu etc) and trying to make a judgment about what advantages and disadvantages each has and comparing them to see what makes the most sense for me.
I've found Intel's processor designations mind boggling. They do have a pretty good comparison tool though, which can help clear things up once you've narrowed it down to a few options.
I suppose they could always give it up and choose an easy job like coal mining or something.
Mostly I was amazed that the window broke so thoroughly. I'd have thought that it would have some film on it or other treatment that would make it somewhat resistant to such an attack.
For all intents and purposes it is a tax, however the way it is raised is important.
Here in Australia we have a similar institution. However rather than being funded by a specific fee it's income is provided from general taxation revenue.
This can pose a threat to it's independence by making it more beholden to the government of the day for it's revenue stream.
I'd have thought that without OS support whatever things braidwood magically decided to cache would also be cached by the OS. Looking at my desktop here it has almost a gig of memory used a cache. If I had a 2 gig Braidwood then half of it would presumably be wasted if it wasn't intentionally caching things the OS wasn't. I suppose you might get a one off improvement on boot but then again the boot process is probably going to hit a lot of files that aren't used thereafter and so won't be in the cache any more.
I mean, in what sense aren't the shareholders suing themselves, thereby achieving little more than moving a portion of the money into some lawyers pockets?
Indeed, why publish a result when you could instead sit on it while you test every other imaginable variant?
When the results are clearly about a subset of men (ie, heterosexual ones) why do you claim that their results are "claiming every man out there".
Seems to me that you are the one with an agenda, not them.
However 'small' that email server may be it'll still require some resources that could be better spent doing whatever it is that the business actually earns it's money from.
Why would you want to use your own resources or pay someone else to fix your server when you can simply get on with doing something else that's productive for your business for an hour or two and have Google fix it in the meantime?
Googles spam handling and not having to maintain your own server would make it a clear winner for most small businesses I'd expect. I'd think it's bigger business which are more likely to have their own economies of scale and internal intelligence that would be less obvious customers for Google.