You have to look at it from the other side, trying to fill jobs. You can look up resumes of a lot of really great people at linkedin. The ones who are not actively looking are pretty obvious. So you send them an invite, and wait to hear back. You hear back, you tell them about the opportunity, and hopefully proceed. The good people all have jobs, but that doesn't mean you can't convince them to make a change with enough money/other compensation.
What linkedin does, as far as I'm concerned, is get me relevant interview offers. A surprisingly relevant, amazing flood of interview offers. Jobs that, frankly, would be difficult for me to find searching painfully through something like monster/dice/jobs, if they are even advertised on those sites any more. Instead of me finding jobs, the jobs find me. Since I have little interest in being an expert job finder, I think it's great.
There's tremendous value in linkedin as a recruiting tool, and they are already making good money off that aspect. I think they could be profitable on that alone in the long run.
The price of food does go down as technology upgrades, or was that part of your point? And buffets stay in business by overcharging so much that even the biggest eater is profitable. If Verizon could charge $600/mo for unlimited (comparable price to eating unlimited at a buffet daily), then I'm sure they could make themselves profitable even for their heaviest users too.
Pampered buffoons with their roads. Why in my day we had to work our entire lives grinding rocks with our teeth just to get a start on just a few feet of road!
That's pretty unusual. And kind of a vanishing market segment... the number of places that will pay for software that won't run virtualized is dropping fast. I am curious what you develop though.
That could be true for sure. In our business, we basically have a license to print money as fast as we can develop software, but the learning curve for our technology stack is huge, so we can't really just hire our way out of the problem. Every small gain in productivity turns directly into money for us.
I meant pay, though I did ballpark it. One dollar per minute is 60 per hour (unless my brain is really dead... I am sleep deprived). A 50-week, 40-hour year has 2000 hours, and is the traditional ballpark number of hours used when estimating how salary translates into hourly pay. So that's 120k/year. Starting salaries at Google are 100-110. If you aren't making 120 by the time you're 5 years out of school, something is wrong, or you're not in the san fran bay area, where the largest concentration of developers is located.
I actually make somewhat more than that, but I have 20 years of experience.
I mean seriously, if you can't do your job with one monitor, there is something wrong.
On the other hand, if you can't gain enough productivity from a second monitor to justify its purchase, there is also something wrong. My second monitor easily saves me 2-3 minutes of tabbing a day, minimum. Most good coders cost at least a dollar per minute. That's say just $2 per day, so a second monitor pays for itself in 100 business days or less.
So a company that won't pay for a second monitor if you want one is likely run by idiots who are wasting your time and their money. Move on to another job.
How about the 125 people who could have been millionaires instead of throwing away money on an orbiter that was destroyed thanks to our non-conversion to metric.
That is how they say hi. Just because your primitive mind is having a hard time grasping it doesn't make it any less obvious as a universal form of greeting.
"Eli Pariser gave a talk at TED which posits that tailoring algorithms are ineffective at creating 'filter bubbles' around each user, failing to restrict the information that reaches you and so the internet exposes you to alternative viewpoints. While you might be happy that liberal and conservative news hits you, and you see the opposing viewpoints and step outside your comfort zone, maybe you'd prefer not to. And now that every site does it, it's becoming a problem of flooding users with too many disparate points of view. Pariser calls for all sites implementing these algorithms to embed in the algorithms 'some sense of reasonable restriction' and also have transparency so you can understand why your Google search might look different than someone with better tastes."
I actually think we're seeing too many sites restricting and filtering information. Even on slashdot I know that the firehose now presents different versions of stories to different people. At least for the moment the shared comments gives the opportunity for interaction and discussion, but frankly I just find it confusing when I'm trying to discuss a different version of the story with someone. And I'm sure it's just a matter of time before we see the stories actually diverge, and slashdot fragments into a dozen bubble storyverses.
Hmm, a little math says this shouldn't cost that much. Let's say we have a 16inx9in display (cinema format) at 600dpi. That's 51M pixels, at 10 transistors per pixel, a whopping half billion transistors. Which you can get for about $200.
But you need about double to quadruple the resolution the eye can perceive to do 3d without glasses, so we'll almost certainly hit 1200 dpi at some point.
Slashdot Mirror
You have to look at it from the other side, trying to fill jobs. You can look up resumes of a lot of really great people at linkedin. The ones who are not actively looking are pretty obvious. So you send them an invite, and wait to hear back. You hear back, you tell them about the opportunity, and hopefully proceed. The good people all have jobs, but that doesn't mean you can't convince them to make a change with enough money/other compensation.
What linkedin does, as far as I'm concerned, is get me relevant interview offers. A surprisingly relevant, amazing flood of interview offers. Jobs that, frankly, would be difficult for me to find searching painfully through something like monster/dice/jobs, if they are even advertised on those sites any more. Instead of me finding jobs, the jobs find me. Since I have little interest in being an expert job finder, I think it's great.
