If I remember correctly from another story about it, the $2.2 million figure is their current profit, not revenue. If they devoted all of their profit and the savings from the CEO's pay cut to the raises for the other employees, they could give out an average raise of almost $26K. It isn't doable now, which is why they mentioned it's going to be done over the next 2-3 years. Of course the CEO is probably going to be getting more stock based compensation, so he may end up making more money assuming that the stock doesn't tank. The current investors may not like having zero profit, but who knows...they may get more business because of this stunt. I agree that a profit sharing agreement would make more sense.
Well, the HBO Now intro page does state that it's only available in the US and some US territories. So, yes, fans in other countries are still out of luck until all the licensing stuff is worked out.
If they have an Apple device that they can use to watch it. I've been debating whether it is worth it. If I want to watch it on my TV, I'd have to shell out for an HDMI adapter or an Apple TV. Given that there is just a $20 difference, I may end get the latter.
Yes, please! Every desk in the building at work has a 4ft long fluorescent tube for when one needs light to read manuals, printouts, etc. But in addition to that there are another set of 3 tubes about every six feet in the false ceiling with practically non-existent diffusers. For me, this causes a lot of eye strain due to the glare on the monitors and in some cases, a bare tube being in my line of sight when I'm trying to read something on the screen. At one point, I brought in a baseball cap to wear at my desk so my eyes wouldn't hurt. Given that everyone is reading a screen which is emitting light, there is no reason for all the lights in the ceiling to be on. It's not like anyone is doing needlepoint or surgery here. They could get rid of 2 out of every 3 tubes in each light fixture and still have sufficient light for doing work, meetings, etc. It would save money too. I think I'm more productive after hours for two reasons: 1) no managers or business users are asking me questions and 2) my eyes feel better because I can turn off all the lights in my area.
What you ask for is for Comcast to take on all the risk of building a physical network, only to have to share it with competitors. It makes zero sense.
Apparently that's what South Korea requires and is often cited as one of the reasons why their average home bandwidth is much higher than the US. Of course, a part of that is also getting rid of the situation where Comcast or some other company has a government mandated local monopoly. Then other companies could build their own networks in new housing developments/apartment complexes (or when the local PUC allows for upgrades to existing areas) but be able to provide service on Comcast's lines as well.
Demolishing them would actually free up the land so something useful could be done with it and any metal would be taken to a scrap yard. Just abandoning this stuff is a waste of resources.
I imagine vendors that have a port replicator (power, display, ethernet, SD reader, and multiple USB ports -- all the stuff that one would expect on a laptop) that works with the new USB-C connector will sell quite a few of them.
I know. But it's not so much about "complain about not getting in their pants" as much as the total absence of anything resembling politeness by most people, especially women these days. Oh well, I guess I can always charge up with some greasy chili containing lots of beans & onions to make their evening a memorable one.:) That was usually a good way to keep the drunks away when I used to record shows for bands.
They are probably going after the users who want more control & flexibility over the final output product that the existing commercial machines currently do not give them. The people that create customized food for parties or other special occasions will be some of the first adopters.
I agree. The monopolists only want the government subsidizing them. It's not much different than the car dealers: the govt has legislated a bit of market protection from outsiders and they want to keep it that way.
Also, explain to this Canadian why NASA is researching climate. Isn't NOAA supposed to be the agency for that?
When I worked at a US Geological Survey office that also archives all the US Govt satellite and aerial imagery, there was a memo that was sent out around 1993 or so. All research projects had to show how they were helping the study of global climate change. If they didn't, they were candidates for having their funding cut. The only exceptions were the ones that were being paid by external agencies or governments. So NASA is researching it for the same reason other agencies are: they have some expertise that can be useful and the funding keeps other projects alive.
The key phrase is: non-military discretionary spending. Medicare, Social Security, interest on the national debt, Federal pensions, entitlements, etc. are all considered "mandatory spending", not discretionary. It is also about 2/3 of all Federal spending. The discretionary stuff is what most of the political fighting is over and it isn't what is driving the increase in the debt. Yes, the percentage of that remaining 1/3 that's being spent on NASA has gone down in part to the expansion of government since the 60's. If NASA could spend that $18 billion without having to scatter it across a huge number of Congressional districts, they might be able to use what they have more effectively. Until then, they need a better excuse for pork spending on NASA instead of some other pet project.
And they'll pull out a chart or some sort of pamphlet that shows the "correct" way of having a computer set up. Of course this is usually something that's impractical with the desk layout and any number of different things. I eventually got used to the progressive lenses that were prescribed to me, but I've found that for computer work, I use the "distance" part of the lenses and end up looking over the top of them for up close work because that's easier than using the "near" part of the progressive lenses. I also just keep them at work and have regular glasses for home. They also said that I'd need one pair of those if I ever did anything like use a recliner for watching TV. IMHO, they probably look better than bifocals, but they're not as useful due to the blurry spots.
Even if the words are 100% correct, it doesn't mean that the translation makes sense. A while ago another employee decided that instead of sending the text for a screen to our translation team, they would just use google or bing translate. Not long after they did that, a co-worker in México called me laughing hysterically. He said what they had for the machine translated Spanish for "Orders in Queue" actually meant "Commands in the ass".
Slashdot Mirror
If I remember correctly from another story about it, the $2.2 million figure is their current profit, not revenue. If they devoted all of their profit and the savings from the CEO's pay cut to the raises for the other employees, they could give out an average raise of almost $26K. It isn't doable now, which is why they mentioned it's going to be done over the next 2-3 years. Of course the CEO is probably going to be getting more stock based compensation, so he may end up making more money assuming that the stock doesn't tank. The current investors may not like having zero profit, but who knows...they may get more business because of this stunt. I agree that a profit sharing agreement would make more sense.