And right up until the actual pop, they're right. And they can make money as long as they aren't the biggest fool.
Can I get ocean front (not view!) with good quality for that yet? I really want a nice retirement home, and I have about that much to spare.
There's tremendous value in linkedin as a recruiting tool, and they are already making good money off that aspect. I think they could be profitable on that alone in the long run.
That's fine. Just stop advertising it as unlimited and I'll stop complaining.
The price of food does go down as technology upgrades, or was that part of your point?
And buffets stay in business by overcharging so much that even the biggest eater is profitable.
If Verizon could charge $600/mo for unlimited (comparable price to eating unlimited at a buffet daily), then I'm sure they could make themselves profitable even for their heaviest users too.
Pampered buffoons with their roads. Why in my day we had to work our entire lives grinding rocks with our teeth just to get a start on just a few feet of road!
I don't know. I looked at the images for that, and frankly, they all look 'shopped.
That's why I work at a cheetos factory. You don't eat the chef!
That's pretty unusual. And kind of a vanishing market segment ... the number of places that will pay for software that won't run virtualized is dropping fast. I am curious what you develop though.
That could be true for sure. In our business, we basically have a license to print money as fast as we can develop software, but the learning curve for our technology stack is huge, so we can't really just hire our way out of the problem. Every small gain in productivity turns directly into money for us.
I meant pay, though I did ballpark it. One dollar per minute is 60 per hour (unless my brain is really dead ... I am sleep deprived). A 50-week, 40-hour year has 2000 hours, and is the traditional ballpark number of hours used when estimating how salary translates into hourly pay. So that's 120k/year. Starting salaries at Google are 100-110. If you aren't making 120 by the time you're 5 years out of school, something is wrong, or you're not in the san fran bay area, where the largest concentration of developers is located.
I actually make somewhat more than that, but I have 20 years of experience.
Remote debug in a vm solves that problem with ease.
I mean seriously, if you can't do your job with one monitor, there is something wrong.
On the other hand, if you can't gain enough productivity from a second monitor to justify its purchase, there is also something wrong. My second monitor easily saves me 2-3 minutes of tabbing a day, minimum. Most good coders cost at least a dollar per minute. That's say just $2 per day, so a second monitor pays for itself in 100 business days or less.
So a company that won't pay for a second monitor if you want one is likely run by idiots who are wasting your time and their money. Move on to another job.
Then why is it so dang hard for Americans to switch from inches and pounds?
Why do we spell favorite, behavior, color differently? Because we can. Does anyone really care?
http://articles.cnn.com/1999-09-30/tech/9909_30_mars.metric.02_1_climate-orbiter-spacecraft-team-metric-system?_s=PM:TECH
How about the 125 people who could have been millionaires instead of throwing away money on an orbiter that was destroyed thanks to our non-conversion to metric.
That is how they say hi. Just because your primitive mind is having a hard time grasping it doesn't make it any less obvious as a universal form of greeting.
"Eli Pariser gave a talk at TED which posits that tailoring algorithms are ineffective at creating 'filter bubbles' around each user, failing to restrict the information that reaches you and so the internet exposes you to alternative viewpoints. While you might be happy that liberal and conservative news hits you, and you see the opposing viewpoints and step outside your comfort zone, maybe you'd prefer not to. And now that every site does it, it's becoming a problem of flooding users with too many disparate points of view. Pariser calls for all sites implementing these algorithms to embed in the algorithms 'some sense of reasonable restriction' and also have transparency so you can understand why your Google search might look different than someone with better tastes."
I actually think we're seeing too many sites restricting and filtering information. Even on slashdot I know that the firehose now presents different versions of stories to different people. At least for the moment the shared comments gives the opportunity for interaction and discussion, but frankly I just find it confusing when I'm trying to discuss a different version of the story with someone. And I'm sure it's just a matter of time before we see the stories actually diverge, and slashdot fragments into a dozen bubble storyverses.
But given the world suffers from a severe overpopulation problem, every fighter not killed is actually a loss for everyone.
Hmm, a little math says this shouldn't cost that much.
Let's say we have a 16inx9in display (cinema format) at 600dpi.
That's 51M pixels, at 10 transistors per pixel, a whopping half billion transistors. Which you can get for about $200.
But you need about double to quadruple the resolution the eye can perceive to do 3d without glasses, so we'll almost certainly hit 1200 dpi at some point.
I want to be able to watch movies on a tablet without the horrible scaling artifacts. Quality on ipad2 is just terrible. 1080p please!
Mods didn't understand my post, please read the thread and metamoderate appropriately.
That wasn't recently proved unless you consider the 1930s recent.
Is BSD linux now?