Well, the HBO Now intro page does state that it's only available in the US and some US territories. So, yes, fans in other countries are still out of luck until all the licensing stuff is worked out.
If they have an Apple device that they can use to watch it. I've been debating whether it is worth it. If I want to watch it on my TV, I'd have to shell out for an HDMI adapter or an Apple TV. Given that there is just a $20 difference, I may end get the latter.
That's funny in that the people that I know who came in with a TN visa are software developers.
IIRC, there isn't a cap on those, but they're limited to citizens of Canada and Mexico.
Lights off?
Yes, please! Every desk in the building at work has a 4ft long fluorescent tube for when one needs light to read manuals, printouts, etc. But in addition to that there are another set of 3 tubes about every six feet in the false ceiling with practically non-existent diffusers. For me, this causes a lot of eye strain due to the glare on the monitors and in some cases, a bare tube being in my line of sight when I'm trying to read something on the screen. At one point, I brought in a baseball cap to wear at my desk so my eyes wouldn't hurt. Given that everyone is reading a screen which is emitting light, there is no reason for all the lights in the ceiling to be on. It's not like anyone is doing needlepoint or surgery here. They could get rid of 2 out of every 3 tubes in each light fixture and still have sufficient light for doing work, meetings, etc. It would save money too. I think I'm more productive after hours for two reasons: 1) no managers or business users are asking me questions and 2) my eyes feel better because I can turn off all the lights in my area.
What you ask for is for Comcast to take on all the risk of building a physical network, only to have to share it with competitors. It makes zero sense.
Apparently that's what South Korea requires and is often cited as one of the reasons why their average home bandwidth is much higher than the US. Of course, a part of that is also getting rid of the situation where Comcast or some other company has a government mandated local monopoly. Then other companies could build their own networks in new housing developments/apartment complexes (or when the local PUC allows for upgrades to existing areas) but be able to provide service on Comcast's lines as well.
Can you buy them from Amazon?
well, the guy in NOLA tried.
Demolishing them would actually free up the land so something useful could be done with it and any metal would be taken to a scrap yard. Just abandoning this stuff is a waste of resources.
It's too bad they can't find a use for these facilities. Contractors would rather build new stuff that may or may not ever be used.
I imagine vendors that have a port replicator (power, display, ethernet, SD reader, and multiple USB ports -- all the stuff that one would expect on a laptop) that works with the new USB-C connector will sell quite a few of them.
Motorhead, Slayer, Brujeria, Assjack...
I know. But it's not so much about "complain about not getting in their pants" as much as the total absence of anything resembling politeness by most people, especially women these days. Oh well, I guess I can always charge up with some greasy chili containing lots of beans & onions to make their evening a memorable one. :) That was usually a good way to keep the drunks away when I used to record shows for bands.
At least to women in any bar or any other social setting in the US.
They are probably going after the users who want more control & flexibility over the final output product that the existing commercial machines currently do not give them. The people that create customized food for parties or other special occasions will be some of the first adopters.
anyone have an idea?
I agree. The monopolists only want the government subsidizing them. It's not much different than the car dealers: the govt has legislated a bit of market protection from outsiders and they want to keep it that way.
No, they will continue to extract it in order to make plastics and other things out of it instead of fuel.
Also, explain to this Canadian why NASA is researching climate. Isn't NOAA supposed to be the agency for that?
When I worked at a US Geological Survey office that also archives all the US Govt satellite and aerial imagery, there was a memo that was sent out around 1993 or so. All research projects had to show how they were helping the study of global climate change. If they didn't, they were candidates for having their funding cut. The only exceptions were the ones that were being paid by external agencies or governments. So NASA is researching it for the same reason other agencies are: they have some expertise that can be useful and the funding keeps other projects alive.
Especially since the B and the V sound the same to some native Spanish speaking people.
The key phrase is: non-military discretionary spending. Medicare, Social Security, interest on the national debt, Federal pensions, entitlements, etc. are all considered "mandatory spending", not discretionary. It is also about 2/3 of all Federal spending. The discretionary stuff is what most of the political fighting is over and it isn't what is driving the increase in the debt. Yes, the percentage of that remaining 1/3 that's being spent on NASA has gone down in part to the expansion of government since the 60's. If NASA could spend that $18 billion without having to scatter it across a huge number of Congressional districts, they might be able to use what they have more effectively. Until then, they need a better excuse for pork spending on NASA instead of some other pet project.
You can now throw all your piss jugs out at Bill's place or at MSFT HQ.
And they'll pull out a chart or some sort of pamphlet that shows the "correct" way of having a computer set up. Of course this is usually something that's impractical with the desk layout and any number of different things. I eventually got used to the progressive lenses that were prescribed to me, but I've found that for computer work, I use the "distance" part of the lenses and end up looking over the top of them for up close work because that's easier than using the "near" part of the progressive lenses. I also just keep them at work and have regular glasses for home. They also said that I'd need one pair of those if I ever did anything like use a recliner for watching TV. IMHO, they probably look better than bifocals, but they're not as useful due to the blurry spots.
Even if the words are 100% correct, it doesn't mean that the translation makes sense. A while ago another employee decided that instead of sending the text for a screen to our translation team, they would just use google or bing translate. Not long after they did that, a co-worker in México called me laughing hysterically. He said what they had for the machine translated Spanish for "Orders in Queue" actually meant "Commands in the ass".